Spirit board - Ouija Video

[AmyB]

Anart,

I hope we can put this to rest soon. It is possible that what I have written is not interpreted as I would wish it was and so I will reread. As for not sharing my experiences and wanting to speak privately with Laura, this has more to do with my position and related risks and nothing to do with not wanting to discuss with you or any other Member. I was simply asking to contact Laura to exchange some information. I was not asking this request because I thought myself to be special or otherwise and so I naturally took offense to the following excerpt you sent me:

You will see that in life you receive exactly what you give. Your life is the mirror of what you are. It is in your image. You are
passive, blind, demanding. You take all, you accept all, without feeling any obligation. Your attitude toward the world and toward
life is the attitude of one who has the right to make demands and to take, who has no need to pay or to earn. You believe that all things
are your due, simply because it is you! All your blindness is there! None of this strikes your attention. And yet this is what keeps one
world separate from another world.

You have no measure with which to measure yourself. You live exclusively according to "I like" or "I don't like," you have no
appreciation except for yourself. You recognize nothing above you- theoretically, logically, perhaps, but actually no. That is why you
are demanding and continue to believe that everything is cheap and that you have enough in your pocket to buy everything you like. You
recognize nothing above you, either outside yourself or inside. That is why, I repeat, you have no measure and live passively according to
your likes and dislikes.

Yes, your "appreciation of yourself" blinds you. It is the biggest obstacle to a new life. You must be able to get over this obstacle,
this threshold, before going further. This test divides men into two kinds: the "wheat" and the "chaff." No matter how intelligent, how
gifted, how brilliant a man may be, if he does not change his appreciation of himself, there will be no hope for an inner
development, for a work toward self-knowledge, for a true becoming. He will remain such as he is all his life. The first requirement, the
first condition, the first test for one who wishes to work on himself is to change his appreciation of himself. He must not imagine, not
simply believe or think, but see things in himself which he has never seen before, see them actually. His appreciation will never be able
to change as long as he sees nothing in himself. And in order to see, he must learn to see; this is the first initiation of man into self-
knowledge.

First of all, he has to know what he must look at. When he knows, he must make efforts, keep his attention, look constantly with
persistence. Only through maintaining his attention, and not forgetting to look, one day, perhaps, he will be able to see. If he
sees one time he can see a second time, and if that continues he will no longer be able not to see. This is the state to be looked for, it
is the aim of our observation; it is from there that the true wish will be born, the irresistible wish to become: from cold we shall
become warm, vibrant; we shall be touched by our reality.

Today we have nothing but the illusion of what we are. We think too highly of ourselves. We do not respect ourselves. In order to respect
myself, I have to recognize a part in myself which is above the other parts, and my attitude toward this part should bear witness to the
respect that I have for it. In this way I shall respect myself. And my relations with others will be governed by the same respect.

You must understand that all the other measures-talent, education, culture, genius-are changing measures, measures of detail. The only
exact measure, the only unchanging, objective real measure is the measure of inner vision. I see-I see myself-by this, you have
measured. With one higher real part, you have measured another lower part, also real. And this measure, defining by itself the role of
each part, will lead you to respect for yourself.

But you will see that it is not easy. And it is not cheap. You must pay dearly. For bad payers, lazy people, parasites, no hope. You must
pay, pay a lot, and pay immediately, pay in advance. Pay with yourself. By sincere, conscientious, disinterested efforts. The more
you are prepared to pay without economizing, without cheating, without any falsification, the more you will receive. And from that
time on you will become acquainted with your nature. And you will see all the tricks, all the dishonesties that your nature resorts to in
order to avoid paying hard cash. Because you have to pay with your ready-made theories, with your rooted convictions, with your
prejudices, your conventions, your "I like" and "I don't like." Without bargaining, honestly, without pretending. Trying "sincerely"
to see as you offer your counterfeit money.

Try for a moment to accept the idea that you are not what you believe yourself to be, that you overestimate yourself, in fact that you lie
to yourself. That you always lie to yourself every moment, all day, all your life. That this lying rules you to such an extent that you
cannot control it any more. You are the prey of lying. You lie, everywhere. Your relations with others-lies. The upbringing you give,
the conventions-lies. Your teaching-lies. Your theories, your art lies. Your social life, your family life-lies. And what you think of
yourself-lies also.

