posted January 16, 2008 02:24 PM            

Well guys, as much as we all like to believe that the GU thread will actually last the winter without Jwhop... It just won't.

And no Whops, it ain't because you're a Liberal minded visionary . You are just a wayyy better substitute to Steven Colbert Lol! Though things might have been a bit more even if Sweet Stars would have given herself a measure of self-control.

But since she has been given the good ol ban hammer, Whops is all we got .

Just... at least TRY to be a bit more open minded from time to time will ya Roughneck?

posted January 16, 2008 08:03 PM            

quote:

---

Jwhop's been chastised by the good people here going back at least three years.

---

AG, I really don't want to misunderstand what you're saying here. I would appreciate you clarifying your statement for me because, at least on the surface, it appears that for "the good people" to have done something then there must also be "bad" people who didn't. Otherwise, they're all just people and there isn't a need to distinguish them in that manner. Rather than accusing you of divisiveness or anything at all, really, I'd just like your help in understanding what you were saying. Forgive me for being slow today, I've managed to catch some sort of cold bug.

******

praecipua

I would say there's a difference in the way one may treat someone's ideas and the way one may (or perhaps should) treat the individual who holds those ideas. I'm not defending anyone here, btw, and that would be clear if you read through my posts perhaps less defensively. I'm not talking about jwhop so much as I'm talking about this thread.

posted January 16, 2008 08:49 PM            

http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum16/HTML/000577-2.html

posted January 16, 2008 09:14 PM            

quote:

---

From your response, however, I can only surmise that you do feel there are "good" people here ... and combined with your earlier comment thus also "bad" people here unless we'll go so far as to suggest that all the others are somehow "neutral". I simply wish to be clear on the matter.

---

posted January 16, 2008 09:44 PM            

My take on the first post is as follows:

Just take these interactions with each others as lessons that you need to learn.

Perhaps you may think bumping in to jwhop is like bumping in to a wall. But heh, go sideways. Why does one care if Jwhop is obstructing you?

Its always the other that is the problem never you. Responsilibity is about owing your problems and not passing them.

Praecipua has a point about people not evolving when they refuse to change I can only say that not all men are born equal in societal conditioning. Some take more years to change than you. Well let jwhop develop in his own ways as we continue to develop on ur own. Let it not create anxiety or anguish or annoyance in you. It speaks of our own problems we need to solve responsibly.

A lion does not invite you to his cage. He is claustrophobic Each one creates his own lion cage by not addressing the problems head on.

posted January 17, 2008 02:30 AM            

quote:

---

I'd appreciate a look at that list of "good people", AG. You know, just to save time.

---

The attempt at putting me in an compromising position is moot. Myself and my judgments are not alone in this place, are they? Could I not easily prove anyone here has essentially the same sentiments [Good, Bad, and loads of shades of in between]? Could I not easily render example after example of people exposing their own sense of judgment of who is and isn't good? It would be child's play frankly, so the attempt at entrapment is a flawed tactic. We all have our judgments and our compartments we put people in.

posted January 17, 2008 06:33 AM            

I'm sorry but I haven't come to jwhop's defense in this thread. I haven't written a single word defending him or his words or his views, etc. My concern is merely with a thread devoted to "sharing negative opinions" about a member. I don't know why you are suggesting that, for me, this is about jwhop when my posting history shows that I feel the same way about any thread intentionally set out to target one member in a negative light. If this were an Will AG Ever Shut Up? thread and I responded in the same manner there as I have here, do you think it would be a personal matter of me "defending" you?

Of course people have problems with other people. Have we forgotten the purpose of this forum? I don't think so. We wouldn't need a place to discuss hope to achieve Unity if we were already united. I don't expect everyone to magically be at peace with themselves (and thus with each other) just because I or others wish they would be. I am, however, at a loss as to why people sometimes feel the need to make public spectacles of themselves and others.

As for entrappment, if any of us are ever trapped by our words it is only our own doing. No one writes for us and we are each responsible for what we post. And implying or suggesting negative things about people is often as bad as saying them outright ... and sometimes worse for its mere cowardice. (I don't think you meant to do that in this, btw and just for clarity's sake.) *added* The problem with implications and suggestions is that it's hard to prove (say beyond reasonable doubt) that malice was intended and often one person's word must be taken at face value. And that situation gets very nasty sometimes.

