posted December 12, 2016 06:35 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceridwen:
I love the constructivity of this thread, and especially the most recent posts.

---

posted December 12, 2016 06:40 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cinnamon sky:
@Voix_de_la_Mer, I think though there is a big chance that everyone will post to nr 2

Or most people. As right now there is already a Beginner forum and there is no traffic there. In my opinion the reason for that is, that the Beginner section right now is more of a static section, "I ask a question and wait for the answer"-type. And then say thank you, bye.
It seems that people need more interaction in a non-hierarchic manner.

I don't exactly understand how nr 3 would work, if you could expand on that?

---

Yes, I think there is a high chance of that also Cinnamon, as I think people are attracted to exploration and discovery.

Just my thoughts, but Forum 3 (Advanced) could function as the place where we take ideas and concepts discovered in Forum 2 (Exploratory) and start developing them into theories by considering research done and also subjecting the theories to further research within the forum. We could have discussion about results among members, that could be used to develop further astrological areas of research, and really drill down to the details.

Forum 3. could be a great generator of articles for the Beginners forum, articles straight from LL's research - how cool!

More complex areas of astrology could also be discussed here, as well as professional issues such as ethical concerns, the science-art model of astrology, the limitations of astrology, etc.

posted December 12, 2016 06:55 PM            

Not to be all crazy controlling about it, but it would REALLY solve a lot of problems, in my opinion.

What those structures and guidelines would look like would be an interesting thing to talk about.

Disclaimers when stating opinions that cannot be supported with credible sources would be a good idea for professionals, I think.

posted December 12, 2016 06:56 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Voix_de_la_Mer:
Yeah, kinda like peer-review

---

posted December 12, 2016 07:04 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Violets:
Really, I think that anyone here who is charging money for their services should probably be held accountable to a different set of structures and guidelines, regardless of which forum they're posting in.

Not to be all crazy controlling about it, but it would REALLY solve a lot of problems, in my opinion.

What those structures and guidelines would look like would be an interesting thing to talk about.

Disclaimers when stating opinions that cannot be supported with credible sources would be a good idea for professionals, I think.

Just my thoughts, though.

---

posted December 12, 2016 07:07 PM            

That being said, I believe that astrology is also a divinatory art - I may not give a single flying about nessus and dejaneira, but if it helps anyone draw conclusions about a particular chart, why not? There was one theory from the synastry forum about the vertex, from lotis white, that I found pertinent and believable; the info was no where else on the internet, but my gut logic resonated with that. It's the reason I stopped getting angry at asteroid info, I just skip it; and to each his own, this is how a science evolves.

posted December 12, 2016 07:13 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Violets:
Really, I think that anyone here who is charging money for their services should probably be held accountable to a different set of structures and guidelines, regardless of which forum they're posting in.

Not to be all crazy controlling about it, but it would REALLY solve a lot of problems, in my opinion.

What those structures and guidelines would look like would be an interesting thing to talk about.

Disclaimers when stating opinions that cannot be supported with credible sources would be a good idea for professionals, I think.

Just my thoughts, though.

---

posted December 12, 2016 07:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by maira:
My 2 cents: from what I recall, Ami is a Gemini; I almost always skip her threads, because - although entertaining - she didn't apply herself at studying astrology, and skipped right to asteroids - which I abhor, it's the reason I stopped visiting Interpersonal Astrology - and little tidbits of information irrelevant in the bigger picture (again, a Gemini thing). I get that you are concerned about the begginners - I also started learning astrology by reading on the internet, including the old archive here; but if one studies long enough, it becomes easier to discern the actual and factual truth.

That being said, I believe that astrology is also a divinatory art - I may not give a single flying about nessus and dejaneira, but if it helps anyone draw conclusions about a particular chart, why not? There was one theory from the synastry forum about the vertex, from lotis white, that I found pertinent and believable; the info was no where else on the internet, but my gut logic resonated with that. It's the reason I stopped getting angry at asteroid info, I just skip it; and to each his own, this is how a science evolves.