But you never stop yourself in what you are doing or in what you are saying because you believe in yourself. You must stop inwardly and
observe. Observe without preconceptions, accepting for a time this idea of lying. And if you observe in this way, paying with yourself,
without self-pity, giving up all your supposed riches for a moment of reality, perhaps you will suddenly see something you have never
before seen in yourself until this day.

You will see that you are different from what you think you are. You will see that you are two. One who is not, but takes the place and plays the role of the other.
And one who is, yet so weak, so insubstantial, that he no sooner appears than he immediately disappears. He cannot endure lies. The
least lie makes him faint away. He does not struggle, he does not resist, he is defeated in advance. Learn to look until you have seen
the difference between your two natures, until you have seen the lies, the deception in yourself. When you have seen your two natures,
that day, in yourself, the truth will be born.

My request was made to Laura and she was perfectly capable of declining my request or never answering my email, I have no problem at all with that. I also realize that many people have had bizarre experiences, that I am not the only one and that I am not special in the least in that regard, point taken. :D

As for the above excerpt, I'm not sure how you wanted me to take this. Obviously you intended to make a point unless you are in the habit of copy pasting excerpts at will for no apparent reason....Perhaps your choice of text combined with your lack of knowledge about me could explain why I became defense...food for thought :)

 

[anart]

As for the above excerpt, I'm not sure how you wanted me to take this. Obviously you intended to make a point unless you are in the habit of copy pasting excerpts at will for no apparent reason....Perhaps your choice of text combined with your lack of knowledge about me could explain why I became defense...food for thought

I didn't 'want' you to take it any way at all.  It is merely the Truth.  I posted it to give you insight into human thinking and posted it in the context of this thread as a reminder that just because you think something does not make it true. (this is true of everyone)

The choice of text is not offensive, it is Truth - your reaction to it, however, is interesting.  Again, all that is necessary to 'know about you' in the context of this thread is to be found in what you have written.  Are you at all familiar with the Work of G.I. Gurdjieff?

 

[AmyB]

The Truth...interesting. In what context? How did the excerpt apply to our conversation. What was the impetus behind you choosing this excerpt? You have not responded although previously you seemed to indicate that it was because I was bold enough to make a special request to Laura and that my experiences could not be so special to warrant such a request... You prefer to continue enlightening me with someone else's Truth taken completely out of context. Truth, indeed...

"The color of truth is gray" — André Gide

Here is another quote for you but don't take offense it only states the truth:

Arrogance and rudeness are training wheels on the bicycle of life -- for weak people who cannot keep their balance without them. - Laura Teresa Marquez

 

[anart]

The Truth...interesting. In what context? How did the excerpt apply to our conversation. What was the impetus behind you choosing this excerpt? You have not responded although previously you seemed to indicate that it was because I was bold enough to make a special request to Laura and that my experiences could not be so special to warrant such a request... You prefer to continue enlightening me with someone else's Truth taken completely out of context. Truth, indeed...

Actually, my reference to Mme de Salzmann's 'First Initiation' was not in reference to your request of Laura.  It was in reference to your evidenced belief in yourself and your experiences.  I realize this fact will likely not be received well by you, but that is the fact of the matter.  This quote is also directly related to the Work, as developed by G.I. Gurdjieff, upon which this forum is based and has been quoted and applied here many, many times. 

Being unfamiliar with the Work, it would make sense that you would have questions about why it was used, however, after having it explained twice it is rather unusual for you to still be asking in such an emotionally weighted way, taking such grand offense.

"The color of truth is gray" — André Gide

Here is another quote for you but don't take offense it only states the truth:

Arrogance and rudeness are training wheels on the bicycle of life -- for weak people who cannot keep their balance without them. - Laura Teresa Marquez

I've no idea why you chose to include the above, other than to amuse yourself and to make a not so subtle dig at me, which is rather fascinating since all I have done is attempted to explain the situation to you in the most clear way possible.  Perhaps taking the time to re-read the forum guidelines might be helpful at this point?

 

[PepperFritz]

You prefer to continue enlightening me with someone else's Truth taken completely out of context.

