|
Post by Reefs on Jan 9, 2013 21:39:09 GMT -5
Hopeless. Will that ever stop? No method is working with you, Silver. There is no intention to change. Change to what? No method - of yours and/or Enigma's. Why even use a 'method' on me or anybody? I came here to see what I could see and learn what I could learn. And maybe have a wee bit of fun. I have to say that the more I read and tried to take in what Enigma and/or you are saying or trying to say, the more confuzzled I've become. In recent weeks, I came to the conclusion that in order to keep from feeling dizzy, I had to avoid reading them too closely because I had an adverse reaction to them. I tried. And I think you are trying a little bit too hard. I can't put it any straighter than that. For all you anti-conspiracy buffs>>> Don't play stupid. I was talking about your sniping. No method is keeping you from sniping. There is no intention on your part to stop it. There was no reason to post that comment and a couple of other comments in the other thread apart from sniping.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jan 9, 2013 21:50:46 GMT -5
“Just cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town.”
~~~G. Carlin
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 9, 2013 21:53:41 GMT -5
"'Get on the plane Get on the plane!' that's what they tell you ... f#ck you I'm getting in the plane ...let Evil Kneival get on the plane" -- GC
"Where's the Bluuuee Foood?" -- GC
"Baseball the national pastime? Football: beat the sh!t of the other guy and take away his land .... Midwest and Rockies to go..." -- GC
"What's the use of being God if every run-down schmuck with a two-dollar prayer book can come along and f#ck up your plan? ... Suppose your prayer's aren't answered whattay' say ... 'Well, it's God's will, Thy will be done!'? fine! ... But if it's God's will and he's gonna' do what he wants to anyway why the f#ck bother praying in the first place? ... seems like a big waste of time...couldn't ya' just forget the prayin' part and skip right to 'His Will'? ... If there is a God may he strike me dead ... see? nothin' happened -- wait ... got a little cramp in my leg ... and my balls hurt ... plus, I'm blind! ... whoops! now I'm ok again, must-have-been-Joe-Pesci .. ." -- GC
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jan 10, 2013 0:37:22 GMT -5
Oh. Great idea, Silence. In my case, the invisible man living in the sky's been replaced by Reefs. Reefs is your God?! Well ~ yes ~ a very angry one, too. (Context - B - context)
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jan 10, 2013 2:52:23 GMT -5
Change to what? No method - of yours and/or Enigma's. Why even use a 'method' on me or anybody? I came here to see what I could see and learn what I could learn. And maybe have a wee bit of fun. I have to say that the more I read and tried to take in what Enigma and/or you are saying or trying to say, the more confuzzled I've become. In recent weeks, I came to the conclusion that in order to keep from feeling dizzy, I had to avoid reading them too closely because I had an adverse reaction to them. I tried. And I think you are trying a little bit too hard. I can't put it any straighter than that. Don't play stupid. I was talking about your sniping. No method is keeping you from sniping. There is no intention on your part to stop it. There was no reason to post that comment and a couple of other comments in the other thread apart from sniping. Don't play stupid. Why are you going on and on about sniping? No method is preventing you from talking way down to me in overbearing, authoritarian tones. I don't see any signs of that stopping. I didn't know there was a law about sniping. And even so, what you may term sniping, I call challenging. I feel to challenge peeps is a good thing. I see you and Enigma doing it all - the - time.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jan 10, 2013 4:19:18 GMT -5
"If the "black box" flight recorder is never damaged during a plane crash, why isn't the whole darn airplane made out of that stuff?"
"Why are hemorrhoids called "hemorrhoids" instead of "assteroids"? "
~G. Carlin
|
|
|
Post by Peter on Jan 10, 2013 7:57:22 GMT -5
And even so, what you may term sniping, I call challenging. I feel to challenge peeps is a good thing. I see you and Enigma doing it all - the - time. Reefs reported 3 of your posts here, Silver. The thing about "Challenging" is that the challenger is usually expected to have some insight with which to point out some fixed idea, inconsistency or ask some question that encourages the challenged person to go/look at some aspect of their experience in a deeper/more authentic way. What you appear to be doing here - lacking any of the above - is just annoying Reefs. Please either bring up something that he can work with, or leave him alone. I've already had to play the "Leave Reefs Alone" card before Christmas and here it is again. Can you take the hint and stick to it this time?
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jan 10, 2013 11:38:58 GMT -5
And even so, what you may term sniping, I call challenging. I feel to challenge peeps is a good thing. I see you and Enigma doing it all - the - time. Reefs reported 3 of your posts here, Silver. The thing about "Challenging" is that the challenger is usually expected to have some insight with which to point out some fixed idea, inconsistency or ask some question that encourages the challenged person to go/look at some aspect of their experience in a deeper/more authentic way. What you appear to be doing here - lacking any of the above - is just annoying Reefs. Please either bring up something that he can work with, or leave him alone. I've already had to play the "Leave Reefs Alone" card before Christmas and here it is again. Can you take the hint and stick to it this time? I wouldn't mind "leaving Reefs alone" if he would just do the same for me. When you were engaged dealing with our stuff a while back, you posted some comments that led me to believe you were more than a bit fed up at hearing our complaints, so I decided not to complain to you. There are quite a few times since then that I really felt the urge to complain about his posts, but as I said, and I chose to bite the bullet so's not to annoy you and/or hear your own displeasure. I hoped things would pan out better. Also, it seemed that my complaints back then ended up getting played down/watered down, to a degree. I feel that if I wouldn't take what I consider to be his abuse and address it with some humor, it might help.. I see 'the fellas' of ST joke around up, down and sideways, but when I do it, Reefs is on - my - case. I think his timing is telling, anyway.…I was trying to cope with the situation using some humor - to try and get a message across to him that he will pop up to backhand me for trying to deal with the situation between us with humor - evidently this is something he chooses to call 'sniping' - this other telling thing is that he seems to be the only one who has a problem with me, and we with each other. I guess you choose to deal - in all cases - with complainants out in the open - which as I've said before, is an unusual way to do things, compared to my stint as a mod elsewhere on another couple of forums. I have no idea if you ever deal with any other similar issues by contacting people via pm (I've never received any from you about similar situations), but I can only suggest that a couple of minor changes might be an improvement - I don't know. Knowing how things go around here with Reefs, especially, I can't say as I blame you, Peter, for doing things totally out in the open like that. I wasn't trying to annoy him, but since I have to live under these imperfect conditions, it's going to be tough to avoid annoying him, since my living and breathing seems to annoy him, and cause him to throw lightning bolts in my direction - just before he runs to the real God-man. What can I say? I will do my best, Peter.
|
|
|
Post by Peter on Jan 10, 2013 12:02:44 GMT -5
...it seemed that my complaints back then ended up getting played down/watered down, to a degree. Yes. Reefs also feels that his complaints get played down. That's why you're both still here. ...I was trying to cope with the situation using some humor - to try and get a message across to him that he will pop up to backhand me for trying to deal with the situation between us with humor Normally - once some difficulty has developed - my (personal) advise would be to try "getting your message across" in as clear and honest a way as you're able to. However, in this particular case what I think is going on is that Reefs doesn't want there to be any sort of situation between you (do correct me if I'm wrong, Reefs) which is something I think you might find a little difficult to accept. I know I would. Now whether or not Reef's own need to participate in drama will cause him to make a hypocrite of himself, only time will tell I can only suggest that a couple of minor changes might be an improvement Do you know what these two changes might look like?
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jan 10, 2013 12:19:22 GMT -5
...it seemed that my complaints back then ended up getting played down/watered down, to a degree. Yes. Reefs also feels that his complaints get played down. That's why you're both still here. Normally - once some difficulty has developed - my (personal) advise would be to try "getting your message across" in as clear and honest a way as you're able to. However, in this particular case what I think is going on is that Reefs doesn't want there to be any sort of situation between you (do correct me if I'm wrong, Reefs) which is something I think you might find a little difficult to accept. I know I would. Now whether or not Reef's own need to participate in drama will cause him to make a hypocrite of himself, only time will tell I can only suggest that a couple of minor changes might be an improvement Do you know what these two changes might look like? The changes - I was referring to possibly utilizing pm's to make brief comments and notices to members if and when you see problems brewing and the potential rising for a big storm...if you see someone perhaps being careless and/or unnecessary roughness - y'know, that sort of thing. I realize the potential for that ending up being a whole lot of work doesn't make it look like an attractive option for a forum with one moderator, but it's a suggestion. For all I know, you're already doing that. I guess that was 2 for the price of 1, Peter.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 10, 2013 13:59:06 GMT -5
