--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > Judy, I understand that you're feeling...uh...impaired > as a result of the Post Count, and that you'd prefer > to bombard FFL with hundreds of tiny fart-posts a week > like you used to, and that only having a few posts left > this week you have been reduced to emulating your > imaginary boyfriend's style and trying to pack all > those farts into one big, smelly fart-cloud, hoping > desperately for a response. Any response.
Anyone smell something? Oh wait, it is the odour of my second grade classroom; I think I have gone back in time. Can anyone say "scatological"? > > So I will be compassionate and give you one. Barry is having a climax of anticipation meanwhile there is drool running out of both sides of his mouth. I am waiting with Batered breath to see what this modern-day Shakespeare has to say. Steve, are you ready to be awestruck? > > First, compared to Robin, you're still a slacker. You > only managed to spew 2,096 words in this one. He used > to be able to come up with 3 or 4 thou in a single rant. For someone who can't give Robin the time of day you certainly have the word count down. What does this mean? > > Second, you *have* achieved his level of unreadability, > based on the fact that I took one glance at this, didn't > bother to read *any* of it, and just ran a word count > on it to see how far your hatred of Barry And Anyone > Who Dares To Defy Me And Like Him had progressed. I > suspect that this was wise on my part and, as with his > posts, provided more elucidation than actually reading > them. Oh, that explains it. You took the time to run a word count on Judy and doing a little math besides and now you are taking even more time to write something, personally, to Judy. I guess, in your world, this means you have no time for her and anything she says. Of course, taking multiple paragraphs to respond to Judy's post is a funny way of being aloof and unmoved so it must mean that nasty boil you've been harbouring all these years has finally come to the popping point. Everyone down, NOW! > > Third, if you want to emulate the guy you have the > heavy mind-lusties for, you need to spew stuff like > this earlier in the week, when you still have enough > posts left to perform SERIAL FARTHING. Robin, after > all, could poot out five or six short story-length > rants about his enemies like this in a row. You've > only managed three Save Up All My Farts For One > Big Poot posts this week, and you "diluted" them > by farting at *different* enemies. How are you ever > going to DEMAND at the top of your high-pitched, > needy voice that these enemies RESPOND to every > little poot you aimed at them if you don't focus on > one sole victim at a time. Ya really gotta pay more > attention in class if you ever want to be considered > as psychotic as the Robinster. Maybe this is an indication that Barry had Mexican for dinner, or Brussell's sprouts 'cause you seem fairly consumed by this gaseous imagery. While Judy is allegedly farting you are positively pooping all over the joint. For God's sake Barry, find a toilet. > > My advice is to start over next week and try to do > this Robin-like Massive Fart Post Thang all over > again, when you have 50 whole posts to do it with. > Instead of pooting out tiny, ineffective hate-clouds, > put some EFFORT into it, and SAVE THEM UP, > encapsulating them into five or six serial > fartposts, all trying to "get" the same enemy. Cry me a river and find some new way to sing this tired ballad, sir. Although I am reading this I am also dying of boredom. Move it! > > Then you can practice Robin's brand of Tantrum > Yoga and DEMAND a response, and threaten to run > away and hide if you don't get one. Yessiree, sounds like Judy every time - if you could enter that addled head that passes for Barry Wright. (Is there a doctor in the house?) > > Just a few suggestions... > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > First, Xeno's intellectual dishonesty in defense of Barry's > > shitting on Robin. > > > > Second, some comments on explaining Robin to those with a > > 15-year-old mentality. > > > > Finally, Susan's reading comprehension problems (among other > > difficulties). > > > > > > > > > > 348888 > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" > > > > <anartaxius@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Sorry, no street cred for you, little guy. Any student of human nature > > > > knows that you cannot first shit all over someone, as you have Robin, and > > > > then trot out some third party excerpt, trying to show your objectivity. > > > > > > > > Who does that?? Only an idiot would operate that way, or someone so > > > > bent on denigrating someone, that they fail to see their own transparency > > > > (in other words, an idiot). > > > > > > > > Personally, I rate your post, "CI", for Completely Impotent. > > > > > > I found that academic tome interesting. As one who experienced turquoiseb > > > > on coming on this forum, I re-post below his comments to Robin after Robin > > > > came on FFL: > > > > You realize, Xeno, that I could use this post of Barry's > > as evidence of his utter *lack* of objectivity concerning > > Robin, and of the fact that Barry started shitting all > > over Robin practically the moment he showed up on FFL, > > *before Robin had ever addressed a post to him*, right? > > > > Also, that you failed to provide the context for the quote > > from Barry's post puts you under strong suspicion of > > intellectual dishonesty. Here's the context: > > > > --Robin posts to whynotnow (DrD) in a conversation > > they