Interesting Times

[StarFraction]

Hmmm

An interesting reply Scio ... in many respects.

I will answer it shortly, in detail.

But I notice you have not yet responded about the computer control - bio-computers - concern in my posts.

Could you please give me your thoughts on this - before I reply - please?

Regards,
StarFraction

"Wise men make proverbs, but fools repeat them."
-- Samuel Palmer

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Hmmm
But I notice you have not yet responded about the computer control - bio-computers - concern in my posts.
Could you please give me your thoughts on this - before I reply - please?

I can see theoretically how there is potential for implanting people with nano-computers that are used for controlling them etc. It's just not something I'd focus my attention on right now, since it's just one of the many ways people can be and are controlled, and it's just another by-product of the pathocracy. Since it's not a present situation, it's good to keep it in mind, but nothing can be done about it except by doing what we've already been doing, as far as I can tell. By fighting the pathocracy in a general sense the way this group has been doing, it is also fighting the possible implant-control in the future, osit.

 

[Kesdjan]

"Wise men make proverbs, but fools repeat them."
-- Samuel Palmer

Are you not a fool, then?

 

[StarFraction]

Hi Kesdjan,

"Wise men make proverbs, but fools repeat them."
-- Samuel Palmer

Are you not a fool, then?

Of course I am.

“Am I not a man? And is not a man a fool? I am a man." – Zorba the Greek

I also love a lot; and laugh a lot; and quite a few people seem to enjoy my company.

But I am a total fool.

The extravagant journey of my life has been a catalogue of one foolhardy venture after another.

You might even say that to be a fool is my predilection.

“I believe in laughter; and I KNOW the world is mad!" – Scaramouche.

If people like me ruled the world – which will NEVER happen! – sleeping dogs would be able to lie undisturbed for as long as they wished … and everyone would wake up to food on their table every day.

Trouble is, I cant be a*sed to rule the world.

Too busy ‘playing the fool.’

Regards,

StarFraction

“Truth is more important than public belief, and any man who feels the need to adjust his knowledge so as to receive public approval is a man unworthy of trust." – Theun Mares (Return of the Warriors, p80)

 

[StarFraction]

Hi Scio,

OK …

… we are in the proverbial endless circle in our debate now.

I don’t think we will add much if we continue to ‘literalise’ each other’s every sentence and write paragraphs around it.

We need to come out of the loop … and move on to a new level (which is a spiralling loop) or agree to have our differences and call it a day.

I can counter-refute your counter-refutations about my counter-refutations about your refutations about my refutations endlessly ….

I will deal with (counter-refute!) a few specific points – and, of course, your own ‘freedom of response’ remains inviolable – but I’d like to start with some general comments.

When I first read your post I felt as though I was reading the writings of someone in a state of mounting hysteria.

First of all you are at considerable pains to defend yourself against what you seem to perceive as an ‘attack’ from me on the possibility that you actually ‘believe’ things!

We ALL believe things! Doesn’t matter! As long as we are aware that we do, can admit the fact, and are prepared to ‘examine’ beliefs that could be adversely affecting ourselves and our relationships with others.

But then, after this long ‘defence’ against the fact that you – or anyone else on this forum ( I gather this reference to others gives you a sense of support from the long term ‘team’!) – after this diatribe against my suggestion that there must be a lot of ‘belief’ within the members of this forum, you then go on to say:

>>The way I see it, it doesn't really matter if it's a hoax or not. What matters is what IS said and done - and the results of it. Results on our minds, in our lives, in our being, in our understanding of ourselves and the world, in our approach to life and reality. If somebody comes up with a hoax that ends up teaching people an unbelievable amount and resulting in their OBJECTIVE growth and removal of all assumptions, beliefs, and programming, and a true ability to see the unseen - then does it matter if it's a hoax?<<

So it doesn’t matter if something is not ‘objectively’ true, and is in fact – lets say it – a LIE or a FANTASY. But I agree, HOAX is a friendlier, sort of fun-sounding (like PRANK) word. It was just a ‘hoax’! (Hahahahaha) Nothing serious. Not like a LIE!

Hmmm.

My second observation is that I have seen in a number of posts here a certain tendency to round upon ‘newcomers’ whose views are obviously ‘not liked’ by some longer-term members of the forum with scathing remarks about ‘attention-seeking’, ‘noise’, and the ultimate killer: ‘Are you COINTELPRO? Sounds like disinformation!!!’

And the sanction is: ‘We will all ignore you!’