But must there always be a negative motive? Maybe the reality is that I give everyone the benefit of the doubt, especially when their words aren't clear to me. Maybe that's why I bother to ask instead of hurling accusations left and right. Maybe I was shocked to see you refer to "good people" here because of the possible (and now certain) implication it carried. Maybe there was a part of me that didn't want to really believe that instead of merely disliking each other's views or opinions or attitudes or personalities that some of us actually pass such complete judgement on a person(s) as to label them "bad people". And maybe that's because the only people I consider "bad people" are people like Hitler, that undoubtedly evil fellow. I don't approve of the way many people treat others or react to others at times. But I'm of the belief that just because a person does a bad thing they are not automatically "bad people".

You know, this is exactly the kind of attitude that keeps us all divided in a greater sense. This suspicion and assumption and mess of supposed loyalties. When you (General) or your perceived "friends" behave one way, it's understandable, it's sharing opinions, it's a joke, it's okay ... and anyone getting offended is taking it the "wrong" way or is somehow attempting to infringe upon your right to express yourself. But when your perceived "enemies" do the same, it's some sort of a crime. Some people love to give it, however they dress it up, but hate to take it. And anyone who doesn't agree with the "friends" must be an "enemy" and even those who point out double standards or who defend both sides at different times are cast in a negative light for their refusal to "pick a side".

Frankly, I'm not on any one person's side, not here or anywhere. I care about many people here, personally, regardless of their opinions of me. But no matter how I feel about any of you, I will share my opinions and call a spade a spade no matter how many feathers I ruffle or how many disagree with me.

posted January 17, 2008 09:39 AM            

quote:

---

Maybe I was shocked to see you refer to "good people" here because of the possible (and now certain) implication it carried.

---

Yes Eleanore, I was too

Is a person who is ornery & judgemental on the outside(verbally), any more moral, ethical or "better" than the one who commits the same offense on the inside(believes) ?

Certainly AG has let us see his insides by saying: me & others good, you & others bad.

It will be a chore now to overcome thinking to self "it`s only AG`s perspective/ opinion". When self confessed, he is judging the good and bad of us all. How sad.

------------------
~
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

posted January 17, 2008 09:43 AM              

Divisive? AG? nah ... never.

posted January 17, 2008 10:09 AM              

quote:

---

i know this category is called global unity

---

Calling this forum GLOBAL UNITY is perhaps the biggest joke in Linda Land. One reason I do not participate in the discussions here. I do read through, but it is not worth involving in discussions - just my personal opinion, because of my personal experience.

I have felt irritated and agitated with many of jwhop's opinions and comments, but at the sme time, I have approved some of his discussions as well. As a person jwhop has his own views and opinions, perhaps might be stupid for me, perhaps might be offensive for me - but as a person what do I have against jwhop? Nothing, nothing at all. Jwhop and SattvicMoon are two people who have managed to register here because of Linda Goodman and the knowledge she has imparted, so my take is to co-inhabit. So long there are no flaming and name callings, it is all good.

posted January 17, 2008 10:49 AM            

quote:

---

Certainly AG has let us see his insides by saying: me good you bad. It will be a chore now to overcome thinking to self "it`s only AG`s perspective/ opinion". When self confessed, he is judging the good and bad of us all. How sad.

---

quote:

---

It's rare to see someone put themselves in such an indefensible position.

---

You guys are something else.

Like I said, we are all judging the good and bad in people every single day. This isn't an "indefensible" position. This is the standard position, especially amongst people who involve themselves in arguments (which includes all of you). That you're not honest enough with yourselves to own your own judgmental natures is frankly odd to me. Indeed both of your posts prove the point I'm making.

Eleanore spoke of my implicating something, but it is something I've implicated a thousand times before. To sit there and pretend like this comes as a shocking surprise that AG would think himself better than Jwhop is simply dramatic. You guys don't have that short a memory.

quote:

---

Is a person who is ornery & judgemental on the outside(verbally), any more moral, ethical or "better" than the one who commits the same offense on the inside(believes) ?

---

I think what you're trying to say here is that Jwhop and I are equal. There's a very significant difference between him and I. The first and most obvious is that I'm not out to trash Republicans whenever I get the opportunity. There are quite a few other differences as well, but as this is the only one pertinent to GU I think we can leave it at that.

Eleanore,

I understand your post thanks to having gone out with a Sag for the last year and a half.

quote:

---

As for entrappment, if any of us are ever trapped by our words it is only our own doing.

---

I don't feel trapped by my words. I think there was an intent to trap me by asking me if I do what everyone intrinsically does.

quote:

---

And implying or suggesting negative things about people is often as bad as saying them outright

---

They are exactly the same in my book, and I respond to both as if they were equal. I would be surprised to learn if I was the only one who did this. They are virtually 100% the same as far as I'm concerned.

posted January 17, 2008 01:30 PM            

quote:

---

Like I said, we are all judging the good and bad in people every single day.