Actually, it is you who do not understand the context of this forum. If you had actually read the Forum Guidelines, as suggested more than once, you would have read that "The foundation of this forum is The Cassiopaean Experiment, the layout of the rooms is generally modelled after the work of Gurdjieff and Mouravieff, the decor and details are filled in by Castaneda and many modern psychological studies." You have been asked several times whether you are familiar with the work of Gurdjieff and have chosen to ignore those queries. You have also failed to investigate the links about Gurdjieff and his 4th-Way Teaching (also known as "the Work") that were provided to you, as suggested. If you had, you would have found out who Mme Jeanne de Salzmann is and why the excerpt provided to you is not only in context, but THE context for the work that we do here.

It would be a good idea if you were to take the time to learn about the context of this forum before posting further. That is, if you are actually interested in this forum, and are not here only to gain a personal interview with Laura.

 

[Laura]

Speaking of quotes, here's a good one from "Political Ponerology":

Paranoid character disorders: It is characteristic of paranoid behavior for people to be capable of relatively correct reasoning and discussion as long as the conversation involves minor differences of opinion. This stops abruptly when the partner’s arguments begin to undermine their overvalued ideas, crush their long-held stereotypes of reasoning, or forces them to accept a conclusion they had subconsciously rejected before. Such a stimulus unleashes upon the partner a torrent of pseudo-logical, largely paramoralistic, often insulting utterances which always contain some degree of suggestion. [...]

We know today that the psychological mechanism of paranoid phenomena is twofold: one is caused by damage to the brain tissue, the other is functional or behavioral. Within the above-mentioned process of rehabilitation, any brain-tissue lesion causes a certain slackening of accurate thinking and, as a consequence, of the personality structure. Most typical are those cases caused by an aggression in the diencephalon by various pathological factors, resulting in its permanently decreased tonal ability, and similarly of the tonus of inhibition in the brain cortex. Particularly during sleepless nights, runaway thoughts give rise to a paranoid changed view of human reality, as well as to ideas which can be either gently naive or violently revolutionary. [...]

In persons free of brain tissue lesions, such phenomena most frequently occur as a result of being reared by people with paranoid characteropathia, along with the psychological terror of their childhood. Such psychological material is then assimilated creating the rigid stereotypes of abnormal experiencing. This makes it difficult for thought and world view to develop normally, and the terror-blocked contents become transformed into permanent, functional, congestive centers.

For those with eyes to see and ears to hear.

 

[AmyB]

Well there we go. Thank you for your response Laura, Anart and Pepperfritz. You really got me, you've got me down pat...the paranoid personality who overestimates her importance or experiences. Funny enough, with such a group of bright individuals, nobody seems capable of realizing that there never was a difference of opinion with respect to my personal experiences or their importance because I never shared them. This is what was at the root of the problem in the first place. The following quote from Anart with respect to his reasoning for sending me the excerpt from The Work makes this clear:

I posted it to give you insight into human thinking and posted it in the context of this thread as a reminder that just because you think something does not make it true.

Arbitrarily stating that just because I think something is true does not make it true is sort of a misnomer in this context. What are we talking about? What did I think was so true that I couldn't open my mind sufficiently enough to incite Anart to send me the excerpt from Mme Salzmann's? I would welcome a response to this simple question as it is at the very root of this discussion. Unless you are telling me that whenever anybody posts anything they should expect any quote from The Work whether relevent to the context or not and should they react poorly to the said quote they will be diagnosed as paranoid?

To answer Pepperfritz, I am not familiar with Gurdieff and The Work and will read the material but I will never let a little bit of knowledge (or philosophy) render me presumptuous enough to judge somebody I don't know and even worse attempt to psychologically diagnose them based on a few lines exchanged on a forum!

I suppose the gang's verdict is out, really no point questioning, the Truth has been found.

 

[Oxajil]

I think that most/all members here are people who are eager to grow, to learn and to try to view different subjects from different perspectives.
Apparently you already have some kind of ''way of thinking'' of how things are or ''should be'' and there is no way to ''open your mind up'' and to let it grow unless YOU start to SEE how ''closed'' it is.
Instead of thinking ''they are wrong'', you could also think ''maybe they are right'' or ''maybe I'm misunderstanding this, because I'm not so familiar with...''. fwiw

 

[anart]

Well there we go. Thank you for your response Laura, Anart and Pepperfritz. You really got me, you've got me down pat...the paranoid personality who overestimates her importance or experiences.

