posted September 11, 2020 12:49 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by vansio:
it would go in Lindaland Central 2.0 👻

while we’re at this... the LL categories aren’t even alphabetical... 😬

---

posted September 11, 2020 12:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Graham:
If childhood conditioning is not regarded as an astrological discussion, I guess this thread is unlikely to involve any astrology. ... http://www.astro.com/astrology/aa_article151001_e.htm

I am ok with it being closed, Kannon . ... But,, on which forum board (if any) should it have been opened.

And, is it inappropriate for members to refer to childhood conditioning when replying to astrological threads on this or/and other forum boards?

---

I wasn't going to close it, just move it to the appropriate sub-forum.

And no, childhood conditioning is not an astrological topic and the header does not point to an astrological topic. And of course, I'm not suggesting that in astrological discussions that reference astrological topics or principles leave out mention of childhood conditioning.

So I'm moving this thread to Lindaland Central 2.0.

posted September 11, 2020 01:12 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumuzi:
i wouldn't call this "heated" though, that implies you're reading more emotion than what i feel into my words

---

posted September 11, 2020 01:46 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kannon McAfee:
I wasn't going to close it, just move it to the appropriate sub-forum.

And no, childhood conditioning is not an astrological topic and the header does not point to an astrological topic. And of course, I'm not suggesting that in astrological discussions that reference astrological topics or principles leave out mention of childhood conditioning.

So I'm moving this thread to Lindaland Central 2.0.

---

Please clarify your reasoning for dismissing childhood conditioning as a valid astrology topic ... as the belief that it is underpins my whole approach to natal chart astrology.

posted September 11, 2020 02:52 PM            

Ok, I will reflect upon that ... but not until this thread discussion has ended.

posted September 11, 2020 03:35 PM            

The issue was:
... an entirely separate misunderstanding: ... the need here is for coherent thread Titles and coherent thread Prompts ... that reflects an original posters expectation of contribution upfront so that users can contribute, with confidence, relevant answers in the discussion’s topic on Post 1 ...

... Astrology 2.0, seems to be a subforum exclusively for discussing the science of astrology, in its form foremost, supplementary thoughts (opinions) are offered in reference to support the formulaic examples of astrology in effect, Bodies of Light ... planets, not parents ...

... yet what happened in this same thread, when placed under the realm of Astrology 2.0 as described above, was then a community discussion about the theme of childhood conditioning, under the guise of astrology, only by virtue of the sites overall theme of astrology or yourself as an astrologer... no actual astrological info, math, planets, aspects discussed, in a subforum that supposes itself for this very thing. pooling opinions about parenting, talking community-wide. Astrology, the actual sociolect, language of it, were cast aside ...

... once again, it only came down to being in the wrong room (not out of misbehavior, but like institutionally) ... which is normal for forums to regulate for continuity’s sake ..

does that make sense? Think of the mistake as having slid a book back in the wrong section at a bookstore ... Parenting-Styles wouldn’t be in the Occult section

posted September 11, 2020 03:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by vansio:
... the misunderstanding isn’t on the relationship between those two themes ..

... the misunderstand is rather, an entirely separate category of issue: ... the need for coherent thread Titles and coherent thread Prompts ... that reflects the OP expectation of contribution upfront so that users can contribute with confidence of relevance in the discussion’s topic ... people walked into Toys-R-Us, but ended up at IKEA ...

... Astrology 2.0, seems is a subforum exclusively for discussing the science of astrology, in its form foremost, supplementary thoughts (opinions) are use for reference in support of formulaic examples of astrology in effect, Bodies of Light ...

... yet what happened in this same thread, when placed under the realm of Astrology 2.0 as described above, was a community discussion about the theme of childhood conditioning, under the guise of astrology, only by virtue of the sites overall theme of astrology, yet not eluding to predetermined info expected, actual astrological info, math like say, info that’s maybe pre-existing, conditional, or at least that’s how enquiry became ... OP pooling opinions about parenting, talking to community, as if astrology, the [b]sociolect, were cast aside ...