(Shriek! Oh my God! New member shudders in horror … cowers before witch-hunter general. Fears ever to post ‘on this forum’ again!)

Well. I don’t cower.

So I guess you will just have to arrange to ban me if you want to get rid of me.

So let me sum up MY understanding of my post.

First off, I am not interested in manipulating anybody.

My firm commitment is the ‘BELIEF’ that each individual must wake up themselves, and be able to function independently.

I DO ‘believe’ that we are about (within the next 2 years) to go through one helluva bad time. Like what people lived through in NAZI Germany in the late 30’s and early 40’s.

I DO think it is going to be a terrible – almost inassimilable! – shock to most people in the Western World.

I try and communicate this whenever I can. Not just on this forum.

Yes, my post was provocative. It was – without me consciously thinking it through at the time I typed it – it WAS designed to deliver a shock.

It was designed to provoke debate. (In that at least it was successful! Lol!)

But more than anything I feel so terribly impotent to help my fellow humanity rouse itself to try and DO something to stop what I can clearly see coming down the pike!

You know, Scio, there were people in Germany in 1933 who were trying desperately to warn others about what that ‘nice man’, ‘baby kisser’ and ‘STRONG man’ Adolph Hitler would do when he came to power. But even many Jews did not believe the warnings! They remained in Berlin and other places … until eventually they received their transportation orders! And even then most of them dutifully packed their suitcases and paraded in an orderly fashion at the designated meeting points.

Sometimes I feel it is 1933 and I am living in Berlin!

So forgive me if I post provocatively upon occasion.

And please try not to fall into the trap of helping to create a ‘forum inquisition.’

After all, what do you have to fear from new members, new ideas and sometimes provocative posts?

All you have to do is reply – if you wish – and maybe the ‘distasteful’ posts from ‘newbies’ will call forth your own fresh realisations.

And the above is not at all meant to ‘throw you off’ replying to me with as much force as you wish.

I never take it ‘personally’, and I enjoy a good ‘fight.’

I will change views and accept ‘correction’ when I feel convinced. And I will acknowledge such.

You have my very best wishes,
StarFraction

"What luck for rulers that men do not think."--Adolph Hitler

 

[Nienna]

First of all you are at considerable pains to defend yourself against what you seem to perceive as an ‘attack’ from me on the possibility that you actually ‘believe’ things!

We ALL believe things! Doesn’t matter! As long as we are aware that we do, can admit the fact, and are prepared to ‘examine’ beliefs that could be adversely affecting ourselves and our relationships with others.

In order for you to understand Scio on the "belief" thing, you might want to look at what the Cassiopaea Glossary says:

http://glossary.cassiopaea.com/glossary?id=52&lsel=B

And most of us here on the forum try to look for objective truth and not "believe" anything. Of cours, maybe you would rather not look at the glossary and see what it is that Scio is trying so valiantly to get across to you. You seem to be set upon your own course of action and "beliefs" whether they are true or not.

And if you haven't done so, maybe you might also want to go to the top of the page and click on "Rules" and read through that, too.

Maybe, just maybe you might be able to "see" what Scio is referring to.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Hi Star, I don't want to spend any more energy on this discussion which, as you noticed, does seem to be going nowhere indeed. So my reply will be brief.

We ALL believe things! Doesn’t matter! As long as we are aware that we do, can admit the fact, and are prepared to ‘examine’ beliefs that could be adversely affecting ourselves and our relationships with others.

We're all filled with programs and assumptions we've acquired over years of conditioning. What I mean is, I do my best to find them and get rid of them when I find them, and also do my best not to develop any new ones. So while I'm not totally free of all assumptions and beliefs on all levels of my being, I stopped acquiring new ones ever since I started seeking truth.

So it doesn’t matter if something is not ‘objectively’ true, and is in fact – lets say it – a LIE or a FANTASY.

It matters very little. As Evey says in "V for Vendetta", "Artists use lies to tell the truth while politicians use them to cover it up." All Laura's work is backed up by research and data. Yes, you do not know if she made up the C's communications or not. But unlike all other hoaxes, there is NO attempt to convince you, no attempt to manipulate, no attempt to ask for your faith. A lie has no power if nobody believes it - so if the C's are a lie, they are a weird one - a lie that teaches you how to spot lies and liars, and tells you to never ever believe anything, most especially anything the C's ever say. Then Laura spends countless hours in groundbreaking research that exposes the most hidden and powerful secrets of our world, backs everything up with data, and suffers through countless of attacks to do it. Dude, somebody should probably tell Laura that she's really bad at this hoax thing...

