Disinformation campaign

[Aetherous]

you're as sensitive as a nun.

 

As someone who appreciates nuns, this is very offensive.

[Todd]

 

No, I did not attack another human being. Man, you need to lighten up. I never threatened the guy. I didn't even post with much hostility, anger, malice, and whatever I said can only be considered an attack if you're as sensitive as a nun.

 

I would appreciate it if you didn't try to show me your holier-than-thou perspective as I'm not really interested in it.

 

Ok.

[Seth Ananda]

Wow.. Seth, bro... I see that you are having alot of feelings here... So, I will try to not take your aggression personally. So, please take a breath and try and read this without any defensiveness. I am not attacking you. I am merely sharing what I see in front of me... But this post of yours is only underscoring my point and further convincing me that my conclusions based on my observations may be accurate. Please, take a look at your communication here with me... Extremely agressive, very defensive and lots of accusations insults and "you" statements in there... such as...

 

(insult. I could take offense at that but I won't)

(Not true. Unsubstantiated accusation. I may have said some things about my experience of buddhists, but that is my experience of a few isolated individuals not a statement against the religion.)

(another absolute statement that is not true. I never say that. In fact I say that I saw him to express himself arrogantly and with absolutism. That is not a saint)

 

Can you see how your behavior in this post to me is exactly what you accuse Vmarco of doing to you? I saw it then and I'm seeing it from you right now...

 

 

I never said that. I don't know who all the buddhists are... What I have said is that it appears to me that some buddhists have been acting in unison to defend a common agenda. and that it appears to me that some have been so emotionally reactive that they have not been thinking clearly. You are giving me this experience right now. You have not been representing my words or feelings accurately at all. In fact, I wonder if while you are reading this right now that you are feeling that as I write this that I am angry with you and trying to fight with you. I am not. I get it that you feel attacked by me. and I have warm feelings for you and wish you healing.

 

But I tell you with all honesty is that my observation is that in this post you are very emotionally reactive and seeking to defend your agenda at any cost and that I am feeling very personally attacked by you because of it. That IS my observation and you can be offended if you like, but I cannot deny that is what I am seeing right now. And I'm not going to change my observations just because it might offend you.

 

 

I believed you until I actually looked at some of the threads in greater detail. And what I said is that what I observed was that it looked that way to me. I am very sorry if my observation causes you personal offense. It was not and is not meant as such. I don't really know why you are personally feeling attacked since I did not mention anyone by name. I never mentioned you in regards to that. So, I don't know why you are feeling the need to defend yourself here. But I saw what I saw... So, should I lie just to gain your approval Seth? or should I not speak out about something just because it might make you angry? Should I be afraid that sharing my observations as I see them might cause you to attack me personally and insult me by calling me blind or give you another opportunity to mock my spirituality?...

 

I just want to point out another observation. This post here sounds exactly like the sarcastic post from Simplicity rules where I believe he was mocking you. I am not mocking you now, but I am going to quote the first lines from each of your posts to show you how similar they are

 

(SR)

(SA)

 

And while SR was being very sarcastic, you are being totally serious... Sorry, but I see what I see...

 

 

I get it that you feel this way. But. Nope. I have not seen that he did anything this extreme or hurtful. You just did though...

 

If he or anyone said that to me, I would be deeply hurt and offended. But, he didn't say anything like that as far as I could tell. I get it that you feel that he spoke that way and I am happy to agree with you if anyone can produce any evidence that he actually said anything like that. But, I haven't seen any hard evidence and no one has shown me anything like it. I have only heard that people felt like he was talking that way. There is a difference. Listen, I have no agenda with this guy and this is my point. I have no agenda with his views one way or another. I would have no problem whatsoever kicking him out if I saw that he actually attacked people on a personal level. I didn't see it...sorry...

 

But I would like to point out that while you have said these extremely hurtful things about me in the 3rd person, under the guise of trying to prove your point it is difficult for me to think that you didn't at the very least want to say that to me to hurt me because you feel that I have attacked you. And again, I must say that you are proving my point. While this is not sufficient to warrant a complaint to mods. ( well actually it is but I won't in the interest of healing) I will put you on ignore also because I do find your behavior very aggressive, irrational and am deeply hurt by your tactic. Was that your intention? and based on your communication here, I have no evidence that you are able to have a reasonable disagreement when you are emotionally stimulated. So, for me, you are not a safe person to talk to and I need to ignore you for my own emotional well-being...

