RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bhairitu Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 2:16 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife It would be interesting to see how FFL would fare as a forum. The difference would be you could have specific sections including a "General" for all kinds of topics. Heck you could Turq and Judy their own section. One dynamic with a forum that doesn't occur with Yahoo Groups is that some authors could see how many people actually "viewed" their topic. It would be cool if you could choose a forum interface if you preferred it, yet still have the other viewing options.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
Rick Archer wrote: > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of tkrystofiak > Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 9:10 AM > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife > > > > Attacks, personal aspersions, outright ridicule, intimidation - who > needs it? Vaj quoted something, in a different context, > about "diamonds in the excrement". Picking them out is possible, I > suppose, but not how I prefer to spend my time. > > How about washing the diamonds before posting? > > I happen to believe that the Golden Rule - treating others as you would want > to be treated - is a spiritual practice, and failing to abide by it retards > one's spiritual development. I don't always live up to it, but if one really > takes that to heart, one is less inclined to trash people. It also helps to > remember that we're dealing with living, breathing human beings here, not > just pixels on our monitors. Would we speak as harshly to one another if we > were sitting face to face? It would be interesting to see how FFL would fare as a forum. The difference would be you could have specific sections including a "General" for all kinds of topics. Heck you could Turq and Judy their own section. One dynamic with a forum that doesn't occur with Yahoo Groups is that some authors could see how many people actually "viewed" their topic.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
I wonder how many read their squabbling posts? Maybe only you. They might do better to squabble through personal emails, and save their 50 posts for topics others will actually read. Right, I enjoy reading one and I've got the other on block. "Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only love." - Amma --- On Tue, 11/25/08, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, November 25, 2008, 10:52 AM From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of raunchydog Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 12:04 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife The territory Judy claims on FF Life is calling Barry out on his BS, and refusing to let his trollish behavior go unanswered. Her analytical abilities are awesome and I am thankful she stands on principle that no one should tolerate lying. I respect her integrity as a writer and I rely on her to take out the garbage. Whenever Judy takes Barry to the woodshed for the spanking he deserves, I'm sure some part of him masochistically enjoys his foray to the woodshed because he always comes back for more. I wonder how many read their squabbling posts? Maybe only you. They might do better to squabble through personal emails, and save their 50 posts for topics others will actually read.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of raunchydog Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 11:11 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Let's call it for what it is: "Washing the Diamonds" is censorship. Applying the Golden Rule every moment to one's life is a laudable endeavor and an individual choice. We cannot enforce it. Of course pixel bashing is safer, we are not within arm's reach of each other. Posting on a forum is not as if we're sitting down to tea. The beauty of writing is that it can be raw and impolite as well as filled with diamonds. It's a matter of taste. Do you prefer your tea bland or spicy? Spicy is nice, but not rancid (I'm not into that Tibeten rancid yak butter tea). BTW, let me take this opportunity to say that although I've disagreed with you on many issues, "psychoanalyzed" you, etc., I hold no personal animosity toward you, and in fact I like you. Keep that in mind if we encounter each other around town.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 25, 2008, at 11:27 AM, Sal Sunshine wrote: Sound credible to you? I seem to remember a quote from the Talmud (or some Aramaic text) that describes a magician named Jesus/Jeshua which claimed that he was crucified for sorcery--or something along those lines. It sounded plausible to me. Re: Josephus, one passage always seemed to be a clear forgery to me, with Josephus, a Jew, lauding Jesus as "Christ" or some such highly improbable thing. The other mention (Jesus and James), who knows? I certainly don't. All the evidence seems somewhat shakey to me. I took a course on the historical Jesus from the Luke scholar E. Earle Ellis in college and I remember being left with the conclusion that we really didn't know if he was an historical person at all and wondering why we were never taught that in Sunday school (of course it could be because I was kicked out :-)).
