|
|
Post by anja on Jun 24, 2016 8:11:40 GMT -5
See figgles, he still avoids responding to my post in this thread, and has once again brought up the request i give him an answer about me being a hybrid baby incubator. Laughter, it is not important to me that you respond to my post in this thread. The ongoing stalemate tactic you use is totally ineffective on me. You not responding already says a lot, though it would be interesting to hear your reasons for your constant immature, irrational and disrespectful comments toward those you disagree with and\or do not rez with. Again, not interested in your opinion you think i am wrong. I can clearly see you lost the contest, and in my view, an extremely trivial matter compared to the rest of one's life. What is still interesting is observing you spend a lot of time trying to convince others you did not lose the contest, as it reaffirms my theory you do have issues with losing or being wrong and will go to great lengths to be publicly seen as the winner or correct. That's fantastic, though completely irrelevant. Well no, I'm not avoiding a response to your post in this thread, but I am insisting that you directly answer that question before I offer one. The avoidance here is very clearly yours and not mine: all you have to do is directly answer that question to get the response you were waiting for. Why won't you do that? I promise that as soon as you do I will, with great joy, immediately and gleefully respond very directly to every point you've raised there. Glad to see that you're not waiting any longer, I wouldn't want to leave you in a lurch like that.  Perhaps you never were really waiting for that reply after all and instead would rather it remain unwritten .. I mean, a simple yes or no is all it would take to illicit it at this point, and if I didn't hold up my end then of course I'd have broken a promise and you'd be able to refer to me along the lines of something similar to "attention wh0re" and then preemptively whine about how I might wind up denigrating you in further dialog. As far as the game is concerned, you're the one bringing the initial interest as to who's won or lost, so of course the question as to whether it had a defined ending point is quite relevant to that interest. It's no surprise to me that you're interested in the game, as you're in exactly the same situation that gave rise to it to begin with. By that I mean the following: have you noticed that over these months it's always you who responds to me first -- and with one very notable exception -- it's always you who starts writing about me out of the blue when I've neither engaged what you've written or made reference to you? Just for the record: I, Anja, don't want my children (although I have non) be educated and taught by anybody who thinks he is impregnated by tassie-aliens (or other et's) and is advocating and promoting the so called flat-earth theory. With only one of these two very strange expressions of what one thinks is the case, I would be able to deal with. But the two things, one subjective, like being impregnated by aliens, and one seemingly objective, like the earth is flat, as a testemony of someone, leads me to the conclusion that I don't want my children to be educated and taught by someone who holds those kind of believes. And no, you can not seperate the person, the character, from what is expressed by it. The motto: Don't attack the messenger only the message, is a good one. But unfortunately the message can not always be seperated form the one who brings the message. Because sometimes oneself IS the message also. |
|
|
|
Post by anja on Jun 24, 2016 11:05:52 GMT -5
The only movement of mind that ever calls out and mocks the ego of the other is ego.  So that means when you engage here you are almost constantly engaging from ego.  Interestingly the discussion in this ST forum, when one dislikes what someone else has said, the insult is not done by simply saying, "I think you're an arsewhole and your opinion stinks like farts." No, here we say, "that's your ego talking, Mr. Mind." Sounds more polite and sophisticated but is actually the same like saying, "you suck! You stink! Annnddd you're ugly too!" |
|
|
|
Post by anja on Jun 25, 2016 11:00:11 GMT -5
