Or maybe it was Share and yourself having the "senior moments," mistakenly thinking Xeno had been seriously asking for "alternatives" to his medication rather than making an ironic point about jargon (jargon being the topic of the post, in which he was siding with Barry--of course--against the vile jargonistas on FFL).
Xeno was a little nonplussed, I think, to find Share recommending aloe vera gel when she didn't know what his skin condition was nor what medication he was using for it, especially given that he hadn't intended to actually solicit alternative recommendations in the first place. Xeno certainly isn't the only person here to find some of Share's posts a bit, um, shall we say, disorienting. Sure Share, I guess we're all at the point where we might have a senior moment now and then. Maybe that was what was going on with ol Xeno. A little crotchety maybe. (-: For the record, I am very fond of Twinkies. And although I don't care for clams, I do think they are cute. (-: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <sharelong60@...> wrote: thanks, Steve. The thing is, I am rarely offended by anything Xeno says, even when he likened me to a Hostess Twinkie and a clam. It has to do with that mysterious element of writing called tone. I am almost always soothed by Xeno's tone. And I thought it was fun that he provided the chemical signature of the medicine he's using. I wish my posts were more to his liking but there we are! On Monday, January 27, 2014 6:55 AM, "steve.sundur@..." <steve.sundur@...> wrote: Good point Anne. And not only that, he was able to make his point in one short paragraph! PTL! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <awoelflebater@...> wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sundur@...> wrote: WTF? Xeno, do you have a burr up your butt? Chill out a little. You asked if someone had an "alternative" for treating your skin condition. Share made friendly suggestion. What's next, you gonna try to get her cited for practicing medicine without a license? Lighten up dude! "It's just a chat room"! Who needs the lightening up, little Stevie? Let grandpa Xeno get a little riled, it's the most excited I've ever seen him. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <anartaxius@...> wrote: Share, making a medical recommendation on the basis of what I said is rather risky don't you think? I did not mention the condition, just the chemical used to treat it, and it is used for a number of purposes. From a medical point of view, aloe vera has not been researched enough or well enough to come to any medically useful conclusions, though the cosmetic industry seems to have made it one of its poster child products. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <sharelong60@...> wrote: Xeno, aloe vera gel... On Sunday, January 26, 2014 11:19 AM, "anartaxius@..." <anartaxius@...> wrote: Buck, I agree with Turq. Card's posts are in their own little world. Most of them are incomprehensible to me, including the request this thread is about. Card actually reduced the jargon a bit by putting a portion of his request in a slightly less technical form parenthetically, but it still did not help. Who else here transliterates Sanskrit or has such a grasp of language? Usually I have no way to even begin to respond to one of his posts. Some additional explanation plain words would be a big help as to what he is getting at. And Buck, your posts are pretty jargon laden as well, besides being almost completely spam. Tell us what you think in your own words. Farmers are not noted for being abstract philosophers, they speak plain and simple. Do you post all that stuff so you look good to the thought police over there at MUM? On occasion you have posted some really interesting things that seem to represent what you think and feel that come across as natural, but most of the time, you do not do this, you sound more like a Jehovah's Witness proffering pre-canned quotes from Watchtower Magazine, so instead of making a worthwhile contribution, you are largely ignored. It's OK to quote things, but then tell us what you think about that, free of jargon, what it means to you, and perhaps how you would explain it to someone who never ever heard of TM or meditation in general. You do not learn what you are saying until you can spontaneously say it in your own words, and understand it on your own terms. Then, you have to learn how to say it to someone who has not gone through that process. It is really easy to fail at this. I have a slight skin condition, so right now I think I will go an apply a layer of (CH2)7(CO2H)2 to the affected area so that the proximal and distal surfaces of the application are minimised. Can anyone here recommend an alternative to this? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <turquoiseb@...> wrote: My point, "Buck," since you seem to have missed it, is that a number of people -- especially Fairfielders -- have been living in a Jargon Bubble for so long that they no longer realize when they are speaking jargon. They have lost the art -- and, I would suggest, even the desire -- to give "intro lectures" and communicate with anyone who *doesn't* speak the same jargon they do. That's fine, if all you want to do in life is the thing you've adopted as your schtick here -- "preach to the already converted." That's fine if you're comfortable with being an elitist and don't really want to ever speak to anyone who *isn't* already an elitist, and "your kind of elitist." It's not so fine if you were ever trying to actually communicate to the occasional lurker who might appear here, wanting to learn a little something about TM, or even spiritual practice in general. But I guess that's not what you're trying to do, right? You'd prefer to keep writing jargon-filled stuff that gets zero replies. Anyone who wants to reply has to "come up to your level" and stop being so "ignorant." Did I get your position on all of this correctly? How long has it been since you ever *gave* an "intro lecture," "Buck," or even wanted to? I know it's difficult to imagine, interacting with the unwashed masses of the ignorant and all, all those who just aren't as good as you are. I'm just pointing out that pretty much NO ONE responds to your rants as they are. Do you think that maybe...just perhaps...the way you're writing them might have something to do with that? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "TurquoiseB" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > > Om Dear Turq, I am concerned about you. It seems evident you are > becoming somewhat obsessed and and even hung-up on this particular > thought form around jargon that you would seek to suppress people's > writing use of jargon around here on a list that is so manifestly > technical about spirituality. > > Don't be an ass. I am not trying to "suppress" the use of jargon. I'm > trying to get through to people who *no longer realizing they're using > it*, and that doing so is *excluding* people from what they're trying to > say. > > > Card was looking for an answer and anyone who knows what NSR and biija > mantras are and could possibly answer the question will do so. > > And anyone who doesn't (I have no idea what NSR means) are excluded. > > > People who are ignorant of NSR and biija mantras are always free to > improve themselves with Google searches further. > > A "Google search" for NSR returns -- in order -- "National Skills > Registry," "National Scouting Report," and "National Swine Report." > Which do you think Card was referring to? >
