posted May 30, 2007 12:20 AM         

When I read it initially within the context of 'karmic justice', It seemed a valid question albeit the graphic portrayal.

I personally do not like it when people use "**** " in their work conversation. I mean with friends that lingo is ok. But not at work. I like to keep it professional.

What do you fair ladies say Fayte, Lialei and Mirandee?

posted May 30, 2007 03:31 AM         

You know... we cannot foresee divine strings in motion.
What may appear "negative" with a naked eye may be in a subtle mysterious process of metamorphosing into an unimagineable Beauty. If it's natural process is detoured or halted, it may never come to the graceful fruition it is in flow with to become.
Potentials are our freedom.

I wonder sometimes about people who die,
surrounded by loved ones who have become almost like strangers, for becomming so closed off to them, afraid to face the experience with them, in all its fearfully unknown realness. So isolated they must feel.

Everything has its meaningful place. The ones who talk of heaven and angels and blissful sojournies, are appreciated for the solace of their hope. But equally as meaningful and needed is that brave person who would hold their loved one's hand and truly listen and try so earnestly to understand.

"I'm dying. I'm afraid."

"It's ok....everyone is afraid, it's natural to be frightened. I'm listening, I'm here with you, I care. I won't tell you not to say it. I won't turn away. Please keep talking."

Sometimes promotion of exclusive "positivity" only serves to alienate people who are most in need of empathy and understanding.

I'd like to better address your post in the morning when I'm more rested, Dean.

posted May 30, 2007 03:31 AM         

Most times people just speak as they feel and there are times when swearing puts emphasis on those feelings. Some swear words I just plain don't like to hear though.

Frankly I feel that HSC is a reasonable person and also a moderator so if asked to edit the graphic wording out of his posts I am sure he would have done so. I feel that you have done HSC an injustice here by not allowing him the opportunity to apologize and edit his post. Now, thanks to you, it makes him look bad.

If this is about the baby example that HSC and MM used then I can understand how some folks might be offended by that. I read it and at the time I did feel that we know what happens when a baby or child is sexually abused. It does not have to be explained to us in graphic terms. Honestly, when it comes to that and it is being reported on the news or on some T.V. crime show, I do turn the channel because I get so upset that I cannot sleep at night. I think about it all day long. I can't shake the image from my mind. And I just feel so sad and sorry for the child. It also conjurs up feelings of anger. However I am not sure that my feeling that way is a bad thing. Painful as it may be for me, if it makes you more motivated to press the government for stricker laws and punishment for these predators and do more to protect children then those feelings might be a positive thing. So one could look at it as negative thing, or if it motivates you to do more to help children, then it could be a very positive thing. Depends on how each of us perceive it.

In other words, the graphic way that HSC put his post could be looked at as a negative by some but seen as a positive by others. It's all in our perceptions. What I don't like is anyone else telling me that I should perceive things as they do.

Plainly what is negative to some people is positive to others. I think that people who go around saying " only think of the positives," don't be negative", or " that's a negative thing" are the ones who are negative. They must be negative because they don't see BOTH the negative and positive in things. They only see negative. Or they only see positive. There is no balance there.

I remember a few months back, Sesame, when you came on Lialei's dream thread where she told about the flying dream and in the dream as she was happily flying there appeared a large raven above her that seemed to overshadow her. From that point on she described how she rose above that and the dream was very positive. Yet you came on the thread and interpreted the dream to be negative because you only concentrated on the raven and paid no mind to the positive outcome of the dream.

You closed that thread for the same reason, Sesame. You dwelled on the negative and ignored all the positives that far outweighed that.

This tells me that there is no balance with you regarding negatives and positives. If there were you would have seen both. And you would have seen that the positives outweighed the negatives. Instead you only dwelled on the negative and closed the thread. Thereby eliminating all the positives along with it.

posted May 30, 2007 04:26 AM         

By all means, lets just forget about that little girl and the man/boy who did it. Let's not investigate his state of mind and what caused it or the environment that contributed to the entire situation. Then it can just keep happening and as long as it isn't happening to the kids in nice suburban neighborhoods and we can hide it from those nice suburban kids, then everyone in suburbia can sleep at night (no offense about the "sleeping" Mirandee) and everything will just get better and MORE POSITIVE!!! YAY!