As I mentioned earlier, sarcasm isn't very helpful, though it does say a lot about you.

Funny enough, with such a group of bright individuals, nobody seems capable of realizing that there never was a difference of opinion with respect to my personal experiences or their importance because I never shared them.

And you have failed to notice that what you are objecting to so strongly has nothing to do with 'your experiences' per se - it has to do with what you have written here and how you have written it.  This has been explained several times, yet, still you don't grasp it.  Very, very odd, that.

This is what was at the root of the problem in the first place.

No, it wasn't.  You apparently don't even understand the conversation.

Arbitrarily stating that just because I think something is true does not make it true is sort of a misnomer in this context.

No, it's not -  first of all, you are misusing the word 'misnomer'

misnomer: 1: the misnaming of a person in a legal instrument 2 a: a use of a wrong or inappropriate name b: a wrong name or inappropriate designation.

Secondly, you are not understanding the crux of what has been said to you - yet you will not stop to question yourself at all, thus, you continue to wander in the dark, slashing your sword about at imaginary enemies, missing the whole point - which, actually, proves the accuracy and appropriateness of the de Salzmann quote.

Your evidenced inability to grasp this also speaks to Laura's point.

What are we talking about?

Your behavior, as defined by your posts on this forum.

What did I think was so true that I couldn't open my mind sufficiently enough to incite Anart to send me the excerpt from Mme Salzmann's?

Your estimation of yourself and your perception, as evidenced by your posts in this forum.

I would welcome a response to this simple question as it is at the very root of this discussion.

And you now have it, though you were also given it several posts ago. Can you grasp it?  Likely not, judging from your behavior thus far.

Unless you are telling me that whenever anybody posts anything they should expect any quote from The Work whether relevent to the context or not and should they react poorly to the said quote they will be diagnosed as paranoid?

Nope - very odd interpretation, though and a rather severe twist that evidences a profound lack of perspective.  What is truly fascinating about this is that despite copious evidence and input to the contrary, you still do not question your own thinking.

To answer Pepperfritz, I am not familiar with Gurdieff and The Work and will read the material but I will never let a little bit of knowledge (or philosophy) render me presumptuous enough to judge somebody I don't know and even worse attempt to psychologically diagnose them based on a few lines exchanged on a forum!

And this, Se'et, is a twist and a statement made with a significant degree of suggestion.  Perhaps you could re-read Laura's post?

I suppose the gang's verdict is out, really no point questioning, the Truth has been found.

And, back to the sarcasm.  Fascinating. 

It seems obvious at this point, Se'et that this forum is likely not for you.  That is not uncommon and not really even that 'big of a deal' but I do think that it's time for you to move on.

 

[Renaissance]

What did I think was so true that I couldn't open my mind sufficiently enough to incite Anart to send me the excerpt from Mme Salzmann's? I would welcome a response to this simple question as it is at the very root of this discussion.

Your question is a bit misdirected, and even manipulative to suggest that Anart is attacking you. She's not attacking you, so you can drop the victim act. There is nothing to suggest that Anart was 'incited'; however, your reaction does express continual incitement. It is your reactions, which began before this quote was provided and still continues, that exemplifies the meaning within the quote. And jeeze, you're not being singled out here - it's an explanation of our condition here.

Direction for answers have already been layed out for you; since it appears you're not satisfied with them, you'll likely not find what it is that you want. If there is a possibility that you can look for something other than 'what you want' then maybe you'll find some answers.

 

[NormaRegula]

I am not familiar with Gurdieff and The Work and will read the material but I will never let a little bit of knowledge (or philosophy) render me presumptuous enough to judge somebody I don't know and even worse attempt to psychologically diagnose them based on a few lines exchanged on a forum!

Se'et, if you're sincere in studying Gurdjieff, that's a starting point in discovering the truth about yourself. Perhaps you may return after your studies with a better understanding of what this forum...and Laura's work...is actually about. You might even come to realize that what you currently believe and know about yourself and the world is based mostly on assumptions and a heavy dose of self-importance. Very few human beings are immune from the aforementioned behavior. It's quite common and leads to all sorts of misunderstandings.

