Earl Grey

Re: Modi: NOPE.

I didn't say Hinduism is evil--I am implying the BJP and Modi are presenting a perverse version of it right now for political means. And some are more informed than others in certain respects. Nor was I trying to as per me conceding earlier!

So I realize my short answers were already more or less adequate, but I think I'll say a few more things starting with the above: that quote is not complaining about the forum, it was a "too bad for you" response to the user who got suspended, who, by the way, was the same one who was defending Ausar. He wanted a democratic vote and felt people would rally to his cause, and didn't realize it's not the way things are here, it's more like Cheers where Ted Danson could theoretically throw Norm out if he's had too much to drink (but they're buddies, so he won't!). In other words, I was telling him to deal with it because he was causing issues for our Flying Phoenix and Doo Wai matters and some posts that have disappeared included him inciting threats of violence. Anyway: moving along, the visa system is already gone, I just haven't edited it or looked at my PPJ the past week. I made my point and the threads are open for all...but if someone starts posting like Everything did on Taomeow's Sumeria thread, then I'll see about employing mafia hitmen to hang them by their toes and torture them by forcing them to listen to Gilbert Gottfried, Fran Drescher, and Bobcat Goldthwait sing covers of Bette Midler's "Wind Beneath My Wings" and "Some Day My Prince Will Come"...from the tinny quality of a mobile phone's speakers instead of a surround sound stereo. Political correctness, overreporting, the whole "Teacher, teacher! Someone's being a meanie to me!" and "ahem! Young man, I don't like your tone...Why, when I was a lad, I had far more respect for my headmaster, blah blah...." kind of thing going on now, I hope will become a thing of the past. Lastly, freeform summarized his criteria that are also my reasons for saying what I say to help out, but as I just said to someone in a PM, at this point, I'm too exhausted to say much more in the future discussions, unless someone comes knocking or if someone looks like they're about to drink Clorox to cure Covid and are sure it will work because they chanted "Om" into the bottle before they attempt to chug it.

The Kumb Mela issue last year (you know what I'm talking about) was what really irked me...along with the revival was in my eyes staring to look very similar to the Islam that was considered "orthodox" that came more from Arab nationalism in response to colonialism....and also, the list of issues with how non-Hindus or lower castes...don't get me started... I make no assumptions and will also make no claims to have all the answers.

I am quite sure you would get your fill of donuts. Anyway, I am already cynical about “Hindu” because of the BJP and Modi and how they’ve ruined it in modern times, but that’s a whole different discussion... As for reliable source—nope. Don’t have one offhand. I have what I’ve been given and that won’t cut it for sake of citing sources for a discussion. so I concede on this part.

Let’s be clear I don’t hate “New Age” per se, what I disdain is people using New Age to display a shallow understanding of traditional wisdom and touting it as superior to it all is my issue, especially self-initiation and hubris. After all, I do list Reiki, Biogenesis, and Pranic Healing as practices I do and have done before as can be seen in my profile....

Sure—and “Hindus” have a lot of variety rather than being one homogeneous group given that the “Hindus” and Vedic people I know have completely different views and practices from one another. It’s like saying that there’s only Catholic and Protestant or there’s only Sunni and Shia.

You can certainly make conjecture and try to draw comparisons (and yes, you did intend to make a jab that whiffed earlier, which others saw too...), but I can ask for quotes from people with Vedic and Taoist prestige on their views of my interests in the Akashic. Anyway, to answer your question: it depends on what they want. It isn’t going to heal them. It isn’t going to predict the future. It’s equivalent to one part life coaching, one part counseling, one part devil’s advocate, and is neither a fortune teller nor clairvoyant. But I make no assumptions about what will come because I just play a role as an interpreter, am not a channel or anything else. Will it help? Depends on their questions. Will it make sense immediately? Who knows? Sometimes it hits immediately, other times it sinks in a week or so later. By the way, New Age is based off of New Philosophy from the 1960s and a bastardized version of Blavatsky’s work: https://www.britannica.com/topic/New-Age-movement Might want to look into that rather than presume I hate anything new. I hate hacking culture even more when it comes to cultivation.