 

Once again I will ask the question: How is it that some people who proudly wear the banner of a religion that preaches non-attachment, compassion, forgiveness and love be so aggressive, defensive and hostile? As I said, I know little about buddhism but as I understand it, it is when your enemy is being the most aggressive that you are encouraged to show the most compassion. What you and others have said is that because Vmarco was so hurtful to you that you had every right to abandon your religious principles. I do find that ironic and in that instance I do see that as being hypocritical....

 

Peace to you Seth.

A good honest reply. Thank you.

 

First I was not attacking you either, just to get that out of the way. When I said you must be blind it is because either you are just skipping over or have not read the seriously denigrating things Vmarco has said about our tradition {and many others}.

And as to you being Anti Buddhist, I have seen you take many swings at them over time here, but I should have written it more clearly, that [to me] you seem anti some of the Buddhists here...

I also should have expressed that most of the other stuff was not really directed at you, apart from the Imaginary scenario which was just meant to give you a feel of what its like for us, having Vmarco round here.

 

That example was meant to be emotionally charged, but does not represent my views towards you. If I lived near you I would come and study with you.

 

 

But just on an annoyance point, you put up in one of your posts back a bit, that you don't like passive aggressive, then here you say:

 

Once again I will ask the question: How is it that some people who proudly wear the banner of a religion that preaches non-attachment, compassion, forgiveness and love be so aggressive, defensive and hostile?

 

To me this is passive aggressive. Vmarco has pissed me off, I am being openly aggressive, and you are trying to rub my face in it. I am allowed my reaction.

This is a subtle dig at us and our tradition again. In what world are we all supposed to be perfectly realised and free to take shit from anyone door mats?

 

My other question is why are you even in this thread? I did not see you conversing with Vmarco? [maybe you did] And you obviously have not read half of his posts or you would have seen his insults and denigration towards, well nearly everyone...

 

So what are you personally getting out of being here?

[Aaron]

Hello folks,

 

I just thought about this today. I think VMarco is an academic authority on many of the topics he talks about. If you understand the notion of academics, then you can also understand why he might see our own views as being irrelevant to some degree and why he may feel the need to take on the role of teacher more than student.

 

I sincerely believe that he has a lot to offer us and upon reflection I also understand that, as Five and others have said, there are many other people on this thread who have done much worse than VMarco, but because they have been here for awhile have gotten a pass. That's okay, really it is, but perhaps what we should try to be doing at this time is understanding our own nature, how we choose to interact with others. No one can force us to argue or insult them, it is our own decision. Defending ourselves from words is like gathering water in a spaghetti strainer, you might be able to retain a bit of ego for awhile, but eventually it will all slip away anyways, so just let it go from the start.

 

Aaron

 

edit- Also I apologize to VMarco if it seems like I've disparaged him when he couldn't respond to my comments. I didn't intend to do that. I hope that you find a place here, because I certainly believe with your vast experience and knowledge, that I could learn from you. In particular I'm very interested in religious history, something you seem quite experienced in. Just throwing that out there.

[Marblehead]

Good post Aaron.

[VCraigP]

If someone says things that really upset you perhaps this is an excellent opportunity to examine why?

 

This is my take away from this VERY charged thread.

 

 

5ET - The clarity of your examinations and demonstration of critical thinking are very much appreciated.

 

In my view there is no greater skill than to remain stable and think for yourself critically in all situations without being swayed by your attachments.

 

Craig

[Wynn]

Sorry, I'm not really up to speed on this ...

Is there some kind of feud between Buddhists and Daoists here?

 

If so, what's the beef? If you find some words which point you towards the Truth, what difference does it make what school you ascribe to?

[fiveelementtao]

[Encephalon]

Good job. Are the emboldened phrases yours?

 

I post this again from www.criticalthinking.org

 

I only wish I would have kept all the criticisms of this doc rendered in this forum - really spooky stuff!

 

Valuable Intellectual Traits

 

Intellectual Humility: Having a consciousness of the limits of one's knowledge, including a sensitivity to circumstances in which one's native egocentrism is likely to function self-deceptively; sensitivity to bias, prejudice and limitations of one's viewpoint. Intellectual humility depends on recognizing that one should not claim more than one actually knows. It does not imply spinelessness or submissiveness. It implies the lack of intellectual pretentiousness, boastfulness, or conceit, combined with insight into the logical foundations, or lack of such foundations, of one's beliefs.