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 25, 2008, at 10:43 AM, Rick Archer wrote: It's called Fairfield Life, right? Well, remember there's always been the conflict in Fairfield, Between the Ru's and the Townie's... So, just think of it like that...it's sort of built into the equation. I actually think that some of the townies are possessed by bad spirits which get released, as the many people, who have passed through Fairfield, probably a few bad spirits got dropped off... And may have attatched to some on the south side, so be careful, out there... Watch it bub. Sal and I live on the south side. You want a knuckle sandwich? No kidding. Have they come to any conclusions about the cause of that fire, Rick? Sal
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of tkrystofiak Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 9:10 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Attacks, personal aspersions, outright ridicule, intimidation - who needs it? Vaj quoted something, in a different context, about "diamonds in the excrement". Picking them out is possible, I suppose, but not how I prefer to spend my time. How about washing the diamonds before posting? I happen to believe that the Golden Rule - treating others as you would want to be treated - is a spiritual practice, and failing to abide by it retards one's spiritual development. I don't always live up to it, but if one really takes that to heart, one is less inclined to trash people. It also helps to remember that we're dealing with living, breathing human beings here, not just pixels on our monitors. Would we speak as harshly to one another if we were sitting face to face?
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 10:14 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife (snip) It's called Fairfield Life, right? Well, remember there's always been the conflict in Fairfield, Between the Ru's and the Townie's... So, just think of it like that...it's sort of built into the equation. I actually think that some of the townies are possessed by bad spirits which get released, as the many people, who have passed through Fairfield, probably a few bad spirits got dropped off... And may have attatched to some on the south side, so be careful, out there... Watch it bub. Sal and I live on the south side. You want a knuckle sandwich?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 25, 2008, at 10:16 AM, Vaj wrote:On Nov 25, 2008, at 9:42 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote:Both points by Do and Sal were fascinating. You hear these namesthrown around so much it is easy to forget that scripture was reallynever meant to be "history" as much as an advocacy piece for a POV.And as far as I know, there's not even any credible evidencefor Jesus' existence either, outside of one reference by, Ithink, Tacitus.What about the Talmud and Josephus?Josephus on JesusFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaChristianity portalThis article is part of the Jesus and history series of articles.There are two extant references in Josephus on Jesus, the one directly concerning Jesus has come to be known as the Testimonium Flavianum. These passages appear in The Antiquities of the Jews, written in the year 93 by the Jewish historianJosephus. All extant copies of this work, which all derive from Christian sources, even the recently recovered Arabic version, contain the two passages about Jesus. The authenticity of the Testimonium Flavianum has been disputed since the 17th century, and by the mid 18th century the consensus view was that it was a forgery. This consensus was questioned in the 20th century. The other passage simply mentions Jesus as the brother of James, also known as James the Just. Though most scholars consider this passage genuine [1], its authenticity has been disputed by Emil Schürer as well by several recent popular writers.http://tinyurl.com/5r3sbIn like manner, references in the Talmud to various historical figures were said to be coded references to Jesus, despite Jewish insistence that the Talmud refers to other, actual persons. A prominent example is Balaam son of Beor, a pagan prophet who lived approximately 1000 years before Jesus, whose actions are portrayed in the Bible, in Numbers 22 through 31. The Talmud's harsh words against Balaam echo the Bible's own condemnation in Deuteronomy 23 and Nehemiah 13. Yet, these references were said to be secretly about Jesus.And:Despite the numerous mentions of Edom which may refer to Christendom, the Talmud makes little mention of Jesus directly or the early Christians. There are a number of quotes about one or more individuals designated "Yeshu" that once existed in editions of the Talmud, although details about Yeshu do not match the known facts about Jesus' trial and death.http://tinyurl.com/hgglhSound credible to you?Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 25, 2008, at 11:11 AM, Sal Sunshine wrote: On Nov 25, 2008, at 9:42 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: Both points by Do and Sal were fascinating. You hear these names thrown around so much it is easy to forget that scripture was really never meant to be "history" as much as an advocacy piece for a POV. And as far as I know, there's not even any credible evidence for Jesus' existence either, outside of one reference by, I think, Tacitus. What about the Talmud and Josephus?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 25, 2008, at 9:52 AM, Rick Archer wrote: I wonder how many read their squabbling posts? Maybe only you. They might do better to squabble through personal emails, and save their 50 posts for topics others will actually read. Wouldn't be nearly as much fun for them. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 25, 2008, at 9:42 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: > Both points by Do and Sal were fascinating. You hear these names > thrown around so much it is easy to forget that scripture was really > never meant to be "history" as much as an advocacy piece for a POV. And as far as I know, there's not even any credible evidence for Jesus' existence either, outside of one reference by, I think, Tacitus. Keep the faith...I'll take the fortune! Sal