My second observation is that I have seen in a number of posts here a certain tendency to round upon ‘newcomers’ whose views are obviously ‘not liked’

Has nothing to do with liking, has a lot to do with arrogance, ignorance, etc. Find and read the threat on "opinions" (read: "Views").

I DO ‘believe’ that we are about (within the next 2 years) to go through one helluva bad time. Like what people lived through in NAZI Germany in the late 30’s and early 40’s.

Do you have more evidence for this than I do for Earth being round? Why not share it?

It was designed to provoke debate. (In that at least it was successful! Lol!)

Why? This is not a debate forum. We're here to learn and discuss together, not argue and compete for who is right.

You know, Scio, there were people in Germany in 1933 who were trying desperately to warn others about what that ‘nice man’, ‘baby kisser’ and ‘STRONG man’ Adolph Hitler would do when he came to power.

True, and important. But not as important as telling them WHY and how you know this, so it's not just your word they have to go on.

After all, what do you have to fear from new members, new ideas and sometimes provocative posts?

Not fear, empty provocations are no different than a fairy tale. New ideas/members are great though. Opinions and declarations with nothing backing them up, that's noise, and only gets in the way of real research.

I never take it ‘personally’, and I enjoy a good ‘fight.’

I don't, and there will be no "fight".

 

[anart]

NIce reply, SAO - good job. Now, onto the post of Starfaction...

Hi Scio,

OK …

… we are in the proverbial endless circle in our debate now.

I don’t think we will add much if we continue to ‘literalise’ each other’s every sentence and write paragraphs around it.

We need to come out of the loop … and move on to a new level (which is a spiralling loop) or agree to have our differences and call it a day.

I can counter-refute your counter-refutations about my counter-refutations about your refutations about my refutations endlessly ….

I've decided to step in at this point because StarFraction is, at this point at least, speaking as if there is no objective truth to the matter being discussed. As SAO pointed out in his post, this is not a debate forum. This is a forum where sincere people attempt to get at the truth of any matter by contributing data - researched, verifiable data. At this point, StarFraction, you are using your own opinions on the matter as if they were data. They are not, simply because you are providing no references, or proof of research or backup at all.

I will deal with (counter-refute!) a few specific points – and, of course, your own ‘freedom of response’ remains inviolable – but I’d like to start with some general comments.

When I first read your post I felt as though I was reading the writings of someone in a state of mounting hysteria.

I read his post as well and he did not come across to me as someone in a state of mounting hysteria, which indicates your reading instrument may be 'off'.

First of all you are at considerable pains to defend yourself against what you seem to perceive as an ‘attack’ from me on the possibility that you actually ‘believe’ things!

We ALL believe things! Doesn’t matter! As long as we are aware that we do, can admit the fact, and are prepared to ‘examine’ beliefs that could be adversely affecting ourselves and our relationships with others.

At this point, it becomes obvious that you need to do some research on belief - what constitutes belief as opposed to knowledge. After doing this research, feel free to comment.

But then, after this long ‘defence’ against the fact that you – or anyone else on this forum ( I gather this reference to others gives you a sense of support from the long term ‘team’!) – after this diatribe against my suggestion that there must be a lot of ‘belief’ within the members of this forum, you then go on to say:

>>The way I see it, it doesn't really matter if it's a hoax or not. What matters is what IS said and done - and the results of it. Results on our minds, in our lives, in our being, in our understanding of ourselves and the world, in our approach to life and reality. If somebody comes up with a hoax that ends up teaching people an unbelievable amount and resulting in their OBJECTIVE growth and removal of all assumptions, beliefs, and programming, and a true ability to see the unseen - then does it matter if it's a hoax?<<

So it doesn’t matter if something is not ‘objectively’ true, and is in fact – lets say it – a LIE or a FANTASY. But I agree, HOAX is a friendlier, sort of fun-sounding (like PRANK) word. It was just a ‘hoax’! (Hahahahaha) Nothing serious. Not like a LIE!

Hmmm.

This is very interesting, because SAO only went into this explanation of 'what if it is a hoax' because you led him into it - he was speaking from a frame of reference that you built, which you then turned around on him, as if he constructed it himself. This is blatant manipulation. Granted, SAO was drawn into it, but the fact remains that he was attempting to communicate with you on a level that you 'created' - and you then act as if you did not create it. Very interesting. This is the kind of manipulation and twisting of reference that we see here again and again - and that we remove as quickly as possible.