There's a reason why we call what we do here in this forum "Work." Part of the process involves having a mirror held up to our faces. It can be uncomfortable. It can be difficult to accept if a subjective aspect of our thinking is pointed out. Forum members, myself included, are given suggestions and recommended reading lists to help us recognize the lies that permeate this world...the most important of which are the lies that we tell ourselves. We are sometimes questioned by moderators and fellow members about our sacred cows, opinions, demands for immediate information and/or conformation without prior research, and interpretations of what constitutes truth if those views appear to be held in a subjective manner. It's not done to be cruel or judgmental. It's done to simply point out ones blind belief systems vs objective truth.

It appears that you came aboard without really knowing what this forum was about. You then responded to Anart's, PepperFritz's, and Laura's suggestions, questions, and quotes with sarcasm, assumptions, and passive-aggressive justifications. "A few lines exchanged on a forum" that deals with uncovering the truth via the "Work" will surely get a response...although it appears it was not the response that you were originally seeking.

 

[Laura]

Well there we go. Thank you for your response Laura, Anart and Pepperfritz. You really got me, you've got me down pat...the paranoid personality who overestimates her importance or experiences. Funny enough, with such a group of bright individuals, nobody seems capable of realizing that there never was a difference of opinion with respect to my personal experiences or their importance because I never shared them.

The above encapsulates what Lobaczewski wrote about the Paranoid Characteropath:

It is characteristic of paranoid behavior for people to be capable of relatively correct reasoning and discussion as long as the conversation involves minor differences of opinion. This stops abruptly when the partner’s arguments begin to undermine their overvalued ideas, crush their long-held stereotypes of reasoning, or forces them to accept a conclusion they had subconsciously rejected before. Such a stimulus unleashes upon the partner a torrent of pseudo-logical, largely paramoralistic, often insulting utterances which always contain some degree of suggestion.

The problem is, AmyB AKA Se'et, everything you have written thus far clearly indicates that you know so little about our work here, my work, the Cs, that your claim that "there never was a difference of opinion" is ridiculous. If you really knew what our work is about, if you really had done any Work yourself, every single response you have written would have been different! Do you understand that? Probably not, but there it is.

Just for the record, I get a LOT, LOT, LOT of emails from people who may have read a smidgen of the Cs material, or even just the transcripts and know nothing about the context, and think that they are "the chosen one" or have a new perspective to add, or they are channeling the Cs, too (never mind the part where the Cs say they are me in the future!), and so on and so on. The interesting thing about these emails is that, for the most part, the characters of the individuals writing them - as revealed by what and how they write - are all pretty much the same. If anyone questions their conclusions at all, they immediately unleash a "torrent of pseudo-logical, largely paramoralistic, often insulting utterances which always contain some degree of suggestion". Usually the suggestion is that if I don't agree with them 100% (whatever they are writing) then I've obviously lost my way or been taken over by evil forces etc.

I find it quite curious that AmyB would select the forum handle "Se'et" - especially if she has really read the material on the cass website - considering what I have written about "Set" and my experiences with those who want to "channel Set". A little "signature", perhaps?

 

[AmyB]

NormaRegula,

Thank you for your comments. They were fair and it is true that I am not familiar with this forum and the type of feedback that is given to Members. Anart indicated that many people had made requests such as mine in the past and that the excerpt he sent me had been sent on many occasions, however I have not seen such replies. Perhaps there should be a notice on the forum indicating that Laura will never in any circumstances communicate with Members individually outside the forum. That might have resolved the issue as well from the start. I especially appreciated that you provided me with explanations on the forum itself without resorting to analyzing my mental condition, attempting to label me with a personality disorder or even questioning such futile things as my choice in name for an avatar.

Laura, I don't remember thinking or saying that I was the chosen one and certainly don't feel that way, especially in light of the fact that the Cs are you in the future. As for the name I chose, it was not related to your work at all... I chose the name Se'et (in Sumerian) as in Aset-Iset-Isis as in Anton Parks' novels (NOT Set). Anton Parks is also a channel and he has done some very interesting work. (_http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vida_alien/secret_darkstars/secret_darkstars03.htm)

 

[anart]

NormaRegula,

Thank you for your comments. They were fair and it is true that I am not familiar with this forum and the type of feedback that is given to Members. Anart indicated that many people had made requests such as mine in the past and that the excerpt he sent me had been sent on many occasions, however I have not seen such replies.

I'm curious as to why you think this is relevant?