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of raunchydog Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 12:04 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife The territory Judy claims on FF Life is calling Barry out on his BS, and refusing to let his trollish behavior go unanswered. Her analytical abilities are awesome and I am thankful she stands on principle that no one should tolerate lying. I respect her integrity as a writer and I rely on her to take out the garbage. Whenever Judy takes Barry to the woodshed for the spanking he deserves, I'm sure some part of him masochistically enjoys his foray to the woodshed because he always comes back for more. I wonder how many read their squabbling posts? Maybe only you. They might do better to squabble through personal emails, and save their 50 posts for topics others will actually read.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 25, 2008, at 5:55 AM, do.rflex wrote: >>> Actually there's no legit evidence that Abraham, or any >>> of the others existed until you get to Solomon. >> >> >> Yeah. Other than the Biblical texts themselves, I recently read that >> there's no historical corroborating evidence of a Moses or a Pharoah >> who enslaved the Israelites or Israelites wandering the desert for 40 >> years. It appears that it's just tribal myths passed along. Correct. Sometime in the early 90s someone found something with House of David written on it, from that period, so up until then there was no evidence of him either. And that actually isn't evidence so much of one person as of a lineage. >> My own personal opinion is that the creepy, sadistic, bloody, >> murdering, jealous and vengeful 'god' of the Old Testament was a >> politically useful creation of the character of the >> quasi-savage/barbaric peoples of the times. And he was fairly liberal by the standards of the day! Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 6:18 PM, do.rflex wrote: A peculiar side note: Both Islam and Judaism hold their God to be the -same- God of Abraham. And therein lies the crux of our disagreement: a claim. Please understand that to a practicing or observant Jew, that's all it really is, a claim made thousands and thousands of years later. Really, if you tried to appreciate the wild separation of timeline along with the claim (of Allah-IHVH similitude) you might appreciate how bizarre a claim it really is. However (conversely) if you look at the two (IHVH and Allah) as contemporaneous, it sounds downright friendly. Shouldn't we all just be friends? Let's fudge for friendship and ignore the relative realities! It's this disparity you seem to be missing. And given that Islam has a known historical date of origin, it's a pretty difficult span to breach, unless one is an adherent of a philosophia perennis (a"perennialist") or a theosophist. From the Arabian side, it's much easier at so late a date to make such a wild claim (that Allah is IHVH or G*d).
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 7:39 PM, do.rflex wrote: I don't what your sources are Vaj, but: Do, it's one thing to claim you're descendent of Abraham and it's quite another to make a post hoc claim of being such a descendant, let alone a latter day Avatar of IHVH. Most Jews I know would consider such a claim not just incredibly offensive but also historically untenable. I'll have to look into it, but the Hebrew equivalent of Allah is fairly well appreciated in the Jewish Orthodox community--I'm not saying that it's right, I'm just saying it is or was the most viable explanation I'd ever heard.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
As far as I can tell, this pointless crap between the two of them has been going on for over a decade going back into alt.meditation.transcendental - maybe even further. Reminds me of these two characters, chasing after each other on their dead planet at the end of the episode: "Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only love." - Amma --- On Mon, 11/24/08, do.rflex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: do.rflex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 5:05 PM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of authfriend > Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 3:06 PM > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife > > > > You're correct to direct your attempt at > Barry, who is by *far* the worst offender; > but not on the basis that he's "better able" > to stop. > > OK, then show us that you're better able to stop. I presume that you and > Barry both defend yourselves against the other's attacks to convince the > rest of us that you are innocent of the charges made, but I for one would be > more impressed if either of you managed to completely ignore the other's > attacks and focus instead on intelligent discussion of other issues. I don't > believe something about you merely because Barry said it, and vice versa. > It's the overall impression one makes that's important to me, and a tendency > to bicker detracts from the positive impressions I've gotten of both of you. > I read quite a few posts from both you and Barry, but I immediately delete > them if they're an attack on the other. I don't care who's right or who's > wrong. Both of you are wrong to continue this game. As far as I can tell, this pointless crap between the two of them has been going on for over a decade going back into alt.meditation.transcendental - maybe even further. I really doubt *anyone* actually pays any attention at all to the petty details anymore - or even wants to see any of it. I sure as hell don't. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 6:39 PM, do.rflex wrote: I don't what your sources are Vaj, but: Abraham: The root of three religions http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/bios/b1abraham.htm Actually there's no legit evidence that Abraham, or any of the others existed until you get to Solomon. As baby Abraham gave his first lusty cry at being brought into this cold and cruel world, few would have guessed that his influence would be felt down through the ages. Three of today's major religions trace their roots back to him, each viewing him as their founder or at least their forefather. Although Judaism, Christianity, and Islam see Abraham as an important character in their past, each sees him this way for a different reason. Abraham is very important to Judaism. Jews believe that God called Abraham out of Ur of the Chaldees (Mesopotamia) in order to make a covenant with him. Through this covenant, God would bless him and give Abraham's descendants a new land. Abraham left his home to become a wandering herdsman because he had faith in God's promise: "I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you." (Genesis 12:2-4) God led Abraham through a series of trials in order to test whether or not Abraham really believed God's promise. The most drastic trial Abraham experienced occurred when God told Abraham to sacrifice his only son Isaac through whom the future Messiah (Savior) was promised. Although greatly troubled, Abraham went through with God's request because he reasoned that God would still somehow fulfill his promise. God rewarded Abraham's obedience by sending and angel to stop him from killing Isaac and providing a lamb to take Isaac's place. In essence, without Abraham, Jews would not be the "chosen people" among the nations through which a Savior would later come. Abraham is indispensable to Christianity, but for a far different reason than he is to Judaism or Islam. Christians hold to the same historical account as the Jews do; but Christians make a further-reaching conclusion. Christians view God's interaction and covenant with Abraham as something leading up to the coming of Jesus Christ. God's love for his creation was so infinite that he determined to somehow bridge the immeasurable gap that man had made when he sinned. To this end God made the first covenant with Abraham which included the promise of a future savior, Jesus, who would come through Abraham's descendants. Any covenant that was made demanded blood to seal the pact. Just as Abraham killed "…a heifer, a goat, and a ram each three years old, along with a dove and young pigeon, " (NIV, Genesis 15:9) to seal the first covenant, Christians believe that Christ's blood, when he died on the cross, sealed the second. Christians draw many parallels between Jesus and Abraham's life. One of the best known examples is the story of Isaac. Isaac was Abrahams dearly loved, only son through whom God had promised the future salvation of the world. Yet God asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac to see if Abraham's faith extended that far. Just before Abraham was about to plunge the knife into his only son, an angel stopped him and God provided a ram to die in Isaac's stead. Christians see Jesus as God's only son whom he loved infinitely, yet for the sake of mankind God sacrificed his only son. Jesus became the sacrificial lamb so that: "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord [Jesus] will be saved." (NIV, Romans 10:13) In conclusion, although they don't trace their lineage back to Abraham, Christians view themselves as adopted sons because they consider themselves sons of Jesus who was the future promise for Abraham's descendents. Abraham's role in Islam is different from that which he plays in either Christianity or Judaism. Arab Muslims trace their lineage back to Abraham through Ishmael. Call me Ishmael... Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 6:29 PM, do.rflex wrote: > A peculiar side note: Both Islam and Judaism hold their God to be the > -same- God of Abraham. Depends on who you ask. Some consider the revelations of Mohammed to be those of a mad man. Others draw a distinction between IHVH/Jehovah and Allah as a descendent of a pagan Arabian moon-god; they're not the same god. Some Kabbalists draw a similar distinction. Yet others consider Allah to be a "Vast Face" expression of IHVH, thus the insistence on no physical representation--and thus the Islamic fundie insistence on no physical representation of ANY god. The Puranas actually list the rock which exists in Kaabah, the Ruknu Al-Aswad, as an ancient lingam of Shiva.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 5:53 PM, Vaj wrote: > Israel is already starting to go green, Islamic countries are not. I shouldn't say that. Turkey is is very unusual exception--there may be others that I'm not aware of. About five years ago I carried on a long correspondence with a follower of the "Messiah" Sabbatai Zevi who was living in Turkey and was a leading example of those who could marry the Lurianic Kabbalah and Islam. It was very universal. It was beginning to seed all over Turkey. So was a universalist Freemasonry, generally considered anathema and heretical in Islamic countries (the Egyptian government sponsored a 33-part series on the evils of Freemasonry throughout the middle east). The moral of that story is--to me anyways--is that we should allow this liberalizing trend to spread from Turkey. The only way for this to happen is to disallow conflict with her neighbors. Favor liberal diplomacy. Look at a map and you'll see how important this is.