were having about the nature of enlightenment. > > > > --Rick responds to Robin's post, challenging what he > > said to whynotnow about his (Robin's) experience of > > enlightenment. > > > > --Robin responds to Rick's challenge to his account of > > his experience of enlightenment. > > > > --Barry--entirely gratuitously--blasts Robin for having > > posted to Rick about Robin's experience of enlightenment. > > > > --Robin responds ironically to Barry's post; it was so > > absurd and so completely uncalled-for that there was no > > way for Robin to respond other than with irony. > > > > --Barry comes back with the long, very unpleasant slam > > that you posted part of. > > > > The salient fact here is that Barry busted in on a > > serious exchange Robin was having with Rick. Barry > > seemed to be under the impression that Robin should > > have posted in a way that was of interest and agreeable > > to Barry (no matter who Robin was writing to or about), > > and that because Robin hadn't done that, there was > > something very wrong with him. > > > > I mean, it was a jaw-dropper. Especially given the > > context, there is no way one can consider the quote > > you posted even minimally objective. > > > > Here's some of Barry's first post to Robin (two > > comments of mine in square brackets): > > > > "MZ, here's a free clue to explain to you why I got no > > more than two sentences into the self-serving drivel > > below [that being Robin's response to Rick's challenge]: > > I DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR 'ENLIGHTENMENT.'...Someday you > > might want to figure out that expecting other people > > to be interested in your subjective state of > > consciousness [as Rick obviously was] is like expecting > > them to be interested in your retelling of a vivid dream > > experience you had the previous night...." > > > > WTF?? And if you actually read Robin's post that Barry > > was complaining about, there wasn't that much about > > Robin's experience of enlightenment in it. Most of it > > is in those first two sentences that Barry claims were > > all he could manage to get through. And Robin was > > writing *to Rick* in response to something Rick had > > said *to him*. He wasn't writing to Barry or about > > Barry. > > > > Why should Robin have to write only about things > > Barry cares about? Why shouldn't he be able to > > discuss his experience of enlightenment with someone > > who wrote to him about it? > > > > Here's something you snipped from the quote you posted > > that's quite telling: > > > > "I suggested that (on the receiving end) it was > > a lot like having to sit there and listen to someone going > > on and on about the vivid dream they had the previous night, > > and how incredibly meaningful that dream was to them." > > > > Since when does Barry have to "sit there and listen" to > > something he doesn't care about? And why does he assume > > that Robin cares whether Barry is listening? The self- > > importance is just astonishing. As if it were some kind > > of offense for Robin not to be eager to entertain Barry! > > > > When Rick challenged Robin about his enlightenment, should > > Robin have said, "I'm sorry, Rick, but I can't talk about > > that because it's not interesting to Barry"? > > > > And then at the end: > > > > "You give the impression of someone who is convinced that > > his subjective view of the world and how it works is more > > than opinion. Good luck finding people who might agree with > > you about this. You haven't found one in me." > > > > Again, remember, *Robin was responding to Rick*. What > > on *earth* makes Barry think Robin was looking for > > agreement *from Barry*? > > > > This is what you call "pretty straightforward"? It's > > one of the most blatant displays of presumption and > > overinflated ego I've ever seen. And you *didn't even > > quote* the really nasty parts of that post. More > > intellectual dishonesty on your part. > > > > Here's the link to it (which you also omitted) if anyone > > is interested: > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/280410 > > > > Folks can track backward to see what the posts that > > preceded it were about if they want to verify the context > > I outlined and get the flavor of the posts in question. > > > > > > 348897 > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" > > > > <anartaxius@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Yes, that weak-minded reply to Robin set the stage, that Barry was > > > > incapable of tracking Robin's thought process, and really had no clue what > > > > the man was talking about. Then as Barry grew increasingly frustrated with > > > > his own lack of comprehension, his commentary on Robin grew increasingly > > > > negative and distorted. > > > > > > > > The same response as a small child might have, when attempting to read > > > > a book far beyond his capability. Barry is an excellent writer, for the > > > > consciousness he reflects. The problem is that the consciousness is dim. > > > > > > Why should Barry, or anyone be interested in Robin's > > > thought processes? > > > > No reason at all. So why did Barry--in the very post you > > quoted--*complain* that he wasn't interested in Robin's > > thought processes? > > > > > How do you interpret what Robin says? Say you had to > > > explain what Robin says to someone who was, say, 15 > > > years old, let us say I have the mental capacity of a > > > 15 year old (and you had better believe that is what > > > some here think). What would you say Robin's message was? > > > > This is, of course, a complete non sequitur. But assuming > > it