Perhaps there should be a notice on the forum indicating that Laura will never in any circumstances communicate with Members individually outside the forum.

That would not be the truth.

That might have resolved the issue as well from the start.

No, because that was never the issue - you are twisting again.

I especially appreciated that you provided me with explanations on the forum itself without resorting to analyzing my mental condition, attempting to label me with a personality disorder or even questioning such futile things as my choice in name for an avatar.

This is yet another twist of the facts in order to make yourself look like a victim and suggest that you have been treated unfairly, which is not the case. In other words, you are proving, with each new post, how correct Laura's impressions are.

Laura, I don't remember thinking or saying that I was the chosen one and certainly don't feel that way, especially in light of the fact that the Cs are you in the future.

This is another twist - she never said that you did, she was describing other correspondence she has received.

As for the name I chose, it was not related to your work at all... I chose the name Se'et (in Sumerian) as in Aset-Iset-Isis as in Anton Parks' novels (NOT Set). Anton Parks is also a channel and he has done some very interesting work.

You might have misunderstood Laura's reference to your name as a signature, which is very understandable since to understand it, you would have to understand how things tend to work 'behind the veil', which would necessitate being very familiar with the material that is presented here on the associated web pages.

It's quite obvious that this is turning into a 'feeding' situation, however, and that this forum is not for you. I hope you find what you are looking for elsewhere.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

This is my understanding of the situation thus far, although I doubt I can make it any clearer than numerous attempts by others:

I was also wondering if you still invited guests to your seances or if you still hypnotized people to verify their stories.

My understanding is that Laura wasn't using hypnosis to verify people's stories as some sort of lie detector, but to help them better understand and then work through their issues.

I really have a good reason for this request and very little opportunity to "privately" discuss my story. I suppose I feel sort of like you did when you were looking for somebody to pay serious attention to the Cs material before you met Ark.

To me that sounds like you're trying to invoke pity and a sense of urgency because you have a small window of opportunity so Laura should respond while you're still available? Also why are you assuming you know how Laura felt at any given point - I think you are misunderstanding and greatly oversimplifying and therefore distorting it, but that also comes off like a manipulation to try to create feelings of kinship.

I am just wondering if there is any chance I could ever meet with you (I would be willing to travel to France) or at least talk privately via phone or even through personal email (not very private but if all else fails). Would appreciate one opportunity to share my story and get your input. Undecided

Actually, you do not appreciate Laura's input at all. Look at how you took everyone's input in this thread, including Laura's, and just threw it back in their faces with insulting suggestive sarcasm, but also completely misunderstandood what is being said and why it was being said. Did you expect if you met with Laura in person she would not call you out on the same things? Assuming that things would be "different" in person and you would get nothing but praise and food for your predator and illusions is just another example of how you completely misunderstand this group, this Work, and Laura - whom you claim to understand and empathize with.

And this is what others have been trying to tell you - your reaction to helpful suggestions that had no ill will or assumptions within them is just a small example of how you would perceive Laura's comments in person as well. I can't even imagine what would happen if someone gave you a mirror!

The C's constantly stress how important it is for us to pursue Knowledge on our own, formulate our own questions and do our own research, and not expect to be handed "answers" from "on high", so to speak.

For example, you assumed I did not want to do the work and was basically lazily asking for the answers to the meaning of life. Did it ever occur to you that I may not be "in a position" to share the information on line?

You presented it as your personal "story" that you wanted Laura's input on, not as just some information that you know is important to Laura that you have that you cannot publically reveal and are just looking for a way to privately get it to her. And if that's what you're trying to do, you did not say how and why it is important and why you can't just email it.

Haven't we been told and realized that we are living in an illusion whose very purpose is to teach us lessons for our advancement and/or awakening. If we are then in an illusion, how can anyone claim to hold The Truth.

No one can claim to be absolutely certain, but people can have a very good idea from collecting data and networking. It's just a fact of life that some people are much closer the The Truth than others because they are looking for it.

In any event, I wonder how any help can be provided to people seeking real help not simply conversation on a forum such as this

Help cannot be provided to those who are not asking for it. And sometimes having a personal consultation with any person of your choice is just not possible - that does not mean that you cannot greatly benefit from interaction on this forum and use the knowledge you gain here and from applying it to your life to resolve basically any situation you're in. Why is that not a good idea? Does it ask too much of you?