---

That is your limitation and projection and does not reflect Eleanore,tink or myself.

To put that forth as your truth is simply faulty filtering. Now worries or surprise, just sad as you have the ability to glean a clearer understanding of what causes judgement and projection. The unbalance is curable

As for jwhop, we may not share the same politics,Spiritual or whatever beliefs. But I do trust him to speak his mind honestly and we know where we stand with him. No sneaky projection there ey?

quote:

---

." I do stand in solidarity with the "good" people on this as I always have.

---

Excellent, this bad person will continue to seperate the message from the messenger and say I like jwhop!

------------------
~
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

posted January 17, 2008 01:40 PM            

quote:

---

That is your limitation and projection and does not reflect Eleanore,tink or myself.

---

It very clearly and plainly does hence:

"To put that forth as your truth is simply faulty filtering. Now worries or surprise, just sad as you have the ability to glean a clearer understanding of what causes judgement and projection."

How could you say such a thing without judging me?

posted January 17, 2008 02:30 PM            

For some, the consensus opinion is always right and they believe running around looking for those who agree with them bolsters their position.

My experience is that the consensus opinion is almost universally wrong...about most everything that's fit for a serious discussion.

Now, if you really want to know WHO acoustic thinks are the "good people", just ask him for the membership list of the now defunct KS site. That was a real winner.

Or...you could just connect the dots and find those who agree with acoustic...about anything and especially those whom he calls to his aid whenever he's getting his head held underwater in a debate.

Now to the main theme of this thread which should be titled: Shut Up jwhop

That's not going to happen but it no longer surprises me to see those on the left attempt some device to offset the fact they have nothing whatsoever with which to defend their indefensible positions or comments.

Typical among those are attempts to shut others up by trying to get Randall to ban people.

We've had the: He's/She's/They're picking on me...ban them/him/her. Several times

We've had the: Demons are loose among us on the Linda Goodman site...and especially on the GU forum.

The absolute childishness of some is astounding...when one considers they're posing as adults.

One last thing acoustic. My comments to 26T were not about 26T but were rather all about paras.

posted January 17, 2008 02:31 PM            

quote:

---

"To put that forth as your truth is simply faulty filtering. Now worries or surprise, just sad as you have the ability to glean a clearer understanding of what causes judgement and projection."

---

quote:

---

How could you say such a thing without judging me?

---

You made it perfectly clear you judge and ASSUME by projecting it in others by your above statements quoted..

I have Faith you, as is everyone here at LL good, yet sometimes show what is called unacceptable behavior or bad as you say.
Simple yes? Seperate the message from the messenger and you will find "good" where you least expect it .

------------------
~
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

posted January 17, 2008 02:55 PM            

quote:

---

you're confusing judgement with observation.

---

That's an interesting and unique spin to put on it. So if I observe that the list of people that have taken issue with Jwhop are largely good, then I haven't judged at all? I don't think I'll give you that one.

quote:

---

You are me and I am you (Unity of Being).That Knowledge cuts the chase and provides the insight required to Know self and others.

---

If you are me, and I am you, then when I, "made it perfectly clear," that I judge, I also made it perfectly clear that you judge...as we are the same and all. Judgment is inherent in all of our personalities...

...and that's the trouble: when you go to present the idea that another person is judgmental, you are confirming that you share the trait with the person. To try to wiggle out of the simple, obvious truth of it is going to be extraordinarily difficult.

quote:

---

I have Faith you, as is everyone here at LL good, yet sometimes show what is called unacceptable behavior or bad as you say.

---

posted January 17, 2008 03:01 PM              

after a good night sleep, i feel much better.
yesterday i was in the heat of the argument but now i feel calmer and it's even more apparent who's taking the most pleasure out of this thread. juniperb and the like are delighted, so be it.
by creating this thread, i have contributed to their sense of usefulness. YEAH!!!!

after all are they not trying to persuade us that they are compassionate souls who feel for the underdog and want a fair treatment for everyone?

how good on them! they deserve a price.

before they reply and dig their own grave, i'd like to underline the fact that they are not reacting in a less DIVISIVE manner ( their mercy vs our harsh judgment) than you or me have been doing.

so i suggest they look at all their secret delusions about their fairness, and as you suggested, that they start to be truthful to themselves.

but something tells me they won't appreciate those points.

COME ON GUYS, KEEP POSTING, YEAH, WE'LL PROBABLY REACH THE 100 POSTS IN A COUPLE OF DAYS. COME ON....

obviously i keep an eye on this thread but i must inform jwhop that i forgot to read his post, oups!! shall i read it? hmmmm?