I

AM

ASTOUNDED.

Let's just close our minds to everything of that nature and take our SUV's to the New Age store to buy some new GEMS and FLOWER ESSENCES and pretty music on compact disc.

Are my books by Linda Goodman different than other people's books by Linda Goodman? Love Signs for instance, brings up a new atrocity of the world in practically every section that she suggests the couple can investigate further and attempt to take action toward communicating it to others and changing the situation for the better.

And Lotus mentioning the rules of LL as if they apply to this situation when I just read a thread yesterday where she described her masterbation routine is a JOKE.

Blue Roamer, thank you for saying this:

"You seem to believe that if we sweep things under the carpet they go away, but this is not true. Shall we ignore all the misdeeds that go on in this world? I have the greatest respect for those that delve into these underworlds in an attempt to expose and destroy them. People who work with pedophiles, homeless, poor, murderers, the mentally ill, the unlovable, these are the true saints of the world."

Mannu, he said the baby STORY. He was talking about me too.

posted May 30, 2007 04:58 AM         

** that doesn't mean I'm against anyone else. **

You just keep doing whatever you feel you need to. I think you are doing a great job as Moderator. You are here, you care, and it shows. Right or wrong (whatever those are), Linda would love you for your commitment.

posted May 30, 2007 08:10 AM         

MM, I too am astounded.
On top of all this there is alot of bias and favoritism going on. One or more person(s) can attack others and lie and harass them without provocation, and it has been shown that if the liar and harasser is a favorite, they will get the sympathy and the one(s) being attacked, might get at best, a private e-mail saying something along these lines:...[sorry cannot help you, its a free speech board. But I understand how you feel, and yes you are right, you did nothing wrong and or, did not deserve this, I sincerely hope you understand why I can't get involved.]
HUH? Well I do not understand, nor do the others who have been mistreated and harassed by a certain few. While the guilty party(ies) get threads closed and edited to make them look better, when they boo hoo and lie and kiss up enough. Then they get public sympathy and help attacking the party(ies) they wronged because of the editing deleting, which favors the guilty party(ies)by throwing everything out of context of what really went down. Ginny, Silverstone, Lotus, Mirandee, Lia, Myself and many others have found themselves not given the same understanding when attacked by these "favorite" ones without provocation. Then well meaning folks come in to defend the liar or harasser, the one(s) who begain the trouble, because they no longer have the real story. They assume what is left, is what really went down, unaware that it has been cleverly edited or deleted to make the person they are defending look innocent when they are not innocent and actually started the whole mess by attacking and repeatedly lying.
Made worse when any moderator then plays favorites and goes out of their way to defend the guilty party(ies) and or even worse, gets involved in the attacks on the one(s) who were wronged siding blindly with the guilty one(s). There is definitely a double standard afoot here.

posted May 30, 2007 11:17 AM         

I agree. As I said, painful as some things may be for us to deal with, sweeping them under the rug does not solve anything. It only allows it to continue.

It would have been nice and more considerate of you and HSC to give you both a chance to reword your posts.

Fayte, what you said is very true. I know this for a fact. As much as I hate to bring this up again because I feel that DFD and I have gotten past it, talked about it and moved on, but this past Dec. when that across the boards character smear on myself and Lialei was taking place on a daily basis here at UC for over two weeks, Sesame/Dean did nothing. He didn't come on the thread and say a thing about it and he certainly didn't close that thread.

So I have to assume that Sesame/Dean judged the character assassination of two members of LL at the hands of DFD and his friend, SueG a positive thing. While just a couple of months later when she screamed THIS IS VICTIMIZATION!!! just because Silverstone questioned her about the effectiveness of tarot readings through a computer Sesame/Dean came on and not only did he edit out Silverstone's words he closed that thread.