So that means when you engage here you are almost constantly engaging from ego. Interestingly the discussion in this ST forum, when one dislikes what someone else has said, the insult is not done by simply saying, "I think you're an arsewhole and your opinion stinks like farts." No, here we say, "that's your ego talking, Mr. Mind." Sounds more polite and sophisticated but is actually the same like saying, "you suck! You stink! Annnddd you're ugly too!" Just for the record: On my way through my neigborhood I got a question. It bumped in on my invisible telephone. It went like this: "Anja, could you give a brief summery of what happend between you and Satchitananda in the "If I am the world"-thread? Can you describe what happend on a meta-level without quoting anything? But from his perspective?" "Yes, I could. And I would, if he could and would too. But from my perspective." "Okay. I hear ya..." |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 27, 2016 18:43:34 GMT -5
Well no, I'm not avoiding a response to your post in this thread, but I am insisting that you directly answer that question before I offer one. The avoidance here is very clearly yours and not mine: all you have to do is directly answer that question to get the response you were waiting for. Why won't you do that? I promise that as soon as you do I will, with great joy, immediately and gleefully respond very directly to every point you've raised there. All issues raised here, already addressed. If you are not satisfied with this opinion, then you aren't, and i theorise you will once again repeat yourself in some hope you will somehow receive that which you are trying to obtain. Glad to see that you're not waiting any longer, I wouldn't want to leave you in a lurch like that. Perhaps you never were really waiting for that reply after all and instead would rather it remain unwritten .. I mean, a simple yes or no is all it would take to illicit it at this point, and if I didn't hold up my end then of course I'd have broken a promise and you'd be able to refer to me along the lines of something similar to "attention wh0re" and then preemptively whine about how I might wind up denigrating you in further dialog.
(I) I stopped waiting for a response from you as soon as it came to my attention (a) i was reported for sharing my opinion you behave like an attention wh.ore. (b) Hence my statement you not responding in the thread says a lot to me. As far as the game is concerned, you're the one bringing the initial interest as to who's won or lost, so of course the question as to whether it had a defined ending point is quite relevant to that interest. It's no surprise to me that you're interested in the game, as you're in exactly the same situation that gave rise to it to begin with. By that I mean the following: have you noticed that over these months it's always you who responds to me first -- and with one very notable exception -- it's always you who starts writing about me out of the blue when I've neither engaged what you've written or made reference to you? Seems quite evident to me the actual initial interest is yours laughter when you spent a chunk of your life creating the game in order to prove something, that (a) i I (corrected for punctuation) can only assume is important to you. If going around repeating a catch phrase of a character off of a mindnumbingly idiotic cartoon as an instrument of mocking someone or their thoughts gives you some kind of pleasurable or positive sensations, i sincerely wish you well. I do ignore you for long stretches. Sometimes I get annoyed with the nonsense when it becomes this ridiculous and sustained, but the intense level of emotional attachment you've got to this negativity is very obvious in what you write, and that's simply not happening with me with respect to you. My health isn't suffering because of our interaction, but I can tell that yours is. I guess if I were a full-on embodiment of Christ consciousness, if I was a perfect holy Buddha, I'd return all of your vitriol with a loving smile, but ya' see, I'm just a common every-day internet clown.  Sorry hun', just the way it goes. No argument from me. Well yes, I'm repeating myself but for very good reason: you told me you were waiting so I did the courtesy of informing you of what you could do to bring the wait to an end. (a) what gave you the impression that the post was reported? It wasn't. (b) I am completely uninterested in that topic  (II) Yes, of course I had an interest in the game in having started it, but very obviously it had nothing to do with you and my point was that you brought that interest as to "who won?" here to the thread. Why didn't you answer the question about whether you've noticed which one of us replies to and makes mention of the other first? (a) (** muttley snicker **) |
|
|
|
Post by anja on Jun 27, 2016 18:56:17 GMT -5
All issues raised here, already addressed. If you are not satisfied with this opinion, then you aren't, and i theorise you will once again repeat yourself in some hope you will somehow receive that which you are trying to obtain.