My second observation is that I have seen in a number of posts here a certain tendency to round upon ‘newcomers’ whose views are obviously ‘not liked’ by some longer-term members of the forum with scathing remarks about ‘attention-seeking’, ‘noise’, and the ultimate killer: ‘Are you COINTELPRO? Sounds like disinformation!!!’

And the sanction is: ‘We will all ignore you!’

(Shriek! Oh my God! New member shudders in horror … cowers before witch-hunter general. Fears ever to post ‘on this forum’ again!)

Well. I don’t cower.

This is - again - a blatant manipulation. The fact of the matter is that we have many 'newcomers' who fit right in, and almost instantly contribute. What we do not tolerate is manipulators, those here with an agenda and those here so overburdened with self-importance as to be useless to the discussion - those individuals are removed. Where do you think you might fit in with that group of people? I only ask because as your posts have continued, you have displayed a rather telling degree of attempted manipulation, and a stunning degree of self-importance.

So I guess you will just have to arrange to ban me if you want to get rid of me.

So let me sum up MY understanding of my post.

First off, I am not interested in manipulating anybody.

This is a lie (or, at best, you are completely unaware of your own actions, which may actually be the case - you clearly are manipulating, so if you are not interested in manipulation, then you literally have no idea what you are 'doing'). Not only that, but if you'd like to be banned, then feel free to continue behaving as you have in this post.

My firm commitment is the ‘BELIEF’ that each individual must wake up themselves, and be able to function independently.

Each individual must do the work, correct - however, no one can wake themselves up - it takes a network, and the help of someone who has already woken up.

I DO ‘believe’ that we are about (within the next 2 years) to go through one helluva bad time. Like what people lived through in NAZI Germany in the late 30’s and early 40’s.

I DO think it is going to be a terrible – almost inassimilable! – shock to most people in the Western World.

I try and communicate this whenever I can. Not just on this forum.

Yes, my post was provocative. It was – without me consciously thinking it through at the time I typed it – it WAS designed to deliver a shock.

It was designed to provoke debate. (In that at least it was successful! Lol!)

Your self-importance is showing again. I hate to break this to you, but all these things you 'believe' are not news. You are quite a distance behind the 'cutting edge' here, so your 'shocking' intention falls more than a bit flat. I also find it a bit humorous that you state that you were not consciously thinking about the post at the time, yet it was designed to deliver a shock - which is it - were you thinking about it (designing it) - or were you not? You were called on the fact that you present no data - no facts - no objective information.

But more than anything I feel so terribly impotent to help my fellow humanity rouse itself to try and DO something to stop what I can clearly see coming down the pike!

And how exactly do you intend to do this? - just wondering because your technique so far is rather an ineffective one.

You know, Scio, there were people in Germany in 1933 who were trying desperately to warn others about what that ‘nice man’, ‘baby kisser’ and ‘STRONG man’ Adolph Hitler would do when he came to power. But even many Jews did not believe the warnings! They remained in Berlin and other places … until eventually they received their transportation orders! And even then most of them dutifully packed their suitcases and paraded in an orderly fashion at the designated meeting points.

Sometimes I feel it is 1933 and I am living in Berlin!

So forgive me if I post provocatively upon occasion.

A bit of historical research might help you here, and study into the nature of humankind and human psychology. The reason people did not believe the warnings had nothing to do with not being told - again, how do you intend to 'rouse' people differently than they were not roused in 1933?

And please try not to fall into the trap of helping to create a ‘forum inquisition.’

After all, what do you have to fear from new members, new ideas and sometimes provocative posts?

All you have to do is reply – if you wish – and maybe the ‘distasteful’ posts from ‘newbies’ will call forth your own fresh realisations.

And the above is not at all meant to ‘throw you off’ replying to me with as much force as you wish.

I never take it ‘personally’, and I enjoy a good ‘fight.’

I will change views and accept ‘correction’ when I feel convinced. And I will acknowledge such.

More manipulation. If you actually spent real time reading the massive threads on this forum, you would have realized that only those people who display a very clear inability to learn, a very clear agenda to distract, a very clear need to manipulate, or a very clear tendency to verbally abuse are removed.

Also, there is no difference between manipulative and provocative - you seem to like to classify your posts as provocative - provocation lacking objective truth is manipulation - yet, somehow, I doubt you will understand or accept that clarification.

If you would like to be removed, then feel free to continue this behavior. If, on the other hand, you would like to actually learn or even contribute, then please make that clear.