So I would have to agree with what you said, Fayte having been on the receiving end of Sesame/Dean's biases for those he considers friends.

Closing BR's thread has less to do with what he states about wanting to keep things "positive" here at UC than it has to do with something else. Mainly because he has proven to me that if a friend is involved he lets the "negativity" go and does nothing.

Sorry, to bring this up again, but it's the truth and for the reasons I gave here about what Sesame/Dean allows at other times and jumps in and closes threads that are much less worse than a character smear campaign or someone just questioning a friend of his, I am lead to think there are other reasons that he closed BR's thread than what he stated.

I am not out to start an argument. I am tired of arguing with folks, but what I said is the truth and I have had experience with how Sesame/Dean applies his justice. When all that was taking place last Dec. both Lialei and myself were waiting for JUST ONE mod on one of those boards to say "Stop it! This is not right" and close the thread. And not one of them did!!!! Including, Sesame/Dean for all his touting about what is negative and what is positive.

You know for a fact too when DFD put in a thread here at UC for the specific purpose of attacking you. That went on for a long time too and SueG was involved in that attack on you as well. Again, Sesame/Dean said and did nothing. He didn't close that thread either. He allowed it to continue on because a friend, the same friend, was involved in both those negative attacks.

posted May 30, 2007 11:22 AM         

We now have mods coming in here and supporting Dean just because he is one of them against the rest of us.

We are going to now take an Us and Them stance while we go around the boards talking about the oneness of all humanity. LOL Noted though that you clarified that you weren't against anyone else, Ra. However addressing the example above of what went down this past Dec. if you agree that what Sesame did here is right then my question is, why didn't you say or do anything last Dec. when that smear campaign also was taking place on a daily basis on the board where you moderate? Do you also feel that character assassination of other members is okay while less things aren't?

Excuse me but the hypocrisy makes me want to hurl.

posted May 30, 2007 12:16 PM         

Frankly, I am really sick of being insulted, and lied about!

posted May 30, 2007 12:19 PM         

Dean says that such things deserve our discussion and attention. he simply says that this is not the place to do so, esp in such graphic detail. this is like a place of refuge, this forum esp, where people come to find respite. even global unity, in this same website, seems a more tolerant venue for discussing disturbing content. if issues such as these are weighing heavy on your soul, i'm sure that saying so in this forum is fine...and then someone, Dean maybe, can indicate a more helpful and appropriate place for discussion and resolution.

we all want to confront and solve the very sad and distressful things that plague this world. and the way that many people do is to spend time figuring things out, and then spend other time finding ways to bring peace and balance into their own souls. i think Dean is saying that this is the purpose of this forum. a place that people can come to have their souls restored. so that they can then, in the rest of the day, carry on the task of bringing balance and harmony to this world, in whatever way they best can.

if we always walk around devastated and distraught from the very real pain we feel at the disturbing issues in this world, then how effective can we be in resolving them?

we're not, we become victims too. i know i did not expect to see such things here, in this forum. this is where i weigh anchor to restore balance to all the negativity that assaults me from every corner in the rest of the day. that's the function of this forum, that i think Dean is trying to convey.

perhaps he doesn't moderate to the standards of everyone here, but i do believe he tries. it's perhaps like the thread you posted in yellow wax about only the most beautiful poetry. yes you confront and deal with head on every day the stark realities of this world. but there has to be some point in the day that a refuge into soul soothing things restores and replenishes you. in such a pursuit, such as beautiful poetry, graphic and disturbing issues infiltrating the refuge defeat the purpose of restoring your soul. we seek to restore our souls so that we can go on later to confront the sad and distressing issues that deserve and need our strength and compassion.

posted May 30, 2007 12:51 PM         

What? You said how often you did it, what you thought about when you did it, and that you liked to do all natural without toys and more information that was more than anyone needed to know. If you ran back and changed it, there's nothing I can do about it and I'm SURE not going to read it again. Talk about stuff that keeps you awake at night...

posted May 30, 2007 12:59 PM         

I do not edit my posts!

