Introduction

Happyville said:
Certainly don't want to Spin my wheels for what ultimately seems to be of no benefit to me or the others on the forum.
Click to expand...

Many members have pointed out the importance of these types of conversations, and the potential benefit to both yourself and all others. But rather than address any of those posts, you have simply repeated yourself for a third time.

If you think that this type of interaction is of no benefit to you or others, then what type of interaction are you are looking for?
 
MoskoeOne, the above post is noise. If you are unable to sincerely participate in this forum, your posting privileges will be removed.
Click to expand...

Hi Anart

Is this a Context specific request regarding links?, links to videos?, music?,

It might be helpful to new-comers if you define subjective terminology such as the word 'sincerely' by its objective expression -such as posting a link to a youtube video', (or whatever your concern is in this case) IF its going to be used in an unconventional sense, and in a sense specific to understanding unique contexts within the forum environment. I.e there may be descriptions of general appropriate behaviour, which is very helpful for the visitor, but those general descriptions don't use words in an entirely consistent fasion to how there used in forum discussion. The glossary defines certain ideas, which again is very helpful. The concept of 'noise', is explained very clearly:

Noise Noise as used by the QFS refers to any information which is irrelevant to a discussion, does not contribute meaningfully; detracts from the topic and/or confuses the issue. Noise can be thrown into a discussion in numerous ways such as derailing the main topic by introducing side issues or counter arguments that cloud rather than clarify; keeping the discussion at a superficial level using only black or white contrasts- refusing to see the gray areas.

…but it has been attached to terms like sincerity, equality etc. There is nothing wrong with any of these terms, it is that the descriptions of their meaning are coming from different places and the core-or overiding principle behind them is not being used each time. For example if video links are in-convient, or in-appropriate for whatever reason,...

1. No video links please.


If I am correct in drawing a distinction between the nature of different area's within the forum, a video link or image might be an appropriate expression within the 'creative acts' thread but not others? The use of poetry, poetic language? emotional language in certain contexts certainly seems to be considered noise. The response to emotion with emotion is unclear whether this is also noise obfuscating the signal in the attitudes of members. It is also objectively unclear whether emotion has been felt period. All angles eventually give way to objectivity. The initial emotion can only be interpreted into a situation by a persons projection, like-wise the response can only be interpreted by projection. It is a case of specs in the eye and logs, neither eye can know or care whether it has a spec or a log in it, ..what It is looking for is the other eye.

The ability to be response-able, relies on a persons ability to post, - just as the administrators capacity to be response-able relies on them providing this opportunity.
To walk away is not being response-able, To walk away can be done by shutting out or pulling back, it is to walk away from objectivity.
 
MoskoeOne, let me make it very simple for you. You posted a video link to the Beatles singing "we can work it out" with no comment whatsoever. This is flippant and your behavior in this thread has bordered on trolling. You've made it quite clear that you are here to argue and little else. Another forum might be much better suited to you.
 
To anart. truth seeker & obyatel this is my last post to this thread as suggested I have read the forum rules fully. It was a good refresher as I had not read them in a couple of years. It looks like this is not the forum for me as my objectivity/creativity knows no limits. I did not come here to cause trouble but I was passionate about SOTT because of all the site has done for me since I discovered it in early 2004. If you have access to reader comments check my comments there particularly to the removed articles pertaining to the Jean&Marie situation. I have studied law for the past three years with the Cass material and Laura’s work ever present in my mind when doing so. Now maybe this is not networking by your definition but I assure you I do not do this alone. As stated earlier my computer skills are very lacking and this post will have been mostly written and pasted into the forum format. Because of my limited computer skills most of my Cass material is strictly from memory having read the Wave Series and then the Adventure series back in 2004. I’m going to give you a couple of definitions from a 1965 edition BRITANNICA WORLD LANGUAGE DICTIONARY First NATUAL LAW 1. The rule of civil conduct deducible from the common reason and conscience of mankind: the natural law of self-defense. 2. A law of nature.
This is the law I live by and I think anyone with a conscience also would. This is what I call LAW everything else is a rule of society or CODIFIED LAW.
Now if memory serves me right the Cass material mentioned (although hypotheticly) that perhaps someone set up a long slow mind control program perhaps 2000 years or so ago, to gain this comfortable planet for themselves. This is codified law and it is about 2 plus thousand years old.
Free will is given in many obscure and deceptive ways to this codified law system.
Now for the other definition from the same book. TERRORISM 1. The act of terrorizing. 2. A system of government that seeks to rule by intimidation. 3. Unlawful acts of violence committed in an organized attempt to overthrow a government.
I find definition 2 very interesting as I have lived in Canada my entire life and can tell you the Canadian Government fits this definition perfectly.
Should any moderator or administrator want to contact me directly please feel free to do so. I know that it is not recommended but I do not feel that moderators and administrators are predators and if I am, I’m sure you will know right away. On the other hand if you believe that I am a predator or troll or just making noise, please delete this post and I apologize.
 
Loud John said:
To anart. truth seeker & obyatel this is my last post to this thread as suggested I have read the forum rules fully. It was a good refresher as I had not read them in a couple of years.
Click to expand...

Thanks for re-reading it - it's always good to re-calibrate an understanding of the purpose of the forum.
 
Oy! I would quote Loud John, Happyville, and/or MoskoeOne here, but let me just say in response...

This is why, if I ever needed a Lawyer, I would seek the assistance of Wise Counsel as apposed to a person who has studied Law for three years. Why I would seek someone who knows the difference between arguing and legal argument. Why I would find a Lawyer who is over twelve years old and not Legally Blonde.

Like most people here on this forum, I am busy. I have many obligations in this life, I would rather spend what time I have keeping up with this forum and the posts from people that are working on themselves and are truly sharing than wasting time reading argumentative, meaningless posts.

Well, at least Loud John has reread the Forum rules, maybe he Will gain a better understanding of the purpose of this forum. It is a great place to be if your heart and intentions are in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom