People often defend their actions by saying "I wasn't being (a jerk, rude, insulting...), I was just being (direct, blunt, telling the truth...)". If so, then that presents the challenge of how to be direct without coming across as a jerk; to be blunt without coming across as rude; or to tell the truth without being insulting. As I'm sure we've all learned the hard way, before speaking it's wise to first be direct, blunt and truthful with ourselves in evaluating our motives, then practice external consideration by pondering who we're speaking to and how they might perceive our words.It’s just being direct. I wasn’t being a jerk. Considering this is a research forum, perhaps you should take a look at why it was started.
People here will form their own opinions, and are pretty good about figuring out the people who steer threads. If you’re looking for independent thinkers, you hit the jackpot. If you’re looking for useless chatter, you’re in the wrong bar.
I get it. I’ll never agree with certain members of the forum. So I won’t post much and I’ll watch to see what happens. It’s all odd to me though, a guy arrives. Uses an avatar of a psychopath from a movie and then wonders what Bill Gates fantasies about and probably has no clue why the forum was started as evidenced from his posts. Then he changes his avatar after another member also found it to be offensive…. But lets not be “jerks” and use words lest we offend people.People often defend their actions by saying "I wasn't being (a jerk, rude, insulting...), I was just being (direct, blunt, telling the truth...)". If so, then that presents the challenge of how to be direct without coming across as a jerk; to be blunt without coming across as rude; or to tell the truth without being insulting. As I'm sure we've all learned the hard way, before speaking it's wise to first be direct, blunt and truthful with ourselves in evaluating our motives, then practice external consideration by pondering who we're speaking to and how they might perceive our words.
Maybe you're overlooking a middle ground of speaking truth, but in a way that doesn't activate programs and ego defenses, or perhaps settle for simply planting one small seed (e.g. something as minor as "I see that in a different way.") trusting that others in that person's path later can nurture that seed into sprouting. It's very easy to spew out all the truth we know and overwhelm others. It's much more "Work" to restrain ourselves and tell only the amount of truth which will be helpful at that point. Humility can help us be more effective by keeping us mindful that we're not fully responsible for anyone else's enlightenment.I get it. I’ll never agree with certain members of the forum. So I won’t post much and I’ll watch to see what happens. It’s all odd to me though, a guy arrives. Uses an avatar of a psychopath from a movie and then wonders what Bill Gates fantasies about and probably has no clue why the forum was started as evidenced from his posts. Then he changes his avatar after another member also found it to be offensive…. But lets not be “jerks” and use words lest we offend people.
It’s a tough thing right, if there’s actually a chance of 200 people changing things by figuring out who each one of them are…. Separating the wheat from the chaff. Anyway, as mentioned I won’t be posting unless it’s contributing to a research thread as to not offend anyone. If the line of force of things change, all I can really do is not support it.
All that just hits me as word salad. Which is ok, it’s why I’ll limit engagement. The issue was what Bill Gates has fantasies about, which I felt was irrelevant because we can see what he’s doing which is more important. In fact the C’s just mentioned him and Klaus as two people who are paving the way for 4D STS and are “plugged in”, which is why I mentioned Greenbaum programming.Maybe you're overlooking a middle ground of speaking truth, but in a way that doesn't activate programs and ego defenses, or perhaps settle for simply planting one small seed (e.g. something as minor as "I see that in a different way.") trusting that others in that person's path later can nurture that seed into sprouting. It's very easy to spew out all the truth we know and overwhelm others. It's much more "Work" to restrain ourselves and tell only the amount of truth which will be helpful at that point. Humility can help us be more effective by keeping us mindful that we're not fully responsible for anyone else's enlightenment.
Not sure where you are coming from with this line of thinking... I like to know where a person is coming from, and seeing what programs they have is a big indicator to me. I can't see how dealing with someone in a way that allows them to hide behind their mask is beneficial to me. Not speaking to this person specifically, but to strangers in general.Maybe you're overlooking a middle ground of speaking truth, but in a way that doesn't activate programs...
Billionaires seldom talk in numbers or ever really speak about money (of course there are examples to the contrary), rather ideas which in turn produce wealth. The carbon footprint of a Billionaire is gigantic and although greed may or may not be their driving force, they still seem to share the same basic instinct of survival, from how to maintain wealth and various ways to increase it. (BTW, FM258 - I'm X-1st 214th Aviation Battalion Germany, 1st Squadron, 6th Cavalry Regiment (Gen. Lee), Ft. Riley, V-Corp Army Europe, with one year in South Korea and still, one of U.S. Army's best kept secrets. Hooha!)If you are poor, fantasies about just anything are on your radar.
The more wealth and power you attain, more of those old fantasies become obtainable.
We all have the daydream/fantasy gene...so that's my question....people like Bill Gates and Elon, can have anything they want, but what do you suppose they "might" think about. Its an odd topic, but I get these strange ideas once in awhile.
I've been thinking things over today, and I think you're correct in your assessment. He did mine the soul, so to speak, and brought some interesting insights to the public. It was just reading about his cultish compound with his "witches" in attendance, which I found very off-putting. So I was a bit premature in throwing the baby out with the (admittedly very filthy) bathwater. His ideas on "the predator's mind" do need to be kept in mind, especially as we are now approaching a very testing time vis a vis the alien invasion, as referenced in the latest C's session. I apologise if I came across as terse in my initial dismissal of his work, and your estimation of it.Castaneda was obviously a shady guy but said some great things that can be helpful in the work, imo.
There’s a thread somewhere about Anart, who was a very active member. She was direct and had a knack for quickly zoning in on inadequacies of someone’s position, especially newcomers. Some of her approach to people had been discussed there. There could be some similar learnings on that thread too in relation to this topic. I couldn’t as yet find that thread. Will keep looking.Not sure where you are coming from with this line of thinking... I like to know where a person is coming from, and seeing what programs they have is a big indicator to me. I can't see how dealing with someone in a way that allows them to hide behind their mask is beneficial to me. Not speaking to this person specifically, but to strangers in general.
I have read that thread. She had other problems she was hiding (hence, a mask).There’s a thread somewhere about Anart, who was a very active member. She was direct and had a knack for quickly zoning in on inadequacies of someone’s position, especially newcomers. Some of her approach to people had been discussed there. There could be some similar learnings on that thread too in relation to this topic. I couldn’t as yet find that thread. Will keep looking.
That made me smile. When I first typed my answer to you I used exactly this same sentence before erasing it for the sake of brevity.So I was a bit premature in throwing the baby out with the (admittedly very filthy) bathwater
That thread is here if I'm not mistaken.There’s a thread somewhere about Anart, who was a very active member. She was direct and had a knack for quickly zoning in on inadequacies of someone’s position, especially newcomers. Some of her approach to people had been discussed there. There could be some similar learnings on that thread too in relation to this topic. I couldn’t as yet find that thread. Will keep looking.
I agree. I gave my opinion and that’s that. After that I remove myself from the discussion.
I don’t do it to antagonize anyone intentionally, that would be trolling.
People often defend their actions by saying "I wasn't being (a jerk, rude, insulting...), I was just being (direct, blunt, telling the truth...)". If so, then that presents the challenge of how to be direct without coming across as a jerk; to be blunt without coming across as rude; or to tell the truth without being insulting. As I'm sure we've all learned the hard way, before speaking it's wise to first be direct, blunt and truthful with ourselves in evaluating our motives, then practice external consideration by pondering who we're speaking to and how they might perceive our words
You ever see that scene in Braveheart with Steven the Irishmen? Maybe think about why he acted like that eh? He sure showed restraint. But some would say he sure was a jerk…..
There’s a thread somewhere about Anart, who was a very active member. She was direct and had a knack for quickly zoning in on inadequacies of someone’s position, especially newcomers. Some of her approach to people had been discussed there. There could be some similar learnings on that thread too in relation to this topic. I couldn’t as yet find that thread. Will keep looking
I don't know Anart either but came across some of her posts. She seems to have a swift mind, put her fingers on weak spots quickly and goes to surgery with a sharp knife sometimes uncalled for.I don't know Anart, I've come across a few posts, but it might be instructive and useful to open a new thread entitled: "Are we OK, after networking with Anart?
But is it reasonable to link Anart's facts with Benkostka?
Or am I overdoing it?
Where are we going?