Randall, could you please confirm this!

posted May 30, 2007 01:15 PM         

I can sometimes get passionate in my writing when my feelings are aroused. I can see how my ***'s
might have been a bit too strong for the casual reader.

If that and the graphic descriptions were the only reason, then I'd probably be feeling reassured and understanding, leave it to be more cautious, rethinking my wording here and carry on.

It's reason # 2 --
"And 2, because negativity begets more negativity. I want Positivity."
that leaves me unsettled.

Does this mean at any given time you might close a thread because you don't see it as positive? In the meantime, how are we to know what, where, when? For, we all have different perceptions of this--will our differences be respected?
Does this mean that in the end, your perception and desires are the deciding authority of our expression?
This conveys a hierarchal censored environment, where you are a spiritual leader/authority. That seems to go far above and beyond your privelidge and responsibility as a moderator,
especially where the administrator, Randall, has time and again upheld LL a freedom of speech site, as long as no one is harmed or there is crude or pornographic language.

In fairness, I have seldom seen you do this in the past...but your statement leaves things open to worry if this might indicate a newer suppressive trend around here. Our freedom might be in question and I'm hoping this is a misunderstanding and that's not the case.

You say closing the thread made you feel happy. But, did you also consider how it might make others feel?
Being a thread where the subject matter was directly about the sorrow of injustice in the world, and the more sensitive and delicate state of struggles with faith due to that, your actions could have been dangerous to anyone vulnerable in the moment working through that in themselves. Because it invalidated its significance...which is the very reason for the initial query. The timing of your actions might be more significant than you realize.
Most probably it wasn't your intention,
just that you didn't take that into consideration.

alanabelle, I've read your posts, so I have a hard time imagining anything you would say could be pointless. Hope you reconsider sharing.

posted May 30, 2007 01:50 PM         

I am not sure I want to try to discuss things just expressing them according to how I feel about it because any time I post here on the threads I know that someone will take it wrong. It's just the way we people are. I often misunderstand the posts of others myself. So we all do it.

I'm sorry but I just can't express myself if I have to worry about how I word every little thing and if I know that someone who lives in a bubble world of only happy, happy, joy, joy ( which is really phoney because happiness cannot be sustained for very long in this word, it's fleeting like everything else ) is going to be offended by reality and censor my posts.

posted May 30, 2007 02:44 PM         

I don't read every string. In fact, I read very few outside Astral Realms. I don't know exactly what is going on here, I don't know what happened last December. Moderators can certainly be wrong and biased. I think most of us can. Dean could be wrong, I don't know. But he has a set of standards that I respect, and he does what he can to balance things out, and I trust him. He is not a dictator, he is just a guy who is trying to bring a bit of civility and level-headedness to this, very tiny, part of his Universe.

There is so much room out there in the world for negativity, and an unending supply of fuel for it ... I don't think it is too much to ask for a brief reprieve in this tiny spot of the Multiverse. It's not about suppressing negative energies, it's about meeting them with Love, and diverting them around us, or absorbing and transmuting them within ourselves. I think Dean just does not want to feed it, not here, not in this tiny spot in the vastness.

Is that too much? Is that dictatorial? I hope not, or I am guilty of the same. Negativity will always rear it's head in UC, as it should and as it needs to, for Positivity cannot exist without it, and I'm sure Dean will agree that some portion of it is just plain necessary and even healthy. But when enough is enough, Dean is Moderator, and he has the right to say "when", until the time comes that Randall decides to pull his plug. Could it be done differently? Perhaps. Do we need to fight about it and call each other names and hurl subtle and not so subtle insults? Probably not.

I think we can get past this, can't we?

Good luck Dean!

I hope there are no hard feelings with anyone.

posted May 30, 2007 02:48 PM         

"Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil."

Does anyone know what that really means? It is not about ignoring evil.