(I) I stopped waiting for a response from you as soon as it came to my attention (a) i was reported for sharing my opinion you behave like an attention wh.ore. (b) Hence my statement you not responding in the thread says a lot to me. (II) Seems quite evident to me the actual initial interest is yours laughter when you spent a chunk of your life creating the game in order to prove something, that (a) i I (corrected for punctuation) can only assume is important to you. If going around repeating a catch phrase of a character off of a mindnumbingly idiotic cartoon as an instrument of mocking someone or their thoughts gives you some kind of pleasurable or positive sensations, i sincerely wish you well. No argument from me. Well yes, I'm repeating myself but for very good reason: you told me you were waiting so I did the courtesy of informing you of what you could do to bring the wait to an end. (a) what gave you the impression that the post was reported? It wasn't. (b) I am completely uninterested in that topic (II) Yes, of course I had an interest in the game in having started it, but very obviously it had nothing to do with you and my point was that you brought that interest as to "who won?" here to the thread. Why didn't you answer the question about whether you've noticed which one of us replies to and makes mention of the other first? (a) (** muttley snicker **)Does that mean you apply for membership, Laughter? |
|
|
|
Post by jay17 on Jun 28, 2016 4:03:15 GMT -5
Well yes, I'm repeating myself but for very good reason: that does logically explain why you keep repeating yourself i think this is another pleasure inducing self created loop you're in you told me you were waiting so I did the courtesy of informing you of what you could do to bring the wait to an end. already addressed what gave you the impression that the post was reported? It wasn't. Seems quite logical to me to conclude you possess different evidence to me. Reiterating what i said to you many moons ago, please don't ever become a lawyer. Yes, of course I had an interest in the game in having started it, but very obviously it had nothing to do with you YOU DON'T KNOW ME ! ~howls of laughter~ and my point was that you brought that interest as to "who won?" here to the thread. Yeah, i clearly saw you say that. I still maintain the initial interest is all yours about who will win. Why didn't you answer the question about whether you've noticed which one of us replies to and makes mention of the other first? Which question was that now? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 28, 2016 20:42:57 GMT -5
Yes, of course I had an interest in the game in having started it, but very obviously it had nothing to do with youYOU DON'T KNOW ME ! ~howls of laughter~ Notice how you often express pride in your analytical and logical approach and just as often deride me as often expressing irrationally, and yet here, your response to an obvious rational objective fact is a nonsensical, non sequitur emotional outburst. Why is that? It's definitely related to this you see: Why didn't you answer the question about whether you've noticed which one of us replies to and makes mention of the other first? Which question was that now? ... but sorry, if you can't keep track of all the questions you're dodging, ignoring and not responding to or answering then please don't expect me to do that for you. you told me you were waiting so I did the courtesy of informing you of what you could do to bring the wait to an end. already addressed For as long as you keep chasing me around writing your denigrating images and responding to me in dialog that has nothing to do with you for no apparent reason I'll continue to present this question, because it's quite pertinent to how I respond to you. Do you understand why that is? Do you have any idea of how and why your answer to the question would effect the way I'd respond to you? By rights I really shouldn't reply to you at all until you answer but I'm pretty sure that would just incite you to more of these antics. Well yes, I'm repeating myself but for very good reason: that does logically explain why you keep repeating yourself i think this is another pleasure inducing self created loop you're in and my point was that you brought that interest as to "who won?" here to the thread. Yeah, i clearly saw you say that. I still maintain the initial interest is all yours about who will win. It's amusing watching you try to weave in these bad parrot-jobs of my mode of expression so that you can try to make the future claim that I'm arguing with myself. what gave you the impression that the post was reported? It wasn't. Seems quite logical to me to conclude you possess different evidence to me. Reiterating what i said to you many moons ago, please don't ever become a lawyer. Well as you obviously have no compunction about resorting to out and out lies about people you accost with your pestering you've got at least one box checked as far as that goes. |
|
|
|
Post by jay17 on Jun 29, 2016 8:19:06 GMT -5