 

[Ryan]

We ALL believe things! Doesn’t matter! As long as we are aware that we do, can admit the fact, and are prepared to ‘examine’ beliefs that could be adversely affecting ourselves and our relationships with others.

If one criminal in a gang of thugs starts to believe that his criminal behaviour is wrong, that will adversely affect his relationship with the rest of the gang. And if he wishes to stop being a criminal, no doubt there will be much conflict. The point of discussion in this forum is not to "meet in the middle and make nice". It is to determine the objective truth. Sometimes conflict is required - and this conflict is usually most painful to those people who refuse to let go of their beliefs because they think that their beliefs are just as valid as the Truth.

In fact, no beliefs are valid. One does not need to "believe" in Truth. One sees it, or one does not. Of course, many people choose to believe that a person who sees Truth is in fact just expressing another "belief". In which case they say things like, "Your belief is no more valid than my belief". This is usually grounded in an unacknowledged emotional reaction stemming from pathological psychological behaviour learned at some earlier point in life. The thread on "Opinions" contains some excellent discussion and further reading on this subject.

But then, after this long ‘defence’ against the fact that you – or anyone else on this forum ( I gather this reference to others gives you a sense of support from the long term ‘team’!)

In fact, SAO is entitled to say this, because he does have support from the "long term team" as you put it. Because anyone who is of a colinear perspective here (seeking the Truth) is entitled to feel at home. Because one of the aims of this forum is to create a group of people who DO feel at home here - as if amongst family and friends. And family and friends support each other.

– after this diatribe against my suggestion that there must be a lot of ‘belief’ within the members of this forum, you then go on to say:

>>The way I see it, it doesn't really matter if it's a hoax or not. What matters is what IS said and done - and the results of it. Results on our minds, in our lives, in our being, in our understanding of ourselves and the world, in our approach to life and reality. If somebody comes up with a hoax that ends up teaching people an unbelievable amount and resulting in their OBJECTIVE growth and removal of all assumptions, beliefs, and programming, and a true ability to see the unseen - then does it matter if it's a hoax?<<

So it doesn’t matter if something is not ‘objectively’ true, and is in fact – lets say it – a LIE or a FANTASY. But I agree, HOAX is a friendlier, sort of fun-sounding (like PRANK) word. It was just a ‘hoax’! (Hahahahaha) Nothing serious. Not like a LIE!

You are ignoring context here, and attempting to use simplistic "black and white" rules to "catch" SAO. Surely you see the difference between telling a lie consciously in order to reveal a greater Truth, and telling a lie consciously in order to conceal it? Yes, they are both lies. But you are pointing out a supposed inconsistency in the behaviour of the truth-seeker and delivering a moral judgement against that inconsistency. In fact, there is no inconsistency in the motive, intent, or that which stems from the "inner" part of the person, which is what we should all be seeking to discern as accurately as possible because that will tell us what kind of actions and results we can expect from them. Or so I think.

The idea that people who love and seek truth MUST only speak truth is a para-moralism. Close, but no cigar.

Well. I don’t cower.

So I guess you will just have to arrange to ban me if you want to get rid of me.

That can be quite easily arranged - it would take about 20 seconds of any mod's time. I say this with no rancour - just pointing out the facts of the matter. In the end, who loses more from one's removal from the forum? The forum? It will keep going quite fine without your input or mine, I'm sure. Or perhaps the person who no longer gets to participate? One could then quite easily indulge in the predictable, "Pfft, 'sif I need these losers anyway" reaction and feel none the worse after a night's sleep, of course. Or one could swallow their pride and drop the combatitive attitude, negating the need for the banning in the first place. As SAO said, we don't like fights and aren't looking for any.

My firm commitment is the ‘BELIEF’ that each individual must wake up themselves, and be able to function independently.

I DO ‘believe’ that we are about (within the next 2 years) to go through one helluva bad time. Like what people lived through in NAZI Germany in the late 30’s and early 40’s.

I DO think it is going to be a terrible – almost inassimilable! – shock to most people in the Western World.

I try and communicate this whenever I can. Not just on this forum.

As you can see from the replies, we are not interested in your beliefs. We ARE interested in any data that you might have about these topics. This is so we can determine if you might be SEEing objective reality, or if you are just another person declaring, "because I, the Lord God, have spoken".

But more than anything I feel so terribly impotent to help my fellow humanity rouse itself to try and DO something to stop what I can clearly see coming down the pike!