weren't, my response would be that I wouldn't try to > > explain Robin's thought processes to someone with the > > mental capacity of a 15-year-old. Robin hasn't been > > addressing people with that mental capacity, he's been > > addressing adults who presumably can read at the college > > level. Robin himself could probably adjust his language > > and mode of expression to make himself clear to a 15- > > year-old (given that he used to teach middle school), but > > that's a skill I don't have. > > > > > > > > 348894 > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <wayback71@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" <steve.sundur@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > wow! what a reaction. is this an extreme example of > > > > > shooting the messenger? don't even need a show of > > > > > hands for that. > > > > > > > > Now you understand why the person who sent the > > > > link to me in email didn't want to post it them- > > > > selves. > > > > > > > > Sure is good to see that the "enlightened" don't > > > > throw balls of shit like chimpanzees, eh? :-) > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, no street cred for you, little guy. Any student > > > > > > of human nature knows that you cannot first shit all > > > > > > over someone, as you have Robin, and then trot out some > > > > > > third party excerpt, trying to show your objectivity. > > > > > > Doc, are you kidding? I mean think about it - is Barry the > > > only person here on FFL that has "shit all over someone"? > > > > Susan, you need to think about it. DrD never said Barry > > was the only person here on FFL who has done that. > > > > > Several other people here seem to feel quite free and expert > > > in putting down other people and calling them names (I would > > > say Judy and Ravi are probably most skilled at name calling > > > and putdowns, and they do so frequently) > > > > Bit of a difference, Susan. I never do so *gratuitously*, > > and I never do it *dishonestly*. Plus which, I'll respond > > if someone wants to engage with what I say. I don't do hit- > > and-runs. Nor do I diagnose mental disorders in people I'm > > not on good terms with. > > > > > Barry certainly seems to think Robin was and probably is a > > > strange guy. No argument there. > > > > Nor is that the problem, as you know--or should. > > > > > Now, Barry posted something written by other people. My > > > take was that it was not focusing on Robin and his > > > personality and his diagnoses or problems; it was about > > > the events of that time as seen thru the theme of > > > spiritual movements and how they grow or split in factions > > > or dissolve. > > > > You apparently didn't bother to read Barry's post with > > any attention. The big deal for Barry was that the book > > excerpt appeared to contradict what Robin has said about > > his devotion to Maharishi. (There are problems with that > > conclusion, but I've addressed them briefly in another > > post.) > > > > > Robin, Shri Shri and Deepak were the players, along with MMY > > > and the TMO. Personally I thought it was interesting to get > > > an objective view of those years in the TMO. There were some > > > details about Robin's activities that I did not know about, > > > and it presented his concerns witht he TMO and how it had > > > changed for the worse. It was a rather clear summary from > > > one point of view. > > > > I have no problem with this precis. But then you go on > > to say: > > > > > I hardly consider that "shitting all over Robin." > > > > Susan, your reading comprehension ain't so good these > > days. DrD didn't say it was. Go read the quote from his > > post at the top, see if you can figure out where you > > went wrong. If not, I'll be happy to help. > > > > From another post, 348899: > > > > > And I meant to add, neither do I consider Barry's past posts > > > about Robin to be "shitting all over him." > > > > Apparently you've read very few of them, then. They've > > been about as nasty as it gets around here: gratuitous > > and dishonest and vicious and insulting and repellent > > in the extreme. > > > > > But then I too found Robin's writings odd and uncomfortable > > > to follow. > > > > So that excuses Barry's unpleasantness toward Robin? > > > > What are you trying to say here? > > > > > He appears to be extremely intelligent. And it is not that > > > his posts were intellectually impossible to get, but that > > > his whole style and switching of topics and use of words > > > made me feel as if I was being manipulated (that is the best > > > I can put it, and I did so directly to Robin from day 1). > > > > You sure don't put it very well, Susan. It doesn't make > > much sense. I strongly suspect it's a hangover from your > > TMO days when you were *told* negative things about Robin > > that you accepted without question, and you're just > > parroting them back, assuming he hasn't changed. > > > > Maybe you should look at whether you have an unwarranted > > fear of being manipulated that arises in the presence > > (electronic, in this case) of someone you feel is > > considerably more intelligent than you are. > > > > Do you remember Robin's response when you told him you > > felt you were being manipulated? He basically said that > > he wasn't entirely sure what you were getting at, but: > > > > "It's one of those moments where one senses: Hey, this > > guy [Wayback] is having an innocent experience, and that > > experience hints at SOMETHING potentially at least, > > problematic about what you are saying, MZ." > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/280403 > > >