 

Intellectual Courage: Having a consciousness of the need to face and fairly address ideas, beliefs or viewpoints toward which we have strong negative emotions and to which we have not given a serious hearing. This courage is connected with the recognition that ideas considered dangerous or absurd are sometimes rationally justified (in whole or in part) and that conclusions and beliefs inculcated in us are sometimes false or misleading. To determine for ourselves which is which, we must not passively and uncritically "accept" what we have "learned." Intellectual courage comes into play here, because inevitably we will come to see some truth in some ideas considered dangerous and absurd, and distortion or falsity in some ideas strongly held in our social group. We need courage to be true to our own thinking in such circumstances. The penalties for non-conformity can be severe.

 

Intellectual Empathy: Having a consciousness of the need to imaginatively put oneself in the place of others in order to genuinely understand them, which requires the consciousness of our egocentric tendency to identify truth with our immediate perceptions of long-standing thought or belief. This trait correlates with the ability to reconstruct accurately the viewpoints and reasoning of others and to reason from premises, assumptions, and ideas other than our own. This trait also correlates with the willingness to remember occasions when we were wrong in the past despite an intense conviction that we were right, and with the ability to imagine our being similarly deceived in a case-at-hand.

 

Intellectual Integrity: Recognition of the need to be true to one's own thinking; to be consistent in the intellectual standards one applies; to hold one's self to the same rigorous standards of evidence and proof to which one holds one's antagonists; to practice what one advocates for others; and to honestly admit discrepancies and inconsistencies in one's own thought and action.

 

Intellectual Perseverance: Having a consciousness of the need to use intellectual insights and truths in spite of difficulties, obstacles, and frustrations; firm adherence to rational principles despite the irrational opposition of others; a sense of the need to struggle with confusion and unsettled questions over an extended period of time to achieve deeper understanding or insight.

 

Faith In Reason: Confidence that, in the long run, one's own higher interests and those of humankind at large will be best served by giving the freest play to reason, by encouraging people to come to their own conclusions by developing their own rational faculties; faith that, with proper encouragement and cultivation, people can learn to think for themselves, to form rational viewpoints, draw reasonable conclusions, think coherently and logically, persuade each other by reason and become reasonable persons, despite the deep-seated obstacles in the native character of the human mind and in society as we know it.

 

Fairmindedness: Having a consciousness of the need to treat all viewpoints alike, without reference to one's own feelings or vested interests, or the feelings or vested interests of one's friends, community or nation; implies adherence to intellectual standards without reference to one's own advantage or the advantage of one's group.

 

Valuable Intellectual Virtues (June 1996). Foundation For Critical Thinking, Online at website: www.criticalthinking.org)

Edited August 19, 2011 by Encephalon

[Encephalon]

[Marblehead]

Sorry, I'm not really up to speed on this ...

Is there some kind of feud between Buddhists and Daoists here?

 

If so, what's the beef? If you find some words which point you towards the Truth, what difference does it make what school you ascribe to?

 

No really big problem. We just like to disagree with each other now and then. We keep flipping in and on between emptiness and fullness.

[VCraigP]

Encephalon and 5ET

 

Thanks. every once in awhile I cut and paste things from this forum as having value in my collection of "wise words". Thanks for the critical thinking material, they have become part of my collection of important thoughts.

 

Craig

[Seth Ananda]

Hello folks,

 

I just thought about this today. I think VMarco is an academic authority on many of the topics he talks about. If you understand the notion of academics, then you can also understand why he might see our own views as being irrelevant to some degree and why he may feel the need to take on the role of teacher more than student.

 

I sincerely believe that he has a lot to offer us and upon reflection I also understand that, as Five and others have said, there are many other people on this thread who have done much worse than VMarco, but because they have been here for awhile have gotten a pass. That's okay, really it is, but perhaps what we should try to be doing at this time is understanding our own nature, how we choose to interact with others. No one can force us to argue or insult them, it is our own decision. Defending ourselves from words is like gathering water in a spaghetti strainer, you might be able to retain a bit of ego for awhile, but eventually it will all slip away anyways, so just let it go from the start.

 

Aaron

 

edit- Also I apologize to VMarco if it seems like I've disparaged him when he couldn't respond to my comments. I didn't intend to do that. I hope that you find a place here, because I certainly believe with your vast experience and knowledge, that I could learn from you. In particular I'm very interested in religious history, something you seem quite experienced in. Just throwing that out there.

 

I too withdraw from this bout. I have just reread through hundreds of Vmarco's posts, and without reading the conversations around them that contain much of the emotional charge for me. I think he did deserve the suspension but not a longer one.

 

I am also starting [i hope] to get a clearer understanding of his perspective, and I also feel now that he does offer this forum some value. And he does occasionally communicate well with others...

I still think he can come off like a condescending and denigrating twit sometimes, but hey, can't we all

 

So I am sorry Vmarco for the overly bitter hell fire I aimed at you earlier.