My feeling are very neutral towards Ami; but she is a member of this community, and I'd like to see her improve her game and her skills, not the other way around, to create a playpen for the "slower" kids. How will she do that? I don't know; but this is what I would like to happen.

---

Thanks for sharing Maira. So, do you feel that the problem is more a lack of personal responsibility at the level of the individual astrologer, and that instead of the site creating clear standards, the astrologer should improve their methods?

You know, I agree with this. The problem is that if individuals won't change their methods, then we must look to the environment to see if through changing it, we can encourage a change in methods.

posted December 12, 2016 07:28 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by maira:
Also, I don't think this is about misrepresenting charts - she was making a point and sincerely recognised from the beginning that she didn't know if the data was accurate

---

Not true

For instance there is no disclaimer here about "It might all just be make-believe, what I am saying":
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum35/HTML/006294.html

Nor here: http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum24/HTML/236910.html

I don't mean to sound critical, maira.

posted December 12, 2016 07:41 PM            

Full Moon in Gemini opposing Saturn - check

Mercury in shadow phase - check

Mercury is going to conjunct Pluto during the retrograde - check

Whatever you decide, just make it happen after the 27th of January when Mercury is up and running again.

posted December 12, 2016 07:44 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by maira:
Also, I don't think this is about misrepresenting charts - she was making a point and sincerely recognised from the beginning that she didn't know if the data was accurate; the point is that the info on the whole was completely out of context, those were not the top ten aspects for anything, maybe they were 'some' aspects, but certainly not 'the aspects'. And Ami did try with the Beginners Forum, I remember that she responded to a lot of people there, but that forum died a slow death; I can't believe that I'm making a case for her, it's just that I'm a strong believer that a community is the sum of all its members; and that the said members should be helped to be the best version of themselves, not marginalized or ejected.

---

Creating standards that govern articles and posts claiming researched "facts" would apply across the board, so it wouldn't be marginalising one person.

posted December 12, 2016 07:48 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sunnya:
A side note regarding all the discussions and the energies around...

Full Moon in Gemini opposing Saturn - check

Mercury in shadow phase - check

Mercury is going to conjunct Pluto during the retrograde - check

Whatever you decide, just make it happen after the 27th of January when Mercury is up and running again.

to all.

---

posted December 12, 2016 07:49 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Voix_de_la_Mer:
Creating standards that govern articles and posts claiming researched "facts" would apply across the board, so it wouldn't be marginalising one person.

That's the good thing that can come out of conflict - improvements, recommendations, honing and fine-tuning

---

posted December 12, 2016 07:53 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by maira:
Yes, I agree; check out the last thread, it's full of maybes and likely-s. I honestly think that everyone here aspiring to be an astrologer wans to do a good job, if not a great one; after that, it's only a battle with one's own limitations and yes, conflict is always the catalyst for progress

---

posted December 12, 2016 07:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Voix_de_la_Mer:
That's some seriously wise words there Maira. Reminds me of Gandalf talking about Beaorn when referring to why he turns into a bear every night: "He is under no enchantment but his own".

---

posted December 12, 2016 08:08 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gemini Blues:
Gently weighing in on the specific proposal...

I can go weeks without looking at any subforums other than this one and perhaps IA. I'm not sure adding more forums would help as I don't know that they would get used.

---

Yes, this is a good point. I suppose the proposal is to categorise Astro 2.0. into 2 separate forums. One for exploring astrology and generating ideas (would probably get the most traffic) and another for advanced or deeper discussion, articles and planning/conducting/sharing research.

Which one I would choose to visit would depend on my motives.
Do I have an idea I want to share?
Do I have an aspect I don't understand?
Have I developed a theory I want to discuss or test?
Do I want deep discussion or brain-storming?

posted December 12, 2016 08:13 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
Not true

For instance there is no disclaimer here about "It might all just be make-believe, what I am saying":
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum35/HTML/006294.html

Nor here: http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum24/HTML/236910.html

I don't mean to sound critical, maira.