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 5:25 PM, Rick Archer wrote: > I don't care who's right or who's wrong. That's obvious. And as long as you don't, you'll never be able to deal with this effectively. Your snip took me out of context. The point I was making is that many see it as “wrong” that either of you keep this going. It’s like the damned Arabs and Israelis. Either could unilaterally end the end the conflict if they handled it correctly. As long as either the Jews or the Muslims continue to hold onto the belief that land can be held by some "superior" being that is extremely unlikely. And continued conflict only exacerbates the fundamentalist view that "my tribal god" is what matters. "Yours be damned". It's the classic blue- and red-meme samsaric theme: egocentric power-gods and absolutist-domination mythic tribal patterns. Israel is already starting to go green, Islamic countries are not. That means we need to foster a green-meme collective consciousness in Islamic countries. The only way to stop it is to stop warring against the Islamic countries. Only then will they begin to evolve towards a bleeding-edge green-meme, collective and holistic mindset: "our god" instead of "my god". Can't you see the same process here?
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 3:47 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife > I don't care who's right or who's wrong. That's obvious. And as long as you don't, you'll never be able to deal with this effectively. Your snip took me out of context. The point I was making is that many see it as "wrong" that either of you keep this going. It's like the damned Arabs and Israelis. Either could unilaterally end the end the conflict if they handled it correctly.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 4:50 PM, Bhairitu wrote: > I often wonder why two sensible people would carry on like this unless > they've been at it. for lifetimes. :-D I already have Judy's chart, all I would need is Barry's. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 5:05 PM, do.rflex wrote: As far as I can tell, this pointless crap between the two of them has been going on for over a decade going back into alt.meditation.transcendental - maybe even further. I really doubt *anyone* actually pays any attention at all to the petty details anymore - or even wants to see any of it. I sure as hell don't. However the unfortunate thing is, it isn't just "all about Barry" as Willy might say. It's really about the fact that a deranged personality will lash out at whoever, i.e. anyone. You certainly are not immune from Judy's vitriolic spew. The plain facts are, personality disordered people are the bane of internet discussion groups and Usenet. I realize this is un-kosher to state openly, and it's certainly not tactful (it's rarely appropriate to make a medical diagnosis via a discussion group), but it does seem to be the consensus among professional I know who've watched her vent her spleen year after year year. Hell, it's probably decade after decade at this point. :-) But as the saying goes, it does take two to tango.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
Rick Archer wrote: > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of authfriend > Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 3:06 PM > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife > > > > You're correct to direct your attempt at > Barry, who is by *far* the worst offender; > but not on the basis that he's "better able" > to stop. > > OK, then show us that you're better able to stop. I presume that you and > Barry both defend yourselves against the other's attacks to convince the > rest of us that you are innocent of the charges made, but I for one would be > more impressed if either of you managed to completely ignore the other's > attacks and focus instead on intelligent discussion of other issues. I don't > believe something about you merely because Barry said it, and vice versa. > It's the overall impression one makes that's important to me, and a tendency > to bicker detracts from the positive impressions I've gotten of both of you. > I read quite a few posts from both you and Barry, but I immediately delete > them if they're an attack on the other. I don't care who's right or who's > wrong. Both of you are wrong to continue this game. I often wonder why two sensible people would carry on like this unless they've been at it. for lifetimes. :-D
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 3:06 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife You're correct to direct your attempt at Barry, who is by *far* the worst offender; but not on the basis that he's "better able" to stop. OK, then show us that you're better able to stop. I presume that you and Barry both defend yourselves against the other's attacks to convince the rest of us that you are innocent of the charges made, but I for one would be more impressed if either of you managed to completely ignore the other's attacks and focus instead on intelligent discussion of other issues. I don't believe something about you merely because Barry said it, and vice versa. It's the overall impression one makes that's important to me, and a tendency to bicker detracts from the positive impressions I've gotten of both of you. I read quite a few posts from both you and Barry, but I immediately delete them if they're an attack on the other. I don't care who's right or who's wrong. Both of you are wrong to continue this game.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
enlightened_dawn11 wrote:- > there are many of us here who already filter content here on the > basis of common sense and preference. since we are all grown ups > here, i vote we continue to do this. I agree. As I have done before the ones "so unhappy" with the content of FFL should set up their own Yahoo Group, which is easily done, and they can moderate it all they want. Which should be easy to moderate as they will probably have no members. :-D
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