Yes. Reefs also feels that his complaints get played down. That's why you're both still here. Normally - once some difficulty has developed - my (personal) advise would be to try "getting your message across" in as clear and honest a way as you're able to. However, in this particular case what I think is going on is that Reefs doesn't want there to be any sort of situation between you (do correct me if I'm wrong, Reefs) which is something I think you might find a little difficult to accept. I know I would. Now whether or not Reef's own need to participate in drama will cause him to make a hypocrite of himself, only time will tell Do you know what these two changes might look like? The changes - I was referring to possibly utilizing pm's to make brief comments and notices to members if and when you see problems brewing and the potential rising for a big storm...if you see someone perhaps being careless and/or unnecessary roughness - y'know, that sort of thing. I realize the potential for that ending up being a whole lot of work doesn't make it look like an attractive option for a forum with one moderator, but it's a suggestion. For all I know, you're already doing that. I guess that was 2 for the price of 1, Peter. I actually like the transparency inherent in discussing such matters on the forum, though it seem like far more work and far more risky than sending out PM's behind the scenes. It seems like less of a focus on control and more of a focus on trying to figure out what in blazes is really going on, which is my thang. On SF, I implied something negative about the integrity of one of the moderators and she banned me for life. That was the actual reason given to me privately, but it would be absurd to try to justify that reaction publicly. It's possible that even Tzu might have objected. Given that, I know Peter also makes use of the PM's.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 10, 2013 21:07:48 GMT -5
Yes. Reefs also feels that his complaints get played down. That's why you're both still here. Normally - once some difficulty has developed - my (personal) advise would be to try "getting your message across" in as clear and honest a way as you're able to. However, in this particular case what I think is going on is that Reefs doesn't want there to be any sort of situation between you (do correct me if I'm wrong, Reefs) which is something I think you might find a little difficult to accept. I know I would. Now whether or not Reef's own need to participate in drama will cause him to make a hypocrite of himself, only time will tell Do you know what these two changes might look like? Peter, you said you are here to learn something, so I think it's worth replying to this post. As I said earlier, there's a bug in the forum structure. The bug is Shawn and you, Peter. Shawn is never here, which leaves you as the only active bug in the system. You have the means to end every drama whenever you want. Sometimes you do, sometimes you don't. So if there is never-ending drama, the finger has to always point back to you. What makes this situation with Silver so unique is that it shows very well where you are standing, your patterns of thinking, your interests and convictions. I know you for about a year now. I haven't seen any neo-advaitic ramblings from you so far (prove me wrong, please!). You usually stay far away from on-topic-only discussions. You don't post a lot so no one will really notice that. But you do have your regular appearances in threads that contain drama where you usually play the role of the calm 'voice of reason'. I call that mod-posting style. You did that even before you were a mod. Before you became a mod your role play of detached superiority was rather convincing. I call it role play because you can't keep it up anymore. Now you really are a mod and not just imitating or playing anymore and the contradictions in your behavior have reached bizarre proportions. I don't have to go into details here, we've discussed that already. My impression so far is that you are not really sincere about non-duality topics but more interested in forum gossip which could explain why you can't tell on-topic discussions apart from off-topic discussions. Can you answer these questions specifically and right away: 1) What is the forum purpose? 2) What would be an ideal member? 3) What is on-topic and what is off-topic? 4) What kind of drama is helpful and what kind of drama is damaging this community? Can you answer these questions right away or do you have to think about it or ask Shawn first? If you can't answer these questions right away then you are not ready for this mod position.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 11, 2013 0:27:35 GMT -5
And even so, what you may term sniping, I call challenging. I feel to challenge peeps is a good thing. I see you and Enigma doing it all - the - time. Reefs reported 3 of your posts here, Silver. The thing about "Challenging" is that the challenger is usually expected to have some insight with which to point out some fixed idea, inconsistency or ask some question that encourages the challenged person to go/look at some aspect of their experience in a deeper/more authentic way. What you appear to be doing here - lacking any of the above - is just annoying Reefs. Please either bring up something that he can work with, or leave him alone. I've already had to play the "Leave Reefs Alone" card before Christmas and here it is again. Can you take the hint and stick to it this time?"Please, please leave him alone. Can you stick to it this time?"