You know, Scio, there were people in Germany in 1933 who were trying desperately to warn others about what that ‘nice man’, ‘baby kisser’ and ‘STRONG man’ Adolph Hitler would do when he came to power. But even many Jews did not believe the warnings! They remained in Berlin and other places … until eventually they received their transportation orders! And even then most of them dutifully packed their suitcases and paraded in an orderly fashion at the designated meeting points.

Sometimes I feel it is 1933 and I am living in Berlin!

I'm sure most sincere readers of this forum understand where you are coming from here. But trying to start debates and intellectually browbeat others is not the way to do it. Especially not here. And if you are firmly convinced that you have something to offer the forum that the forum does not already know, then offer it! Share your knowledge! But we are interested only in data and knowledge freely shared, and not "Indian giving", or opinions/preaching here.

And the above is not at all meant to ‘throw you off’ replying to me with as much force as you wish.

I never take it ‘personally’, and I enjoy a good ‘fight.’

Many members here do NOT enjoy fights, and the mods stand ready to remove those who attempt to start them. What would you think of somebody who walked into your house and wanted to start a physical fight, while saying things like, "C'mon, be a good sport! I just want to become a better fighter! I'm not taking it personally, and neither should you"...?

I think you'd probably call the police, right?

You have my very best wishes,
StarFraction

Likewise. :)

 

[StarFraction]

My goodness me!

Just look at yourselves.

Take an ‘objective’ look at the sequence of these posts and note the mounting aggression, hostility, ‘veiled threats’, and finally ‘clear threats’, from a ‘moderator’:

>> ….if you'd like to be banned, then feel free to continue behaving as you have in this post. <<

>> If you would like to be removed, then feel free to continue this behaviour. <<

Behaviour?

Oh yes, I forgot:

>>The fact of the matter is that we have many 'newcomers' who fit right in, and almost instantly contribute. <<

Yep.

So anything that ‘doesn’t fit right in’ (in YOUR OWN VIEW) is too disturbing to contemplate … and needs to be ‘dealt with.’

Sounds like an inquisition to me.

Whatever happened to tolerance, equanimity, humour, moderation (Mr Moderator!) the welcoming of diverse views and opinions … and the ability to restrain bitter personal attack?

I was once (mid 90s) in a Taoist Forum – on Compuserve – which I have subsequently realised was pretty unique. It was unique in that the regular Forum members (of which I became one) displayed a pretty much infinite capacity to receive and accept any postings from anyone whatsoever on any subject.

We had the occasional visitations from Christian fundamentalists quoting dogma at us, and various Buddhistic and Eastern sects putting forward their views, and also some very ‘hostile’ posts against the Forum, its ideas, and Taoism. But you know what … many many times it was just those controversial or dogmatic posts that sparked off some of the most interesting dialogues.

(Have you not felt aroused to think and respond to my post? Has it not been interesting? Has it not provided ‘food’ for ‘active mentation?’)

And they were dialogues of intelligent peoples’ own views based on their understandings – from whatever sources – rather than a ceaseless cross-referencing of articles, quotes and other peoples opinions!

We had an excellent Forum Moderator – appointed by Compuserve – who never found the need to ‘ban’ anyone in all the three years I was there. He had a wicked, sparkling sense of humour, which, I find, always helps.

But anyway ….

… here we have something completely different …

Must fit in. This is a ‘special forum.’ We are all ‘objective’ truth-seekers here. We don’t accept anything by belief! You will be ignored on this forum! We can’t accept anything – or even agree to differ – if it doesn’t ‘fit’ with us. You will be banned.

So I leave you to it.

Quoting and linking back and forth to each other … ever careful to ‘fit’ in … huddling together for mutual support … and wary of provoking the ire of the ‘forum watchers!’

Like a giant ingrowing toe-nail.

Reminds me of Michael Jackson living in a plastic bubble – the rest of the distasteful world shut safely outside!

I shall only post again on this forum if someone invites me to remain.

Best wishes to you all,
StarFraction

“The self-confidence of a warrior is not the self-confidence of the average man. The average man seeks certainty in the eyes of the onlooker and calls that self-confidence." – don Juan

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

My goodness me! Just look at yourselves. Take an ‘objective’ look at the sequence of these posts and note the mounting aggression, hostility, ‘veiled threats’, and finally ‘clear threats’, from a ‘moderator’:

Take a close look at your posts and note the mounting delusion about aggression, hostility, etc. Sadly, you're not even being original. It's the same exact pattern that has been repeated ad-nauseum by others coming in here with the exact same self-important programming and blocks. It is a rare and such a beautiful thing when it doesn't end in parting of the ways, when the will and drive for truth is stronger than the self-importance and the person is able to, at least briefly, overcome this programming and reveal a genuine intent to learn. Speaking of which...