YOU DON'T KNOW ME ! ~howls of laughter~ Notice how... This is what i noticed... Yes, of course I had an interest in the game in having started it, but very obviously it had nothing to do with youYOU DON'T KNOW ME ! ~howls of laughter~ ...you saying something really dumb, so i responded with something equally dumb. It's symmetry, harmony, we are one. Which question was that now? ... but sorry, if you can't keep track of all the questions you're dodging, ignoring and not responding to or answering then please don't expect me to do that for you. by george i think he's starting to understand. For as long as you keep chasing me around writing your denigrating images and responding to me in dialog that has nothing to do with youthere's that social cue again...~responding~ YOU DON'T KNOW ME ! ~howls of laughter~ By rights I really shouldn't reply to you at all by george i think he's starting to understand. It's amusing watching you try to weave in these bad parrot-jobs of my mode of expression so that you can try to make the future claim that I'm arguing with myself. Logically, and to maintain personal integrity, i would only point out that you are arguing with yourself if i ever respond to you again with cut and pastes of your own words back to you. That was deeply fascinating watching you argue with yourself. what gave you the impression that the post was reported? It wasn't. Seems quite logical to me to conclude you possess different evidence to me. Tell me, laughter, do you actually enjoy these utterly pointless interactions. Do you actually receive enough pleasure from them that urges you to initiate and perpetuate so many of them? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 29, 2016 14:12:57 GMT -5
Tell me, laughter, do you actually enjoy these utterly pointless interactions. Do you actually receive enough pleasure from them that urges you to initiate and perpetuate so many of them? Which one, between the two of us, has initiated the interactions between us in this thread? By rights I really shouldn't reply to you at all by george i think he's starting to understand. What leads you to believe that you're entitled to slander your image of me without me responding to it? My goal in these interactions for the last year has been to minimize the real estate I occupy in your mind, and it's my judgement that if I never responded to you at all that situation would only worsen. This is what i noticed... Yes, of course I had an interest in the game in having started it, but very obviously it had nothing to do with youYOU DON'T KNOW ME ! ~howls of laughter~ ...you saying something really dumb, so i responded with something equally dumb. It's symmetry, harmony, we are one. For as long as you keep chasing me around writing your denigrating images and responding to me in dialog that has nothing to do with youthere's that social cue again...~responding~ YOU DON'T KNOW ME ! ~howls of laughter~ So the simple objective fact on the ground that the game in question initially had absolutely nothing to do with you is a dumb idea? So much for your claim to logic and rationality. It's amusing watching you try to weave in these bad parrot-jobs of my mode of expression so that you can try to make the future claim that I'm arguing with myself. Logically, and to maintain personal integrity, i would only point out that you are arguing with yourself if i ever respond to you again with cut and pastes of your own words back to you. That was deeply fascinating watching you argue with yourself. Well then you have no integrity because in the instance you're claiming that happened: (a) there was not pure cut/paste as my turns of phrase were always intertwined with what was clearly your expression and not mine and (b) as already addressed, I'd indicated to you at the time that I was aware of your bad parrot job as it was happening.  what gave you the impression that the post was reported? It wasn't. Seems quite logical to me to conclude you possess different evidence to me. You say it was reported, I say it wasn't. You're lying, I'm not. Why are you lying about this? It's your allegation that the post was reported, and yet, you offer no evidence, just your lie. |
|
|
|
Post by jay17 on Jun 29, 2016 18:10:04 GMT -5
Tell me, laughter, do you actually enjoy these utterly pointless interactions. Do you actually receive enough pleasure from them that urges you to initiate and perpetuate so many of them? Which one, between the two of us, has initiated the interactions between us in this thread? You don't seem very comfortable with sharing, laughter. by george i think he's starting to understand. What leads you to believe that you're entitled to slander your image of me without me responding to it? My goal in these interactions for the last year has been to minimize the real estate I occupy in your mind, and it's my judgement that if I never responded to you at all that situation would only worsen. Ooh, he had it, i was sure he had it, but he's lost it...oh well This is what i noticed......you saying something really dumb, so i responded with something equally dumb. It's symmetry, harmony, we are one. there's that social cue again...