I think we’re not going to do it. it’s too heavy-handed. It doesn't matter to me, because I block most of the trolls, anyway. Just trying to offer the group an option, which I think they should vote on as a whole. A far as it being heavy-handed, it's what all the other successful forums always do. As someone just pointed out, people can pick and choose among posts, based on the track record of the posters. That someone is a newcomer. Perhaps some of the long-term regulars will weigh in. "Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only love." - Amma --- On Mon, 11/24/08, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 12:31 PM From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of gullible fool Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 11:23 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Would you want to take on this moderation duty, presuming we agreed on it? It would mean reading all the posts, and making a subjective judgment as to their tone, intent, etc. I don?t have the time, the patience, nor the wisdom for it. But we're all used to you being the bad cop, Rick. I'd do it, but I do not read all the posts and do not want to. Anyone who feels aggrieved will have to report the offending post to the three moderators with an email that has a link in the following format: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/199301 It would have to wait until after we are back from Detroit, so maybe begin on the 8th. As someone just pointed out, people can pick and choose among posts, based on the track record of the posters. If some folks want to spend a lot of time writing things that most people won’t read, just to indulge their desire to vent, then I guess that’s their choice. And it’s unfortunate, because most people who do that also make substantive contributions, but they’re going to lose a lot of people who don’t want to sift through their posts looking for it.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of gullible fool Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 11:23 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Would you want to take on this moderation duty, presuming we agreed on it? It would mean reading all the posts, and making a subjective judgment as to their tone, intent, etc. I don?t have the time, the patience, nor the wisdom for it. But we're all used to you being the bad cop, Rick. I'd do it, but I do not read all the posts and do not want to. Anyone who feels aggrieved will have to report the offending post to the three moderators with an email that has a link in the following format: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/199301> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/199301 It would have to wait until after we are back from Detroit, so maybe begin on the 8th. I think we're not going to do it. it's too heavy-handed. As someone just pointed out, people can pick and choose among posts, based on the track record of the posters. If some folks want to spend a lot of time writing things that most people won't read, just to indulge their desire to vent, then I guess that's their choice. And it's unfortunate, because most people who do that also make substantive contributions, but they're going to lose a lot of people who don't want to sift through their posts looking for it.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
Would you want to take on this moderation duty, presuming we agreed on it? It would mean reading all the posts, and making a subjective judgment as to their tone, intent, etc. I don’t have the time, the patience, nor the wisdom for it. But we're all used to you being the bad cop, Rick. I'd do it, but I do not read all the posts and do not want to. Anyone who feels aggrieved will have to report the offending post to the three moderators with an email that has a link in the following format: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/199301 It would have to wait until after we are back from Detroit, so maybe begin on the 8th. "Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only love." - Amma --- On Mon, 11/24/08, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 11:46 AM From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of gullible fool Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 10:39 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. I?m giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does, but theoretically, either of you could end it once and for all. I suggest we have a one-month moratorium in honor of the spirit of the holiday season, from November 26th through December 26th, inclusive. No personal attacks, no name-calling will be allowed. Violations will result in the the following: The post will be deleted, which means all members who read FFL at the message page will not even come across the message. The violator will be placed on moderation until December 27th, which means his or her posts will have to be approved before being released to the group. The posts will be deleted rather than be made available to the group if they are also in violation. The moderators will take their time to review these posts. Would you want to take on this moderation duty, presuming we agreed on it? It would mean reading all the posts, and making a subjective judgment as to their tone, intent, etc. I don’t have the time, the patience, nor the wisdom for it.