... once again, it only came down to being in the wrong room (not out of misbehavior, but like institutionally) ... which is normal for forums to regulate ..

does that makes sense? Think of the mistake as having put slid a book back in the wrong section at a bookstore ... Parenting-Styles wouldn’t be in the Occult section

have I cleared this up for you? hopefully it’s objective enough [/B]

---

posted September 11, 2020 04:09 PM            

Linda Goodman, the author, was not only an astrologer. So while there is a highly popular “general astrology” section, the creator of the site had taken the effort to compartmentalize various “themes” relevant to her legacy—these sections are subforums— made so that users can elaborate the topics disclosed within each folder

posted September 11, 2020 04:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by vansio:
His comment I’ll admit sounded facetious, but his task as moderator is to maintain the constitution of the board. Sometimes he will go ahead and move the thread without asking the Original Poster, but I think in your case, with your depth of scientific astrology knowledge, he was anticipating there be a point to the Topic being posted there ... to not cut you short—hence his question beforehand

Linda Goodman, the author, was not only an astrologer. So while there is a highly popular “general astrology” section, the creator of the site had taken the effort to compartmentalize various “themes” relevant to her legacy, made into various subforums so that users can elaborate the topics

---

posted September 11, 2020 04:46 PM            

As I mentioned above, there is a “view all currently active topic” page, so no one is bound to astrology-centric discussions only on the Astrology 2.0 sub-forum.

«Click Here To View Today's Active Topics (all public forums)».

for example, the subforum «Know Two Are Alike», where you created a thread introducing yourself, is
moderated by Moonfish, virgolotus, Lexxigramer. Had you posted this particular topic even there, it would have still been deemed as a community discussion: meant for Lindaland Central 2.0.

A subforum (the section of the site) where “A general discussion gathering-place, where you can talk about anything you like that's not listed in another Forum description;” .... though, in Central, there is no demand for any astrologers to talk about astrological technique, despite the fact that we are all astrologers here.

So, casual discussion about how the relationship between two things, social conditioning, isn’t astrology itself. If you beg to differ, would be worthwhile to start a topic, this chicken vs egg astrology discussion, perhaps in the section called “Divine Diversities”

For example, your initial topic on social conditioning could have also been posted in ...

posted September 11, 2020 05:33 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by vansio:
I’m taking the effort to explain because of your age in mind. I figure the reason why this is confusing you—you may have not properly explored the site to comprehend the function for moderators moving topics to appropriate sections. Be well.

---

posted September 11, 2020 05:49 PM            

But now that I think of think of this original topic, which house and it’s ruler would you say plays a part in the development of the false self informing the Ascendant ruler? 2nd House of esteem? in vibration astrology, which aspect? How might the house system be related to child’s stages of development... or perhaps do Parents cause Chiron’s wounds, is this even avoidable?

^^ these would be a reasonable questions for Astrology 2.0

posted September 11, 2020 06:00 PM            

childhood development isn't an astrological topic by default, people can discuss it without even bringing astrology up and do

you didn't bring astrology up in your initial post, you didn't prompt astrological discussion you prompted discussion on your question that was devoid of astrology

it's exactly what i explained to you when i made that comment about a discussion on morality how it can relate to astrology if you put it there, but doesn't have to

posted September 11, 2020 09:51 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Graham:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by vansio:
[b]I’m taking the effort to explain because of your age in mind. I figure the reason why this is confusing you—you may have not properly explored the site to comprehend the function for moderators moving topics to appropriate sections. Be well.