“If”, you predict with certainty. But so far, the opposite happens on those other sites I am on, actually! 🤣 ...probably because it has roots in Indian Vedantic teachings and is something found in the works of Rudolf Steiner and Madame Blavatsky, who came LONG before New Age even if they have influenced a lot of New Age ideas...not to mention that I make no false equivalence with New Age and traditional wisdom...

I come from a totally different system and I can’t make any assumptions. I know how we train to fajin in two different lineages and they are completely different. Your video doesn’t tell me anything. You claim it will win your argument, but like someone who flashes a meme and thinks that an argument is over, there is still the importance of making sure it is a relevant point. Otherwise, all you’re doing is saying “1963” and that means nothing to me, then you say “November 22” and I assume the Kennedy assassination, then you say, “NO! Not it! It’s obvious!” You still haven’t given any context and if you think we’re all going to magically understand it, either your practice is unique and something that someone like me is unfamiliar with, or you don’t know or don’t want to say anything, which leaves us only to conclude it’s nothing special without the crucial information necessary to understand.

I don’t know what you’re talking about anymore or whom you’re addressing, but I certainly still haven’t had my question answered about your videos.

I haven't even given my long, adequate response yet. This response of yours sounds like frustration, and let's be clear that my concern isn't an issue with previous mods--it was how you read the situation presented and didn't look at context clearly until virtue helped out here, as well as pushing it as though the problem is merely my personal narrative rather than something worth considering--which is the issue of nobody is looking at context. And you were dismissing my explanation it appears in favor of Rene's, but the point from earlier was that I am only asking you hear us out rather than writing it off as me being a lunatic obsessed with his own victim narrative (hyperbole used here to illustrate the point, not quoting you). So how you're reading things and how I'm trying to communicate my issues somehow isn't running congruent. This sigh of frustration you appear to be giving doesn't show interest in dialogue evolving as this gets hammered out and aired out simultaneously.

For clarity's sake of what Rene was referring to in her "Not my place." thread, it is this thread with the last comment from dawei as a mod at the time: EDIT: I would like to also add Rene's "obvious" post does not have any actual references, but only vague accusations, and is another instance of the board's dysfunctional communication culture and indirect referencing. Memory can fail and then it opens for witch hunts, and in this case, because there was no context, the offense here is now taken out of context and Ilumairen is using the cliche of "narrative" to shit on the explanations. Everyone uses the term "narrative" but it seems like they don't know what it actually means or how to use it anymore from overusing it.

So what are we supposed to see or be looking for here?

Strong words there... but your videos are private and no one can see them. Also, if a video ends arguments, then the Mo Pai threads wouldn’t go as long as they did. The forum actually is happy to have you...just work on some humility and openness, k?

My short initial response before I get busy again so you know to prepare yourself for the more relevant points in your post in the longer post I’ll make later (not necessarily today): I see you’re focused on the Rene thread rather than the actual issue of moderation here, so I’ll respond to this first. You say Rene makes valid points but you do not see the history I refer to with Ausar, and @virtue can chime in and let you know exactly what happened with the turmoil in the Flying Phoenix thread—context once again, IGNORED. And reading that thread, because you seem to think “knock yourself out, lady” is misogynistic still, nobody I know of all the women I continue to ask of all ages and nationalities to their befuddlement can see what’s misogynistic or asking for violence there. It is no different from me saying, “knock yourself out, man.” Furthermore, clipping toenails is not gendered either, even “pretty little cuticles” seeing most idiots who do that in public like in airports or bus stops I’ve seen doing it were some of Los Angeles’ most hipsterish guys. This so far is reinforcing my idea that your discernment as a moderator ignores what I said about the Flying Phoenix context and presuming misogyny. How then, can what you read be something you’re certain of like reading an insult (from sarcasm of all things) towards thelerner in my last suspension? Lastly, my apologies in my last post are NOT related to the PM you are referring to at all. My longer response to more relevant points will follow when able.

Not yet. When an official one is opened dedicated to that and the ground rules are set, then it counts. An anonymous one and a public one would both help--the anonymous one can be used so mods can choose a point and then bring it to the public thread to discuss.