 

I am kind of looking forward to your return now I {may} be getting a clearer grasp of your Ideas.

 

Seth.

[suninmyeyes]

Wow I never even read this thread before . I have read bits of it just now.

Interesting disscusion..

All I have to say is if Vmarco comes back by the time he answers the posts ,this thread will have 50 pages.In which case maybe Ill take an extra day off to keep up to date.

[ralis]

 

It’s a bitter pill to swallow for those of us who credit our spiritual evolution with a generous helping from one of these traditions. I personally went from Episcopal to Quaker to Unitarian before I made my peace with the West and sought out the wisdom traditions of the East. It is no great burden for me to make the distinction between the salvithic dimension of my beginner’s path and the fundamentalism that the world is currently awash in. In fact, it is my only option. The criticisms of the Abrahamic tradition are only going to become more pronounced in the years to come; check out the very popular The End of Faith by Sam Harris. I offer this up as just one option that I exercised.

 

 

One of the major behind the scenes players in the right wing Christian dominionist movement, is a group in D.C named 'The Family'. Jeff Sharlet's expose' on this sinister group of right wing fascists, is well worth reading. If anyone believes that right wing fundamentalism is not a threat to freedom, then a thorough study of this book will provide insight as to the motives of fear based religion.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Family-Secret-Fundamentalism-Heart-American/dp/0060559799

Edited August 20, 2011 by ralis

[Vmarco]

Having received an e-mail a few days ago asking if I would return to TTB,...I responded:

"I had a most excellent time on TTB,...both the inquisitiveness and the combativeness has been very helpful for my writing. Sure, there's a possibility of returning,....was especially interested in the 'What is Light' thread."

 

Obviously, there are many, including moderators, who allowed themselves to get quite "charged" over my posts. And equally as obvious, there is a double standard,...for example I was called:

 

Sissy, troll, frenzied, pompous, great God complex, attacker, monotonous, hateful, sissified boy, jingles, dramatic reactionary, whacked out!, one eyed girl who should pluck out her remaining eye, and even "a repetitive placard of outdated and/or irrelevant postulations", etc.,etc., and not so much as a warning to those who stalked, trolled, and attacked my posts. But no big deal, that's the nature of today's society.

 

In response to Sunya's statement, "Why don't you rely on your own experience instead of vague scientific theories which are purely conjecture. You rely too much on abstractions..." and a broader dialogues,...I responded, "Ah,...you're a conservative.

http://www.thirdworl...econstruct.html

A link based on "88 different psychological studies conducted between 1958 and 2002 that involved 22,818 people from 12 different countries"

 

And for that I was suspended. Anyone who followed my posts from the beginning of any thread I engaged in, can easily see that my responses were follow-ups, and not launched attacks. Sunya was personally asked to cease stalking and attacking my posts on 12 Aug #239 in the oxymoron thread,....the above comment about Conservatives (obviously to the disdain of Conservatives) was two days later on 14 Aug.

 

I feel I kept the rule. Of course, if I shone some light on Christianity (a subject which I'm internationally known to be proficent on), or attempt to explain the Freethought Buddhist practice of the Short Path, I'm ganged on, disrespected and stomped upon as an attacker of someones beliefs. Well, believe it or not,...people are not their beliefs,...although they think that they are. Conservatism is not a belief,...it's an inability to think in an abstract, open-minded, unrigid way, according to many in the Mental Health field. Conservatism has been shown to be detectable in children that are 3 - 4 years old.

 

I don't attack people,...I critique their beliefs. I did not attack Sunya because of his conservatism. In empathy, I did however mentioned that he shouldn't be ashamed of it.

 

The rule I was given was "Treat other members with respect. No personal attacks"

 

There was even a post that I was in receipt of the TTB rules:

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/19943-disinformation-campaign/ Post #12

"Tao bums is a moderated, privately owned, web site; all who agree with our guiding principals are welcome to join our discussions: Treat other members with respect. No personal attacks."

 

Yet, even before that post, I requested that XxxXxx and Sunya cease stalking and attacking my posts,...for example:

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/19563-oxymorons-that-hinder-awakening/page__hl__oxymoron__st__240

 

Personally, I've gained much insight being an active member here. I've posted to the unremitting trolls stalking me that I would gladly limit the threads I engage in,...and have no intention of threatening their expert positions on the forum. They instead grouped up, and continued.

 

Again I ask,...if you cannot be respectful in responding to my posts, please don't respond. I'm aware you dispise me, and feel threatened by my membership. I understand that your seniority obviously has weight with the moderators, but just because you're privileged to get away with attacking others is no reason to do it.