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of gullible fool Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 10:39 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. I?m giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does, but theoretically, either of you could end it once and for all. I suggest we have a one-month moratorium in honor of the spirit of the holiday season, from November 26th through December 26th, inclusive. No personal attacks, no name-calling will be allowed. Violations will result in the the following: The post will be deleted, which means all members who read FFL at the message page will not even come across the message. The violator will be placed on moderation until December 27th, which means his or her posts will have to be approved before being released to the group. The posts will be deleted rather than be made available to the group if they are also in violation. The moderators will take their time to review these posts. Would you want to take on this moderation duty, presuming we agreed on it? It would mean reading all the posts, and making a subjective judgment as to their tone, intent, etc. I don't have the time, the patience, nor the wisdom for it.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. I’m giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does, but theoretically, either of you could end it once and for all. I suggest we have a one-month moratorium in honor of the spirit of the holiday season, from November 26th through December 26th, inclusive. No personal attacks, no name-calling will be allowed. Violations will result in the the following: The post will be deleted, which means all members who read FFL at the message page will not even come across the message. The violator will be placed on moderation until December 27th, which means his or her posts will have to be approved before being released to the group. The posts will be deleted rather than be made available to the group if they are also in violation. The moderators will take their time to review these posts. "Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only love." - Amma --- On Mon, 11/24/08, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 8:38 AM From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 4:18 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Of course, none of that happened. Instead, some- one who long ago proved that she is pretty much incapable of having an original thought tried to turn it into a "bash Vaj" session, and tried to suck in anyone stupid enough to join in. She actually found one this time, a newb who IMO has not posted a single original thought since she arrived here. You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. I’m giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does, but theoretically, either of you could end it once and for all.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 8:45 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife > You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old > Barry/Judy game. "Sucked into"?? By whom, Rick? Not by me. Agreed. Sucked in by his own habit patterns. *Most* of Barry's Judy-bashing posts are de novo, not in response to anything I've said about him. That's the case with all four of the Judy-bashing posts he's made this morning. Again agreed. I'm giving > you a hard time about this because I think you have > greater capacity to drop the game than she does If you really think that, you haven't been paying attention. You're both guilty. I get the impression that Barry may be better able to break the cycle, but please prove me wrong. Plus which, you don't say a word, again, about his incredibly unfair and simply untrue bash above of enlightened_dawn, who has posted far more original stuff since she's been here than Barry has in that period. Haven't been following that discussion closely. There's something horribly wrong with your sense of fairness where Barry is concerned. The ratio of his bashing to nonbashing posts--and not just those bashing me--is way higher than anybody else's here. Could be. I don't like the bashing whoever's doing it. Nobody's innocent. I was just looking for a possible way to stop it. Part of your problem, I think, is that you don't bother to read his or my bashes. That's understandable, but it also means you aren't in any position to evaluate the situation overall. True. In fact, I just snipped a bunch of stuff without reading it, because it was getting too long and I have to get to work.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 8:28 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife But do me a favor and keep a mental track of the number of posts she spends "trashing Barry" over the next few months. It won't ever be 100%, but it'll consistently be 20-40% of the total, as it has been now for years. That's a lot of "cheek turning" and mooning ahead of me. I might as well take my pants off now and leave them off. :-) Think of yourself as Kevin Costner in "Dances with Wolves" where he rides back and forth in front of the Confederate troops, hoping to be shot, but they all miss him and exhaust their ammunition, allowing the Union troops to charge and defeat them.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 9:02 AM, Rick Archer wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 7:51 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Seriously, Rick, I get what you're saying and I will do my best to try to ignore her attempts to suck me back into the only game she knows how to play. If you do that, and even if she devotes 100% of her posts to trashing you, the percentage of good stuff in your posts will be higher, and thus the overall mix in the stew will be more palatable. I’m just picking on you because when most of us think of bickering on FFL, we think of the eternal Barry/Judy dance. It may take two to tango, but you don’t have to be one of the two if you so choose. Let her dance with others or solo, if no others accept her invitation. Maybe then she’ll get tired of the dance too. Since most email programs have very easy "rules" or scripting to allow you to file emails, that may be the perfect solution. All I have to do is pick the name appearing in the email and then choose where I want it to go, like for example, the trash, or perhaps a folder of posters I'm fond of. You never see the posts from the whacky posters, they go straight to the trash!