~responding~ YOU DON'T KNOW ME ! ~howls of laughter~ So the simple objective fact on the ground that the game in question initially had absolutely nothing to do with you is a dumb idea? So much for your claim to logic and rationality. Hey, it's "objective fact" time again. You haven't used that in a while. I can't tell if that's good or bad for you, reinforcing your belief that your conclusions are correct. Q. Yeah, i rationally and logically think it's pretty stupid to believe you know stuff that you actually don't know, so i responded with a stupid statement of my own. Logically, and to maintain personal integrity, i would only point out that you are arguing with yourself if i ever respond to you again with cut and pastes of your own words back to you. That was deeply fascinating watching you argue with yourself. Well then you have no integrity because in the instance you're claiming that happened: (a) there was not pure cut/paste as my turns of phrase were always intertwined with what was clearly your expression and not mine and (b) as already addressed, I'd indicated to you at the time that I was aware of your bad parrot job as it was happening. Already addressed. Seems quite logical to me to conclude you possess different evidence to me. You say it was reported, I say it wasn't. You're lying, I'm not. Why are you lying about this? It's your allegation that the post was reported, and yet, you offer no evidence, just your lie. I offered no evidence simply because i am not bothered by your ridiculous immature taunts and denigration, laughter. You have made allegations, and i simply stated it seems quite logical to me to conclude you possess different evidence to me. I do not require you to change your mind about the incident or your opinion or attitude toward me. You are entitled to have and to hold all the beliefs you need or desire to, they are your possessions to do with as you see fit or please, i have no need or desire for them,they are of no use to me on my journey. We could literally be sitting together in a cafe and you could go to town on me <-- no sexual innueundo intended...and i would calmly sit there drinking me coffee listening to everything you have to say...and if you ever find the time to stfu, i would smile and say, "please, do go on, this is most fascinating." Buddha Nature in everyone...it's a thing...true story. For someone who spends what appears to me to be a helluva lot of time trying to engage others, you seem very disconnected from what's actually going on in those experiences. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 29, 2016 18:41:19 GMT -5
Which one, between the two of us, has initiated the interactions between us in this thread? You don't seem very comfortable with sharing, laughter. Oh, I'm happy to share with someone who has a genuine interest. Your request that I share was based on the misconceived premise that I'd initiated these interactions in this thread, when you're the one who initiated them, not me.  So the simple objective fact on the ground that the game in question initially had absolutely nothing to do with you is a dumb idea? So much for your claim to logic and rationality. Hey, it's "objective fact" time again. You haven't used that in a while. I can't tell if that's good or bad for you, reinforcing your belief that your conclusions are correct. Q. Yeah, i rationally and logically think it's pretty stupid to believe you know stuff that you actually don't know, so i responded with a stupid statement of my own. So you deny it's an objective fact that the game initially had absolutely nothing to do with you, then what do you think that it had to do with you? Well then you have no integrity because in the instance you're claiming that happened: (a) there was not pure cut/paste as my turns of phrase were always intertwined with what was clearly your expression and not mine and (b) as already addressed, I'd indicated to you at the time that I was aware of your bad parrot job as it was happening. Already addressed. Well no, you're hallucinating that. You never countered the fact that I'd noticed your bad parrot job as it happened. Instead you kept repeating a fantasy that I hadn't noticed, and not one of the posts that you claim were cut-and-pastes were entirely my words repeated back alone. You can keep repeating this "already addressed" foolishness over and over again but the only one your likely fooling with it is yourself. You say it was reported, I say it wasn't. You're lying, I'm not. Why are you lying about this? It's your allegation that the post was reported, and yet, you offer no evidence, just your lie. I offered no evidence simply because i am not bothered by your ridiculous immature taunts and denigration, laughter. You have made allegations, and i simply stated it seems quite logical to me to conclude you possess different evidence to me. , the