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jan 11, 2013 0:37:52 GMT -5
Yes. Reefs also feels that his complaints get played down. That's why you're both still here. Normally - once some difficulty has developed - my (personal) advise would be to try "getting your message across" in as clear and honest a way as you're able to. However, in this particular case what I think is going on is that Reefs doesn't want there to be any sort of situation between you (do correct me if I'm wrong, Reefs) which is something I think you might find a little difficult to accept. I know I would. Now whether or not Reef's own need to participate in drama will cause him to make a hypocrite of himself, only time will tell Do you know what these two changes might look like? Peter, you said you are here to learn something, so I think it's worth replying to this post. As I said earlier, there's a bug in the forum structure. The bug is Shawn and you, Peter. Shawn is never here, which leaves you as the only active bug in the system. You have the means to end every drama whenever you want. Sometimes you do, sometimes you don't. So if there is never-ending drama, the finger has to always point back to you. What makes this situation with Silver so unique is that it shows very well where you are standing, your patterns of thinking, your interests and convictions. I know you for about a year now. I haven't seen any neo-advaitic ramblings from you so far (prove me wrong, please!). You usually stay far away from on-topic-only discussions. You don't post a lot so no one will really notice that. But you do have your regular appearances in threads that contain drama where you usually play the role of the calm 'voice of reason'. I call that mod-posting style. You did that even before you were a mod. Before you became a mod your role play of detached superiority was rather convincing. I call it role play because you can't keep it up anymore. Now you really are a mod and not just imitating or playing anymore and the contradictions in your behavior have reached bizarre proportions. I don't have to go into details here, we've discussed that already. My impression so far is that you are not really sincere about non-duality topics but more interested in forum gossip which could explain why you can't tell on-topic discussions apart from off-topic discussions. Can you answer these questions specifically and right away: 1) What is the forum purpose? 2) What would be an ideal member? 3) What is on-topic and what is off-topic? 4) What kind of drama is helpful and what kind of drama is damaging this community? Can you answer these questions right away or do you have to think about it or ask Shawn first? If you can't answer these questions right away then you are not ready for this mod position. I disagree Reefs. I think Peter has been a very good moderator. There are many moderation styles and the style that Peter is exhibiting is basically staying off the boards as much as possible except when duty calls. We the participants on this forum create the environment for ourselves. Peter steps in when things degenerate. If he were to step in any more than this then he would be directing the conversation and setting the tone himself. In essence, he would be a tyrant through the exercise of his power, enforcing the prejudged image of what things should look like. Yes there is a difference between the way the A-H forums are maintained and the way these forums are maintained. There is also a very good reason to keep them differently maintained. A-H is a specific teaching and the tighter moderation is used to maintain the integrity and focus on that specific teaching. Non-duality is not a specific teaching. There is no specific one-way approach. There are too many ways to point to the imageless, too many ways that people come into that fundamental realization. A tighter moderation would would collapse it down to the moderator's idea of what the right way is. Peter sits out of the fray and does his own searching/mulling from the sidelines. There is no teaching leader here. He's not abusing his power to inject his idea of what the right way to search is. Milk from thorns, my friend. Take what irritates you and use it to ask who or what is getting irritated and why? You get irritated with Silver's contributions and likely with a few other people's contributions. Your post has their air of trying to jockey Peter out of the moderation position and that you would do a better job in his place. What's the power grab for? Have you ever met Shawn? Spoken to him? Asked him why he's left the forum undirected? Or is your opinion an endeavor to cast him in a negative light and thus raise yourself higher in contrast?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 11, 2013 3:04:08 GMT -5
I disagree Reefs. I think Peter has been a very good moderator. There are many moderation styles and the style that Peter is exhibiting is basically staying off the boards as much as possible except when duty calls. We the participants on this forum create the environment for ourselves. Peter steps in when things degenerate. Peter showed very unbalanced behavior. Just look at how many warnings Silver got so far, 10? 20? Just now she got a warning again. How many warnings did Beingist get? Only one or two, then he banned him. How many warnings did Arisha get? More than just 2 but not more than 5 and then he banned her. How many warnings did Question get? I don't know, I wasn't around. How many warnings did Living get? Zero! He just banned him right away. I don't see here any 'style' except arbitrary behavior. The Silver-Peter relationship looks like the cart before the horse and the tail wagging the dog. The admin has to set the tone, not the mod. Besides, I've never seen Peter showing any interest in non-duality, especially neo-advaita. But I see him coming down to just gossip quite a lot. The topic of the forum doesn't matter. The vision has to be clear. This forum here has no clear vision. The A-H forum has a clear vision. On the A-H forum any discussions are welcome about anything that is somehow related to the A-H teachings. And as I already said, they let me talk non-duality there as long as it was somehow related to the A-H teachings. Shawn could do the same here and welcome any discussions on any topic as long as it is related to neo-advaita, that's how I read this statement about neo-advaitic ramblings. This is a discussion forum. It's about ways of discussion not ways of searching what a mod should be concerned about. Friend? Power grab? I think Tzu has a point somewhere. This forum is his brainchild, that's all I need to know. It's a reflection of his mind. It's not about Shawn or Peter for me anyway. It's about structures of communities/organizations and the patterns of thought behind it that brought them into being. I'm much more interested in the abstract mechanisms of thoughts and beliefs that are playing out here than in the personal stories everyone seems to be so occupied with. I'm working with concepts and patterns of thoughts and I share these insights here with all of you. The persons involved in the dramas here are easily replaced by others. Haven't you noticed that? It's different places different faces, or different threads different screen names, but basically the same over and over again because the thought patterns here stay the same. It's a place for the confused managed by other confused ones in order to get more clarity. That's not going to happen. That thought pattern is the bug. It's like putting a bunch of angry people together and let be supervised by another angry one in order to calm down everyone. That's not going to happen. There will be a never-ending series of explosions. That thought pattern has been hold in place by the top guy. And it's flawed. It's simple LOA mechanics from there down to the mod and members and topics/conflicts discussed. It's not rocket science.
|
|