---

We can help with that, if we add astrology. In my post about what my mother said, I could have added that she had mars conjunct Pluto in Leo, trine her Sagittarius sun. She only said it, because I was suicidal over being bullied, basically, and I hadn’t said a word. I’d handled it until I couldn’t take it anymore, and I asked if I could drop out of school. She supported me when I needed her to. We had mercury trine mercury, and she was a great mother. She wouldn’t actually encourage fighting, she was just angry and protective.

posted September 11, 2020 09:58 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumuzi:
@Graham:

yeah but that's you making a lot of assumptions and creating fictitious people now, and that's not really what you asked in the first place

being conditioned one way doesn't mean that our views lie within that anyway like i was raised to think i always had to put other people first and that having feelings for more than 15 minutes if they were negative wasnt ok etc

i can still experience discomfort on a personal level, but i know logically that it's ******* stupid to teach anyone some **** like that or push it on a child

so yeah i was conditioned in x way but at the same time because i'm capable of thinking i can say "well my upbringing was stupid" and discard the useless **** when it comes to others even if there's a level of personal struggle

so i'm just not really seeing the logic behind speaking about it like it's either/or when that's just sortof senseless

why are your fake people incapable of acknowledging their conditioning and working on themselves? generally speaking most people hit a point where they grow up reflect and learn and even if they personally can't overcome that doesn't come with inflicting those things on others

your entire scenario of making it either or is entirely dependent on very one dimensional imaginary people (and you've sortof moved goalposts even creating them because the initial question wasn't like that at all)

people grow and learn and meet other people and figure **** out over time regardless of conditioning, prime example of this is people who move away from the religion they've grown up with or their culture

i'm not really understanding why you act as if this is a strange thing when it's really pretty common for people to recognize things even if they themselves can't fully release all hangups

freeing yourself from that **** isn't the same as recognizing that life isn't black and white

arguably being nice when it's inauthentic and fake is also a flaw and putting on a facade is wrong in and of itself so in its own way you're just talking about suppressing one perceived flaw for another

being kind being civil being helpful etc all that **** is "nice" right, and i'm not really getting how many scenarios a person could encounter where that isn't sort of just the default anyway rather than something put on

i think the conversation would've been better narrow than morphing into that **** personally because i don't think it really makes much sense to ask "how do people grow over time?" that **** just happens naturally

@everyone who talks about being nice as if it's equivalent to being fake:

i'm not understanding this how hard is it to just not be a dick all the time or some **** ? just damn what's wrong with you people 🤣

people always tell me i'm nice and laid back and **** , especially in person, it's not fake or anything i don't have a filter so i just act however i'm gonna without thinking

i find that people who perceive kindness as something fake generally have a lot of ******* issues and are overly suspicious of everyone for no real ******* reason

also to appease kannon maybe my strong libra/venus **** is why i'm just not getting why this **** is so off balance and why civility and **** isn't just default

i'd have to go out of my way to cause conflict in like 90% of situations

---

posted September 11, 2020 10:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Graham:

[QUOTE][b]
Are you saying that ... by monitoring the comments we make to others (whether spoken or written), we can become aware/conscious of what we are projecting?

Thus ... if, during an emotional/heated exchange with another. I find myself accusing him/her of possessing a 'negative" behavioural trait - I should reflect upon the likelihood of that behaviour being a trait of my own which I have not yet recognised (and embraced) in myself?

---

With the one person, I think she needed someone to be patient with her. I may be asking for trouble, because I chose not to let her burn that bridge on my side, but she finally let it go. She can be overly -sensitive and angry, and I can be now, too. I didn’t understand what was going on at first, and when I fell in, I just decided to give her the chance to let it go. I vented to a few friends, because I was one of the few people who hadn’t blocked her, but she didn’t get the reaction she was looking for. I vented to friends who didn’t know her at all.

quote:

---

She let it go on [b]that occasion, teasel (because it was not producing the result she wanted). ... BUT, did she become consciously aware of having projected (onto you) a behavioural trait of her own? ... And, might you have been the physical embodiment of a planetary transit which was attempting to make her consciously aware of that trait in herself? [/B]

---

I was saying that, as I was talking or writing, I became aware that I could have the same issue. It isn’t always a negative trait, but it can be.