I just wish people would look at the threads that have been under discussion...

---

Also, there's this quote that just happened today:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ami Anne:
YES, Jackie O, too, Look at some of her U Tube clips. She has a little girl voice lol

---

This is in response to Moon in Cancer having a little girl voice. Jackie Kennedy has a Moon in Aries.

The thread in question that was just recently created:
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum24/HTML/236941.html

Why even say this?

Why not find an example of a Moon in Cancer female who also has a little girl voice?

It's just misleading, plain and simple.

posted December 12, 2016 08:15 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by maira:
Why, thank you I have spent the last five years in a cave - pluto hit my IC first and then my stellium - I have to say that I don't feel wise; just old

---

Goodness! Well, I suspect it made you wiser, albeit with a couple of grey hairs??

posted December 12, 2016 08:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
Not true

For instance there is no disclaimer here about "It might all just be make-believe, what I am saying":
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum35/HTML/006294.html

Nor here: http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum24/HTML/236910.html

I don't mean to sound critical, maira.

I just wish people would look at the threads that have been under discussion...

---

This has become a serious issue, at least to me, it must be Mercury Rx but it's actually distressing for those who spilled their guts with this. It is to me, at least. I can understand the difficulty in reading long threads but still...

So the reason or one of the main reasons this thread is called "Encouraging Accuracy and Integrity on Lindaland" is that in the above links you will find:

for the 1st
an astrological analysis based on the charts of
Prince William
Kate
Paul Newman
Joanne Woodward
Liz Taylor
Richard Burton

claiming all these people have astrological aspects they DON'T have (the list of the non-existent aspects is in the first answer to the OP).

followed by outrage due to this article being posted very soon after a similar false astro data was posted and outrage caused by the reaction of the poster

followed by an apology of the OP

followed shortly by the second article that you can see in the second link, where NONE of the mentioned personalities

Tom Petty
Anjelica Huston
Doris Day
Raquel Welch
Robert Redford
Farrah Fawcett
Adam Sandler

have the astrological aspects mentioned in the article (second link)

followed by the scandal that has been going for so many days

Although there seem to be many other issues in the backstory, as Voix pointed out, this is the source of the conflict now.

Since personally I work with famous charts in my research all the time, in fact we all do, as astrologers, I can't pretend I don't know Robert Redford is not a Leo ASC! sorry! And once me or someone else notices (and as I said it happens all the time, to me too), it just can't stay there as it is! and it just can't keep coming and coming in different forms!

So one of the main things we are looking to solve here, to my understanding, is how to make this not happen again, such a situation, and for this we need to know how we react/should react when false astrological data is being posted, how the OP should react, the others, moderators and so on, so this doesn't happen again the way it did. This is one of the main problems to solve here.

------------------
I seem to have loved you in numberless forms...

posted December 12, 2016 08:44 PM            

And as I said on this thread: http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum24/HTML/236869.html

Sasha Cohen, Bill Gates, Paul McCartney were also wrong.

Maybe the first two can be forgiven, like she was using people as mascots of an energy even though they do not have the energy. Other people seem okay with her doing that, even though I think it's distorting things needlessly, and I do not regret posting their actual placements.

The third one, she said he has the aspect, and it's nowhere close.

posted December 12, 2016 08:46 PM            

quote:

---

Why even say this?

---

Provocation, bait...

posted December 12, 2016 08:46 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gemini Blues:
Gently weighing in on the specific proposal...

I can go weeks without looking at any subforums other than this one and perhaps IA. I'm not sure adding more forums would help as I don't know that they would get used.

---

Honestly, now that you mention it, I rarely visit any forum other than this one. I actually really preferred it when we could talk about asteroids and synastry in the same Astrology 2.0 forum, but it gets clogged up with posts that way, I suppose. Unfortunately.