Apologies for the late reply, my brief time here in the past week has really been diminished to passing comments that I have posted and responding to Steve in the private message he has sent, which I will send a follow-up to his response later. Yes, the issue here with Spotless is a lingering one because it was what I had mentioned to Steve (who is free to share my own PM to him just as he had said in our conversation that I can share it as well if need be) that I was made to be a caricature, and Spotless, who not only was extremely passive-aggressive with me, but he also never denied that he was talking about me when I called him out in the moderation thread, and worse, not once did anyone ever talk with me as a fellow person, instead making me to be caricature by associating me with a "frat club of the childish lower sewer mind". This stigma has remained persistent since then. This harkens me back to my high school freshman year when I was the new American kid in the international school. Everyone assumed I was all sorts of things from sounding like a cowboy (because they all assumed Americans were Texans) to being a serial killer because America has lots of serial killers like Charles Manson. These were stereotypes the international community's kids had of Americans, who were in the minority in our school. Yet for the first year, nobody actually approached me except for a few people who either didn't care about rumors or didn't believe them, and those who did believe the rumors were surprised when they actually were forced to work with me for class projects that I was nothing like these ideas of whom I should be. Likewise, people had parallel assumptions about me because I am of Asian heritage, and that I should know certain things and act in a certain manner, which I didn't because I was fresh off the plane from the states, so I was being held up to two contradicting stereotypes when convenient, saying more about the people observing than me as an individual, even if it is based off of shallow observations and personal histories. So really, the people who made me to be a frat boy of the childish lower sewer mind were also individuals who told me not to take it seriously, and then get surprised that I respond in a manner that displays my disdain for them? At the very least, I am Sir Kettle, and they are the Teapot family. This part here is where I have spent the bulk of my time drafting my response as best as I can to not sound like this is a defense statement or said with hostility, but now all I can do is hope that these points are considered. First off, let's be clear that there has been a lot of passive-aggression from silent thunder towards me (and others), and a lot of two-faced behavior, and in the moderation thread when it was announced that I was banned, he was the most vocal criticizing me, yet freeform had a comment that is suddenly no longer there about how friends don't speak in a manner of raising a glass and addressing everyone and nobody at the same time, they speak directly to them, or call them in, which silent thunder refused to do and justified his approach. It is a highly ineffective way of dealing with people and actually creates the caricature as opposed to dialogue and engagement that recognizes a fellow man. This passive-aggression from people like him is consistent and somehow it is just cunning enough to overlook and consider not passive-aggressive, but the behavior pattern is evident and aligned with his values. His behavior is somehow tolerated because it follows the egalitarian principle, but the odd thing is, the egalitarian principle here seems to enjoy the amateur over the craftsman when it comes to following a conversation. One way to address passive-aggression from a member's point of view is to directly call out the behavior and say, "Stop beating around the bush and speaking in riddles: what are you saying and who are you talking about?" and the dialogue can potentially continue, but if a moderator steps in, there should be a compelling encouragement to coax the answer out (coax, not force), but instead, we see dialogue completely shut down because of fear of hurt feelings or personal attacks, real or perceived. So in regards to my forum, let's observe how I've not mentioned or described silent thunder in either of the two threads in question. He may have the same opinion as one statement I made generally about idiots who think New Age is a valid framework, but the point I make is not to portray him or anyone in particular as something ad hominem, but the argument itself that is absurd and frankly common here, a view that I make no effort to hide all of my disdain for due to the problems of the average SNAGG (Sensitive New Age Guy/Gal) being someone who increasingly shares a lot in common with the alternative healing promoted by the Alt-Right now for coronavirus, and even before then, were saying things like "Reiki cures cancer" and "The Law of Attraction will give you what you want!" or "Be positive, because negative is terrible, no good, very bad stuff" (font and font color intentional) and putting themselves as a false equivalents to the Mohammeds (PBUH), Siddarthas, and Jesuses of history. While I can see how it can be perceived as an ad hominem, it is more a criticism of the view than the individual--hence me saying idiots. Now the next thing you'll say is that "Then how do we have dialogue when your forum is closed off?" and I say "How do we have dialogue if the people already showed they don't want to have dialogue because they're set in their views and see me as the same way, and then go on acting passive-aggressive to show they will never engage me?" A pity that forum dialogue is voluntary and a moderator does not have the ability to encourage or order discussion in an online forum rather than an actual in-person forum. If people were ordered to talk and hash things out instead of being told to shut up or be shown the door, imagine how other potential for dialogue could turn out. The comparison to joeblast is to me and others laughable because it posits that I am a bully who enjoys humiliating others for the sake of my own entertainment. Judging by the likes on the comment that Steve made in my moderation thread that I have a "history of abuse and bullying" (which I hope is now clear in our PM that it was a lot of mis-reading), I will address several of the individuals there and a couple more to show that it's a false comparison. Let's start with freeform, who, in response to waterdrop on the same thread, made a very pertinent observation: Let us also look at flowing hands then, who I will not deny that I have had hostile interactions with, but in my own defense, I've simple defended myself against him and found him to be unable to have direct dialogue with or correct any wrong assumptions, which began on his part as we can see I said on this thread, which he summarily rejected: which you took as an insult, as you said here: You accused me of insulting your teacher for what? Not agreeing he has the authoritative view? Then you said I am "calling you crap", in your own words, because those are your words, not mine, as nothing in my message said it was crap--all I said was it was just a sect with its own view, not absolute. Then you assumed I was challenging your status, then you criticize me for my participation in the forum. Grow up. I never was a hyena--I defended myself from your insecurities and what is now abundantly clear that it is also your need to engage in combat with people to reinforce your holy martyr status. And since then, flowing hands has seen me as a joeblast, but his premise was on strawman arguments, especially alleging I said things I never said initially, and overreacting rather than taking me for what I meant and tried to explain, in addition to escalating it and then insulting me. He was defending himself when I never said anything. The other two in more recent times don't need quotes--one was Mskied, whom both Ralis and Nungali can confirm that Mskied saw me as a troll, but the guy was already assuming a personal attack when what was initially given from Nungali was a fact check on Crowley and me later on saying Nungali was not trolling him. As the behavior and stubbornness increased, so did the fucks given about what he thought because everything challenging him was considered trolling, until he revealed himself to be dialoguing with himself and an alt-right troll who praised Hitler, which was why Sean banned him. The other was Heartbreak, and me being "mean" to him was because the guy was posting ridiculous things about Asian women and aliens, conspiracies, and how reddit and YouTube were his teachers. The misogyny and conspiracy theories go against what Sean himself said were not acceptable on the forum: And in addition, in Sean's own words: Would Sean be considered another joeblast? I ask considering how in the Marblehead remembrance party, he in his own words also said: I don't even know if Sean would be here long as a member if he were not the owner. Anyway, now that I mention Mskied and his disdain for Crowley above, I suppose the more appropriate comparison to me is not a troll, but an iconoclast. Aleister Crowley, Marilyn Manson, and many others used notoriety to play with the images the world projects onto them, which only a few can see is deliberate hyperbole (much like my wall) to act as gadflies, and yet that humor (also inspired by some bitterness with personal experiences to an extent) is lost and taken to make them literal demons to their critics, especially those who only go off of arguments based on hearsay. And while I have said this many times, it bears repeating from the work of Laozi (Lin translation): Sadly, the wisdom has already proven to be subject to personal bias, as evident in my recent suspension, which was based off of personal disdain rather than facts or existing rules, and worse, lack of clarity and direct dialogue. Wisdom is not a personal thing, by the way, it is a shared collective of knowledge and experiences. The need for fact checking is essential even if it gets in the way of discussion, but the killing of discussion via locking threads or suspensions is a quick way to create resentment. I hate to bring this up, but this is where facts and jumping to conclusions is really evident on the thread that we first interacted in. A thread started by Rene lamented about bullying of a member who got suspended, and when I jumped in and said that the facts were incomplete based on what she's saying, because she had no context of what went on or what posts and threads were hidden or deleted in the Flying Phoenix thread, or what was going on. She had lamented what she saw as bullying, but did not see the threats and trolling from the member DSCB57 in support of a known scammer, Ausar, and his many sock puppet accounts here. Instead, it led to her insulting me, and me getting into verbal jiujitsu with her, beginning with her getting mad that I said "Knock yourself out, lady". This is where you stepped in and asked about my misogynistic BS and Pilgrim explained that it encourages violence against women. For the record, the past couple years I have asked how "Knock yourself out, lady" is misogynistic or encourages violence against women to various ages and nationalities, and nobody can see either the misogyny or the call for violence in that sentence. Rene was acting based off of a perceived attack (the only one was the toenail comment because at that point she was being ridiculous to me and refusing any fact checking or context). And yet: I apologized for the sake of getting along, but in hindsight, I wish I stuck to my guns based on the pattern of everything going on here with the extreme aversion to not having a Cheers-like atmosphere where everyone gets along. So our Flying Phoenix community, who had fended off a major scammer and then a troll who was defending the scammer, were never asked anything when the general forum who had no idea jumped to conclusions. This is worse because the posts supporting this were deleted or hidden. I'm going to stop here and say that the PPJ was inevitably going to reopen once the message has been made, and it's been made. Now the dialogue needs to eventually find a new path forward and I need to decide what I'm doing. The zeitgeist of this forum now is that you all want an egalitarian place that to me reads more like a SNAGG-friendly environment, which I see as dangerous for both physical and mental health and have direct experience with people doing that, such as poisoning themselves with alternative therapies and merely calling it healing crisis. Where does Earl Grey fit into all this? For one option, I have less time to be here and contribute much to the general area due to this current paradigm, and can make sparse statements here and there while focusing on both my PPJ and managing the FP thread of Terry Dunn. Another option, I can just pack up and delete my entire PPJ, disable my personal messenger, and say goodbye, but that is the nuclear option and it's not a very good one either. The next one posits that if I am banned at some point to request that the PPJ and all its contents be deleted from history. What is likely going to happen as this dialogue continues if it hasn't ended yet is to figure out not what I do, but what the entirety of the forum does, not just Earl Grey, not just the moderators, but everyone. My suggestion: you know those comment boxes in some restaurants? Have a dialogue there and let people say things even if abrupt, allow people to vent and don't insta-ban or suspend unless someone is really being a jerk. So create a thread and let people speak, even those most critical of you and don't use suspensions and bans as the band-aid--be members first and look to other solutions. I mentioned Judge Chick to Steve and to others before. If interested, we can discuss him as a potential inspiration for future moderation.