That woman backed off. I think if she hadn’t become aware of it, she would still be trying to poke at me. She I friended me on Facebook at some point, along with a lot of other people, saying it wasn’t me, it was who I was friends with. I’ve heard that before, and that person was the problem. Here, it was kind of the same, but very different reasons. It’s a lot to go into, and not relevant here. She added everyone on Instagram, instead, and she’s been in recovery since the beginning of the year. Whenever I’ve tried to talk about anything, it either ends in what I’m saying being ignored, in a fight, or both. They might come to a realization one day, or you might. Their life and responses to it, aren’t your responsibility.

posted September 11, 2020 11:28 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by teasel:
Your comment about everyone thinking nice = fake, is something that’s surprised me, too, over the years. A decade ago, someone here said that about me, behind my back (said it elsewhere), not knowing that I would see it. I responded to her, and it amused me, because she had never said that to me directly. It isn’t on me to deal with someone’s assumptions or projections, I learned that as a kid.

---

funny you mention that, that's one i still have to get the hang of my ex was constantly projecting **** on me that wasnt there and i got very used to having to explain myself in really excruciating detail and now it's like a default mode that's really just not ******* worthwhile

but yeah i was really shocked by people seeing "nice" as this phony thing like people aren't just that way, it legit wouldn't occur to me to be so distrustful like that

i mean i know well that people aren't all ******* great and **** , but no matter how many times i encounter ****** people suspicion isn't my default

i'm like a kid in that sense i think, and sometimes it's a double edged sword because i can be rather naive on some level, but i think it's probably better to get burned believing in the goodness of others than it is to close yourself off fearing the worst and never having enough vulnerability to fully experience another human

like i'm definitely at peace with that side of me and not fearful of getting stung in the process of it

i'm also just not the sort of person who's nice in a phony way, like i dont use that to try to get over on people because i'm just not the ulterior motives sort

i don't think that far ahead to have those 🤣

because of that though i have a tendency to not really think about others in that manner unless i get that sort of feeling from them, but then it's on an individual level not just something generalized

i don't like judging other people by the actions of individuals who are ****** up you know? completely unfair

posted September 12, 2020 01:59 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Graham:
I agree that attempting to help can often be fruitless, for reasons including those you refer to above.

In my opinion though, one should always attempt to help those whom he/she perceives to need help ... especially if one can see that he/she may be a physical embodiment of a progression or transit to the other person's natal chart.

Often - if the time is right - even a half-ass interpretation can "awaken" the other person. ... And, if the time is not right, "putting/leaving the interpretation/observation/comment on-the-table" can result in the other person getting the message as/when the time is right for him/her.[/B]

---

I agree if we're able to help someone, we should, but I still maintain that this is provided we're confident about it. I've been to astrologers who attempted to doom my life because I don't have a traditionally nice birth chart so for years I believe this area of my life was doomed. It was not until I saw another astrologer recently who helped me to really understand myself and how to handle the challenges that often recur in my life.

Another scenario is like what you cited above...leaving an observation/advice on the table and up to the recipient to pick it up (or not). I learned in vedic a way to assess a person's receptiveness according to their Moon. Some people tend to take feedback negatively no matter how nicely you package it and especially so if they're going through a challenging transit.

posted September 12, 2020 02:01 AM            

quote:

---

Your prompt for discussion was related to people’s opinions on how one is raised to behave—all astrological implications removed. ... you never brought astrology up in your topic man ... it isn't on other people to make astrology part of a topic you started, it's on you to put it there ... In my post about what my mother said, I could have added that she had mars conjunct Pluto in Leo, trine her Sagittarius sun.

---

So ... if my topic had been "Saturn, Parents and Childhood Conditioning", posting it on the astrology 2.0 board would have been ok?

Or/and posting it there would have been ok if my opening post had been "Bearing in mind the role of Saturn in childhood conditioning - should parents/guardians raise children to be 'nice' or to be their "warts 'n all self'?"

If so ... I get that now ... but believe Kannon's decision to move the thread was not motivated solely by my failure to understand/observe the forum rules. ... After all, he replied to the thread himself - despite me having not complied with the rules when posting it.