Thanks for the answers which are kind of diplomatic; I was expecting a harsher communication.
To me, PM's fall into the category of
not-that-reccomended. Voyageur and TC hint at vorbidden. Is it really vorbidden? I had "not-preferred" in mind.
I estimate PM'ing
can participate from a healthy process and that they are sometimes good to be used.
It's not a 100% nogo in terms of polarity. Methink can not apply a negative consideration going by
"each time a user sends a PM". I perfectly understand the risks, especially in the light of "hey let's meet in real". There are, indeed, dangers in PM's. On that note, in one year, I perhaps PM'd 3 people or so. This time, I estimated it would be good than to use this channel, instead of writing my message in the thread. This hints at
proper use rather than a
defect.
@Voyageur yes there is a problem with the thread and the topic. So far, there have been no comment relating to the quote that I've posted. Not that I am expecting anything, but that I can see this right now. The discussion even turned to another aspect. No comment on the quote. Zilch! It is painful to absolutely let go off expectations in terms of potential comments, on the quote. Difficult, but must do it. Painful, frustrating. I will keep the hope that this is an interesting matter, susceptible to raise interesting and wide discussions! But - no comment =... no comment! Let us move on with this, instead of personnal preferences.
In regard of my attitude and actions, I see you've come up with
conclusions, and those are clear. I don't agree with those and oppose (in teh sense of the word) myself to your conclusions and judgment.
I created a post, quoting Harrison Koehli, and suggesting the discussion. Gottathink came by, correcting one word that were part of a digression. He then suggested me to head up to the ponerology Substack when it comes to ponerology matters... "You should have a look at the ponerology blog of Harrison Koehli"
I think, since that moment, my ears started tingeling. It can still be a sincere and positive suggestion, and I appreciate it. But since that time I started to think like "wait a second... something looks odd here". And then, other small possible things came up. I let go, have been applying a "innocence presomption", until I've sent him a PM because it was a bit too obvious. Then, him posting about the PM has been acting as a sort of confirmation. Overall nothing too much but worth the exploration IMO. We are all on the road, and it's okay. I myself have flaws and things etc etc.
I believe the forum is sometimes pushing too much for a sort of public "procedure of self-humiliation". Reasons exist, and it's of course suffering, un-necessary prejudice - but I don't want to submit to this when I am being "asked" to carry it on. I hope we can make the forum a better place. It won't be of any help than to adress issues that are not real issues. I believe it's best than to stop chanelling via Zoom, and to have that many members. I appreciate the honour that such participation provides, but results may be different.
There were very few - VERY few - individuals who ever "attended many of the C" sessions. I can count them on the fingers of ONE hand. The reason for this has been made quite clear on the site: any individual with strong beliefs or emotional attachment to same, could easily skew the reception. We learned this quite early on.
The chanelling will condition the spiritual health of the whole forum. I am a leftover of a long process, adapting to it, and depending on it, and am diluted far away in obscure threads, merely juggling with secondary-mode ricochets, originating in the first place in big motions located at the chanelling efforts. The acceptance of my position makes it easier for me to discern when it really comes to me, or else. I don't know what the else is. Voyageur, you hinted at deflection, but I don't have the need to carry this on. I don't matter that much and accepted this. I prefer to discuss topics!