>> ….if you'd like to be banned, then feel free to continue behaving as you have in this post. <<
>> If you would like to be removed, then feel free to continue this behaviour. <<
Behaviour?
Oh yes, I forgot:
>>The fact of the matter is that we have many 'newcomers' who fit right in, and almost instantly contribute. <<
Yep.

So anything that ‘doesn’t fit right in’ (in YOUR OWN VIEW) is too disturbing to contemplate … and needs to be ‘dealt with.’

Either you're genuinely not getting it, or it's another attempt to manipulate straight from "Manipulation techniques 101". The lack of fitting in has nothing to do with the view being "too disturbing to contemplate", as you so righteously have assumed must be the reason. They do not fit in because they are not interested in truth and networking - not in our "view", but because it is very clear from their behavior. How do we know it's not just a subjective delusion of ours? Because a vital part of "seeking truth" is determining exactly what it means to "seek truth". So if somebody comes here and has assumptions, we instantly let them know that assumptions are not the way to find truth - all the data that we have, through logic and all our life's experiences corroborates that conclusion. So either they are willing to stop and question their assumptions, or they do not fit here by virtue of not being willing to question them. Same thing if they are arrogant and full of self-importance, they do not fit here by virtue of not being able to get over themselves.

You won't fit in a math class if you think 2+2=5. Not because it's too disturbing to contemplate for the rest of the class, but because it's false, and the class is about math TRUTH. Of course you can walk away thinking "Silly class, they just can't handle my views". But I'm sure you can see, in this simplistic example, how delusional and arrogant such thinking would be. Could you extrapolate this to what you do in this forum?

Whatever happened to tolerance, equanimity, humour, moderation (Mr Moderator!) the welcoming of diverse views and opinions … and the ability to restrain bitter personal attack?

You cannot seek truth if you tolerate and/or accept lies and liars. You cannot seek truth if you welcome opinions and views - AT ALL. What we have on this forum are NOT opinions and views, for that you should go to a Religious forum where all they have is views and opinion. "In my view, God created the earth and heavens in 7 days!". Stuff like that. It's a very nice view/opinion, but if you're at all interested in truth, you can quickly begin to see why opinions do not matter. Opinion not firmly rooted and supported by all available data, is a belief, an assumption, and only blinds you from objective reality.

I was once (mid 90s) in a Taoist Forum – on Compuserve – which I have subsequently realised was pretty unique. It was unique in that the regular Forum members (of which I became one) displayed a pretty much infinite capacity to receive and accept any postings from anyone whatsoever on any subject.

You cannot seek truth if you tolerate and/or accept lies and liars. That forum was obviously not designed to seek to understand objective reality. Most especially because it was a religious forum, which meant it was full of believers, and belief=assumtion=self delusion.

… here we have something completely different …
Must fit in. This is a ‘special forum.’ We are all ‘objective’ truth-seekers here. We don’t accept anything by belief! You will be ignored on this forum! We can’t accept anything – or even agree to differ – if it doesn’t ‘fit’ with us. You will be banned.

Another silly attempt to manipulate. Not if it "doesn't fit with us". Only if it doesn't fit with the aims and methodology of this forum. If you want to accomplish something, there are certain ways to do it - this is true for anything. Seeking truth is no different - if you want to establish a network designed to find truth, there are some things that must be done, and some thing that must be avoided. So if your aim is not truth, based on what you say and how you behave, then you do not fit with the aims of this forum, you fit with the aims of those who also do not care for truth and networking.

I shall only post again on this forum if someone invites me to remain.

Anyone is "invited" to post as long as their post contributes to the aim of this forum. Just like you only invite people to your home if they "fit" with you and your family. If they misbehave, are obnoxious, arrogant, and consistently manipulate and keep repeating opinions that have nothing to back them up, you might think twice about letting them be a guest in your home. This forum is no different. You're welcome as long as you stop manipulating, and have the desire to learn and understand objective reality, and not just desire, but demonstrate it by what you say and do. Oh yeah and if you promise to work on that huge self-importance.

Otherwise, this forum is just not for you, you won't "fit" here, as its aims and purpose will not correspond to your aims and purpose.

 

[anart]

Well put, SAO - nothing to add here, really, except, why in the world would you, StarFraction, want to be 'invited to remain' on a forum for which you hold so much clear contempt? This latest post illustrates, beyond the slightest shadow of a doubt, that you truly do not 'get' it.