This is the point of my Xin Yi foundational beginners program: it assumes zero fitness and is modeled after the Charles Atlas and Charles Bronson programs to develop basic fitness and discipline for internal training to create routines before formally studying Xin Yi. Eventually, you barely do the strength training as the Zhan Zhuang and shili exercises help you develop power as opposed to strength.

Cursory viewing of the video is that this is still based off of tribal mentality rather than hive mentality, even if he's talking about the human species as a whole and the responsibilities needed to be taken.

What constitutes being attractive can vary, but it seems you want the body of Charles Atlas.

When I was a university student, it was summarized in two words by my professor: "Who cares?" We could talk about child soldiers, sex slaves, human trafficking--this was an international relations class and we came up with many global issues for our presentations. Nobody got more than a B because there was no focus beyond describing what the issue was. He said "Who cares?" because whatever the issue was, why should anyone take it seriously? Speaking for myself on the topic of anyone making claims about cultivation skills and understanding, I just repeat an old maxim: "By the fruits ye shall be known."

Tombajo, I think your introductory post set a few expectations for the people who have responded already: "Hi, my name is Joel. I achieved enlightenment many years ago from southern doaism" But even without that post for context, the initial post on this thread is already questionable for being poised as a fact.

@ilumairen I have time only to reply to Steve tonight, but my draft is already being prepared to respond. Sorry for the delay. UPDATE: hoping to get it out today at the earliest, but realistically may take a little longer...depends on how satisfied I am with it as it's meant to respond as a form of mutual dialogue rather than a defense statement.

Will reply this evening or whenever I can sit down and dedicate a response to this and whatever one liminal luke is preparing as well. UPDATE: Busy. Will reply as time permits and to PM from Luke.