allegation in this case is yours: that the post was reported. It wasn't. I haven't made an allegation, just denied your lie. To characterize that denial as an allegation would be to invite me to prove a negative. Logic never was your strong suit jimmy. I do not require you to change your mind about the incident or your opinion or attitude toward me. You are entitled to have and to hold all the beliefs you need or desire to, they are your possessions to do with as you see fit or please, i have no need or desire for them,they are of no use to me on my journey. We could literally be sitting together in a cafe and you could go to town on me <-- no sexual innueundo intended...and i would calmly sit there drinking me coffee listening to everything you have to say...and if you ever find the time to stfu, i would smile and say, "please, do go on, this is most fascinating." Buddha Nature in everyone...it's a thing...true story. For someone who spends what appears to me to be a helluva lot of time trying to engage others, you seem very disconnected from what's actually going on in those experiences.  what makes you think I care at all about how you feel about any of this? Dude, you can save these smug proclamations of how unmoved you are, because that simply doesn't concern me, one way or another. You obviously have no regard for the way I feel, so expecting me to take a different orientation toward you is as warped and one-sided as your expectation that you should be allowed to slander my image with no response. And you whine about my "taunts and denigration" but the fact is that your entire interaction with me is immature taunts and it's been that way since the start years ago ... just like this: Ooh, he had it, i was sure he had it, but he's lost it...oh well and this: you saying something really dumb, so i responded with something equally dumb Fact is that you're a perfect example of someone who can dish it out but just can't take it. You're a would-be bully who doesn't like the taste of his own medicine, like, at all. |
|
|
|
Post by jay17 on Jun 30, 2016 2:49:23 GMT -5
Your posts are getting bigger and bigger..i call 'some form of arousal'.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter on Jun 30, 2016 4:15:52 GMT -5
Kettle:Pot = #000000. I had that problem with a friend from college. I'd write him something and he'd write me back responding to my points and adding a few of his own. Then I'd reply to his points and add my own and the whole thing snowballed. One day I got 8 sides of A4 through the post and I just didn't have the motivation to respond. So the conversation just stopped there and I never wrote to him again. The energy and motivation you guys manage to burn through / self generate appears to be indefatigable, however. |
|
|
|
Post by jay17 on Jun 30, 2016 5:19:31 GMT -5
Kettle:Pot = #000000. I had that problem with a friend from college. I'd write him something and he'd write me back responding to my points and adding a few of his own. Then I'd reply to his points and add my own and the whole thing snowballed. One day I got 8 sides of A4 through the post and I just didn't have the motivation to respond. So the conversation just stopped there and I never wrote to him again. The energy and motivation you guys manage to burn through / self generate appears to be indefatigable, however. What a rush ! I feel so alive ! My life has purpose ! I matter ! Subconscious vase ! Mechanical stoneships ! Raccoon clothing ! Clownface helicopter ! Hover puppies ! Antiphysics horse ! BRICK VOUCHERS...RAAAAAAR !!! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2016 5:45:31 GMT -5
Kettle:Pot = #000000. I had that problem with a friend from college. I'd write him something and he'd write me back responding to my points and adding a few of his own. Then I'd reply to his points and add my own and the whole thing snowballed. One day I got 8 sides of A4 through the post and I just didn't have the motivation to respond. So the conversation just stopped there and I never wrote to him again. The energy and motivation you guys manage to burn through / self generate appears to be indefatigable, however. he sent you a few math slides, so you never spoke to him again ??  aren't you using the word friend a little loosely there?... would it be more accurate to call him a colleague, or an acquaintance, or that dweeb from calculus class? |
|
Perhaps you never were really waiting for that reply after all and instead would rather it remain unwritten .. I mean, a simple yes or no is all it would take to illicit it at this point, and if I didn't hold up my end then of course I'd have broken a promise and you'd be able to refer to me along the lines of something similar to "attention wh0re" and then preemptively whine about how I might wind up denigrating you in further dialog. 
what makes you think I care at all about how you feel about any of this? Dude, you can save these smug proclamations of how unmoved you are, because that simply doesn't concern me, one way or another. 
