Ha - you don't see any difference in Share's post and some curious questions by MJ?
Anyway love to hear on what you think Kali is :-). I know you are not the smartest so here's a clue to help you - Kali's not a vile, vindictive bitch. On Apr 17, 2013, at 12:20 PM, "seventhray27" <steve.sun...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Share, you got your Kali out, and I like it immensely. But even your Kali is > always tempered with a big dose of realism and compassion. > > > Did you notice the other day when Ravi was conversing with Michael and (to a > lesser extent), me in a, what you might call, "normal" fashion. Just some > back and forth. No lording over, no "I AM THIS, THAT, AND THE OTHER, thing > going on. I thought it was pretty cool. But I figured it wouldn't last > long, and sure enough, it didn't. > > I'm gonna go back and read his comment that elicited this response on your > part. > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > Ravi, the first week you were in San Diego, you sounded happy. But the > > longer you stay there, the more miserable you sound. And sadly you've > > just about totally lost your sense of humor. I hope your project there > > ends soon and you can return home and be happy again. > > > > BTW I agree that Robin does not have to dumb down his brilliance for anyone > > and I think that many of us feel the beauty of his words sometimes. I'm > > talking about the other times when one needs a buzzsaw to cut through the > > jungle of words and phrases to get to the conceptual oasis. And don't > > even get me started on the Irony! For that one needs as reading > > assistant, the two headed Hydra, one head parsing for the straight forward > > meaning and one for the Descartian doubt technique meaning. > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... > > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 1:28 PM > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S > > VALENTINE > > > > > > > >  > > OMG - hilarious stuff dear Share - what a clueless, dishonest person you > > are. Judy has exposed your lies several times - yet you are unwilling, > > unable to see it. > > > > No - Robin doesn't have to dumb down his brilliance for you, Barry, LG and > > Steve, all you need is a dictionary, a heart to feel the beauty of his > > words. > > > > I will get to your garbage when I have some time. > > > > > > On Apr 17, 2013, at 11:09 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: > > > > > >  > > >laughinggull I want to say that sometimes I find Robin's writing simple > > >and clear. But very often I find it unclear and voluminous which for me > > >adds up to unreadable. IMO Judy demonstrates a certain kind of co > > >dependent arrogance every time she berates people for not getting off > > >their butts, putting in the effort, etc. to understand Robin's writing. > > >Other posters here manages many times to be both clear AND profound. Why > > >can't Robin? Ok, ok, people have a right to have their unique voice. > > >And I actually enjoy all the different writing styles. But if a person > > >wants to be understood, wouldn't they make an attempt to write more > > >clearly for their audience? Especially given that at other times they > > >are able to do so?   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >________________________________ > > > From: laughinggull108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com > > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > >Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 10:25 AM > > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" authfriend@ wrote: > > >> > > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 wrote: > > >> > > > >> > Aw shucks, dumbass, I was rooting for ya not only that you > > >> > *would* do it but *could* do it...very similar to the "dog > > >> > ate my homework". Well, Steve, it'll remain in the holy > > >> > archives that you *did* try, just as others here have > > >> > asked those "in the know" to interpret the writings of you > > >> > know who. > > >> > > >> Uh-oh, LG, you're going the route of the other prevaricators > > >> around here. One of their tricks is not to use names, which > > >> they think makes it safe for them to seriously distort an > > >> incident in which these pseudo-anonymous folks have been > > >> involved, making it sound shifty. > > > > > >My purposeful removal of names, as in this case, was so as not to bring > > >more attention to those that probably crave it. > > > > > >> We know who "you know who" is, of course. But "others here" > > >> refers to Xeno and "those 'in the know'" refers to me. > > > > > >"Others here" now includes Steve, and also includes me as I've asked Robin > > >on at least one occasion to explain in language that I can understand > > >without all the other stuff that merely confuses the point he is making. > > >"In the know" now includes dumbass, and might also include Ann, RD, and > > >Emily who on several occasions have indicated that they understand what he > > >has written. > > > > > >> Here's what really happened: Xeno demanded that I interpret > > >> some post of Robin's *in order to prove* that I understood > > >> him, and I refused to do any interpreting on that basis. I > > >> considered it insulting, given that I had already spent a > > >> huge amount of time explaining Robin to people (including > > >> Xeno) who couldn't take the time to read his posts, or at > > >> least to put any effort into absorbing what he had said. > > >> > > >> > The evidence seems to be leaning towards nobody really > > >> > knows what he's talking about. > > >> > > >> No, there's no such evidence. I think what you mean is > > >> that *you* have trouble understanding him. We know he > > >> confuses Steve and Xeno and Barry and Share as well, but > > >> the five of you aren't everybody. > > > > > >You are correct...I have great trouble understanding him. > > > > > >> Too bad as I was really > > >> > hoping that we had a saint in our midst. > > >> > > >> Well, that was pretty silly, wasn't it? You know, since > > >> Robin himself would be the first person to discourage the > > >> notion. Nor did DrD suggest such a thing. Robin is > > >> REEEEEELY REEEEELY smart, but he ain't no saint. > > > > > >That was the final snarky jab there. While maybe not a saint, I'm always > > >hoping I can learn something from everyone who comments here. > > > > > >> Also, it appears neither you nor Steve read what DrD > > >> wrote with attention. He was suggesting that folks try > > >> validating his analysis of Robin's writing for themselves, > > >> not offering to do it for them. > > >> > > >> Hmm, now I'm beginning to see what's behind this. You and > > >> Steve don't want to risk the attempt, because if you tried > > >> and couldn't see what DrD describes, you'd be hesitant to > > >> report your failure lest it appear that it was due to your > > >> lack of comprehension, rather than DrD's analysis being > > >> faulty. > > >> > > >> So your cowardice in this regard leads you to imply that > > >> DrD and I have been posturing and that Robin has said > > >> nothing of any significance. > > >> > > >> I would expect that kind of craven maneuver from Steve. > > >> I'm surprised to see you engaging in it, LG. > > > > > >It's not deliberate by any means but rather arises from a sense of > > >frustration in not being about to understand what someone is writing. BTW, > > >Robin's not the only one whose writing I don't get. I'm open to > > >understanding but none of you are helping other than to say get off your > > >ass, put some work into it, or provide links to the posts so we can go > > >back and read them again. Don't you see how circular this is? And your > > >explanations are by no means succinct nor easy to understand. > > > > > >Perhaps one of my motives *is* to prove you wrong but for the life of me, > > >I don't know why. I guess I have some work ahead. > > > > > >> The really interesting thing is that Robin isn't all that > > >> hard to understand for those willing to put a little effort > > >> into it. > > > > > >But is the effort worth the reward? > > > > > >[snip] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New > Topic Messages in this topic (320) > RECENT ACTIVITY: New Members 1 > Visit Your Group > To subscribe, send a message to: > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > Or go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > and click 'Join This Group!' > Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us > Feedback