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 7:51 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Seriously, Rick, I get what you're saying and I will do my best to try to ignore her attempts to suck me back into the only game she knows how to play. If you do that, and even if she devotes 100% of her posts to trashing you, the percentage of good stuff in your posts will be higher, and thus the overall mix in the stew will be more palatable. I'm just picking on you because when most of us think of bickering on FFL, we think of the eternal Barry/Judy dance. It may take two to tango, but you don't have to be one of the two if you so choose. Let her dance with others or solo, if no others accept her invitation. Maybe then she'll get tired of the dance too.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of guyfawkes91 Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 4:31 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife > All we have to do is get rid of the ankle-biting > pundits who post lies to get attention! > No, that's not possible. More people need to post more thoughtful messages. Eventually if enough thoughtful discussion takes place on this group there will be a "phase transition" ;-) and it'll flip over into a more restrained tone. People emulate each other, and they like to think they're getting some sort of cred from the groups they're in. Even if it's back to front cred from people responding emotively to one's posts. If it becomes apparent that there's no cred to be gained from emotionally charged yet information free posting it'll die out. Well put Guy.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 4:18 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Of course, none of that happened. Instead, some- one who long ago proved that she is pretty much incapable of having an original thought tried to turn it into a "bash Vaj" session, and tried to suck in anyone stupid enough to join in. She actually found one this time, a newb who IMO has not posted a single original thought since she arrived here. You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. I'm giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does, but theoretically, either of you could end it once and for all.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 3:43 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife That's why I was trying to taunt/challenge Tom to stick around and not limit his remarks to a "drive by hooting." He at least seems to have something to say that is out of the ordinary and new. Whatever he has to say, it's got to be better than the stuff posted by those who have spent 50 posts a week for months or years proving that they DON'T have anything new or interesting to say. But you see Barry, you're part of the problem insofar as you ended your post with an implicit dig at Judy. If you did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to egg her on, and COMPLETELY IGNORED all attempts she might make to engage you in an argument, the whole Barry/Judy thing might fizzle out once and for all. Just think of yourself has being one of those Hindu gods with lots of heads, and therefore plenty of cheeks. Keep turning them no matter what she does and see what happens.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of guyfawkes91 Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 12:27 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife The way to redress the balance is to increase the quantity of posts that are worth reading, which makes more people read, and hopefully more people write other intelligent tracts. I agree. Limiting the weekly posts to 50 was effective because it change the proportions of the mix. More constructive, substantive contributions will naturally change the ratio of useful posts to those which involve petty bickering.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
curtisdeltablues wrote: >> The fruitlessness of trying to change someone else? In general, I >> agree. Still, having someone (like me) post a summary reaction to the >> tone of things in this group - once every 5 years or so - might not >> be too out of line. It's just my reaction: hack it up, spit it out, >> do what you do with it. >> >> BTW, Curtis, I enjoy your posts >> > \ > > Thanks for your response. I hope my response encourages you to post > more about topics that you do like. I think FFL needs more writing. > That way we will have more to choose from. > > More writing? I hope not longer posts. After all who has time to read those? Good writing is actually being able to convey a thought or idea in as few words as possible. I've often said this is also not a writing contest. Some people here can say more in one line as some in many paragraphs. TM tends to make people verbose for some reason. I always wondered why the MIU stuff in the late 70's were so wordy with little actually said. It's an interesting phenomena. One TM teacher friend once said it was due to "overstimulated intellects." Then we have the absolute worst case of people who write lots of words but never learned proper writing and post a wall of words. They are unable to break their thoughts up into paragraphs. Those I don't bother reading.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 23, 2008, at 10:24 AM, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tkrystofiak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Vitriol, aggression, ridicule, backbiting, summary judgment, baiting, > obsession, acting out. The White Knight is mounting his horse, in preparation to save the county. Krishna comes, to destroy the wicked and bless righteous. > > How many of those terms, would you say, characterize the posts on > FairfieldLife? The nobleman tosses out the rhetorical question to the adoring crowds Etc, etc... Great response, lurk. I knew when I read this someone would come up with some high-class snark, and you did not disappoint! :) Glad someone was up to it today. Sal