You insult the forum, the forum members, the moderators, all the while, feeling 'oh so victimized' - and then you ask to be invited to stay? Actually, you threaten that if you are not 'invited to stay' that you will remove yourself from our presence. How very odd. You think we are like Michael Jackson and living in a plastic bubble, yet you want to be invited to stay?

Enough, already, you're not even making basic sense at this point.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

Shirley goes to her first day of Math class, sits quietly and waits for the professor to begin lecturing. The class begins with a discussion of simple rules that are needed in order to work towards more advanced concepts. One of these is addition. Shirley raises her hand and declares, "But can't, under some circumstances, 2+2=5?"

The professor says, "No, you're wrong. Thinking like that will get you nowhere."

But Shirley is insistent, "Ever since reading 1984 I've been convinced of it! Winston even ends up believing it! Isn't it just your opinion that 2+2 always equals 4?! I mean, Winston just changed his opinion. First he believed 2+2=4, then he believed 2+2=5."

The professor responds, "No, it isn't my opinion. You're just plain wrong."

Shirley, getting ever the more frustrated, says, "Jeez! Just look at yourself! Can you see how this conversation is escalating?! You're getting more and more hysterical!!"

The professor watches in quiet disbelief.

Shirley goes on, "You guys just can't handle my ideas. I mean, is this what mathematicians do to newcomers?! Where is the room for provocative ideas? My truth is just too disturbing for you to contemplate."

When StarFraction says, "It was designed to provoke debate. (In that at least it was successful! Lol!)" I can't help but think of http://signs-of-the-times.org/signs/editorials/signs20061211_ThePsychopath27sTruth.php

 

[Kesdjan]

I propose that we adopt this protocol for dealing with posts such as starfraction's:

First we state the goals of this forum- The forum is not about debate or opinion but about intelligent disscussion and analysis of data put up for discussion by any member of the forum for the express purpose of finding the truth. Your post is full of assertions that are not founded in data and which therefore probably do not represent objective reality- an understanding of which is the aforementioned goal of this group.

Next we list all of the assumptions (or at least the main assumptions if there are a lot) in the post numerically and in the order that it is presented in the text. For instance:
1. You assume that our world will be turned upside down.
2. You assume that this will happen some time in the next two years.
3. You assume that we will be under surrveilance.
4. You assume no one will have any privacy.
5. You assume that we will have "bio" computers within the next two years.
6. You contradict yourself when you say these new computers will think for themselves and yet be controlled by "overseers" (perhaps you mean they are able to think for themselves?).
7. You assume that there is some kind of centralized control system for the surveillance. (Possible contradiction- do the overseers have no privacy as well... or were you talking about most, not all, of the population in number four).
8. You assume that freedom of expression will be totally supressed.

Then we say how they have offered no data for these assertions and therefore are not co-linear with the goals of this forum.

Finally we ask them to either please give the data for their assertions or to retract their assertions. Also they should be asked to give a clear point by point list format so that the data or retraction can be easily discerned. If they do not comply as we have asked then they will be banned. We should remind them that we are trying to find the truth, not trying to be mean, and need as little noise as possible.

This protocol, while essentially what SAO did, has the following advantages that SAO's rebuttle didn't:
1. It clearly states what SOTT's goals are.
2. It is arguably easier to follow than SAO's qoute-rebuttle method.
3. It presents a clear plan of response for the original poster.
4. It eliminates endless debate as seen in this thread.

Mods, SAO, forumites, what say ye?

 

[Beau]

We should remind them that we are trying to find the truth, not trying to be mean, and need as little noise as possible.

This protocol, while essentially what SAO did, has the following advantages that SAO's rebuttle didn't:
1. It clearly states what SOTT's goals are.
2. It is arguably easier to follow than SAO's qoute-rebuttle method.
3. It presents a clear plan of response for the original poster.
4. It eliminates endless debate as seen in this forum.

Mods, SAO, forumites, what say ye?

I think this is exactly what occurred, if not explicitly. Which is ok. Having a standard rebuttle makes things a little stagnant. One of the things that is nice about this thread and others of its kind is that people can learn along the way, even though it seems like their isn't any headway occurring.

Also, witnessing one person's continued insistence upon their own views being correct may seem like a waste. But it certainly teaches to continually combat this kind of thinking and defend against it in the future. We have a nice little environment where a petty tyrant can be a pain, but they usually last only as long as is needed.

me 2 cents