 

I would like to engage in discussions on a limited number of threads,...IMO it would be unfair, disrespectful, and rude to post on those threads just to bash a poster. Not once, in 375 posts have I posted solely to bash a poster,....whereas nearly a third of all responses to my posts were ad hominem.

 

V

Edited August 25, 2011 by Vmarco

[C T]

Look, Vmarco, for the record, you were not stalked as you claim.

 

You over-rate your own self-importance.

 

I have no interest to engage with you, nor respond to your posts, EVER, so do me a favor, and cease your accusations of me doing all these unsavory things to you as you keep harping on and on about. Even after a nice holiday, the first thing you do upon return is to re-collect dead wood. Please take a good look and remember who is it who is unable to let the matter go. I can imagine what sort of chip you are shouldering here. But guess what, its no longer my business how you want to carry on now that you have returned. I am sure you are glad to know this.

 

My only agitation with you is your recycling tendencies in each and every post you made. The pattern was seen, then i started dropping hints, but you could not/did not cop on to it, so i became more direct, and what followed (your defensive attacks) is best left unrepeated here.

 

From now on, please do not highlight my 'name' again if you do not wish to see my posts in your threads. I promise i will not come near you if you can do me this favor. If you cant, i will have no option but to bring some 'light' to the surface, deal?

 

To those who missed you, i can only wish you all 'happy engagements'.

Edited August 25, 2011 by CowTao

[Stigweard]

Having received an e-mail a few days ago asking if I would return to TTB,...I responded:

"I had a most excellent time on TTB,...both the inquisitiveness and the combativeness has been very helpful for my writing. Sure, there's a possibility of returning,....was especially interested in the 'What is Light' thread."

 

Obviously, there are many, including moderators, who allowed themselves to get quite "charged" over my posts. And equally as obvious, there is a double standard,...for example I was called:

 

Sissy, troll, frenzied, pompous, great God complex, attacker, monotonous, hateful, sissified boy, jingles, dramatic reactionary, whacked out!, one eyed girl who should pluck out her remaining eye, and even "a repetitive placard of outdated and/or irrelevant postulations", etc.,etc., and not so much as a warning to those who stalked, trolled, and attacked my posts. But no big deal, that's the nature of today's society.

 

In response to Sunya's statement, "Why don't you rely on your own experience instead of vague scientific theories which are purely conjecture. You rely too much on abstractions..." and a broader dialogues,...I responded, "Ah,...you're a conservative.

http://www.thirdworl...econstruct.html

A link based on "88 different psychological studies conducted between 1958 and 2002 that involved 22,818 people from 12 different countries"

 

And for that I was suspended. Anyone who followed my posts from the beginning of any thread I engaged in, can easily see that my responses were follow-ups, and not launched attacks. Sunya was personally asked to cease stalking and attacking my posts on 12 Aug #239 in the oxymoron thread,....the above comment about Conservatives (obviously to the disdain of Conservatives) was two days later on 14 Aug.

 

I feel I kept the rule. Of course, if I shone some light on Christianity (a subject which I'm internationally known to be proficent on), or attempt to explain the Freethought Buddhist practice of the Short Path, I'm ganged on, disrespected and stomped upon as an attacker of someones beliefs. Well, believe it or not,...people are not their beliefs,...although they think that they are. Conservatism is not a belief,...it's an inability to think in an abstract, open-minded, unrigid way, according to many in the Mental Health field. Conservatism has been shown to be detectable in children that are 3 - 4 years old.

 

I don't attack people,...I critique their beliefs. I did not attack Sunya because of his conservatism. In empathy, I did however mentioned that he shouldn't be ashamed of it.

 

The rule I was given was "Treat other members with respect. No personal attacks"

 

There was even a post that I was in receipt of the TTB rules:

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/19943-disinformation-campaign/ Post #12

"Tao bums is a moderated, privately owned, web site; all who agree with our guiding principals are welcome to join our discussions: Treat other members with respect. No personal attacks."

 

Yet, even before that post, I requested that Cowtao and Sunya cease stalking and attacking my posts,...for example:

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/19563-oxymorons-that-hinder-awakening/page__hl__oxymoron__st__240

 

Personally, I've gained much insight being an active member here. I've posted to the unremitting trolls stalking me that I would gladly limit the threads I engage in,...and have no intention of threatening their expert positions on the forum. They instead grouped up, and continued.

 

Again I ask,...if you cannot be respectful in responding to my posts, please don't respond. I'm aware you dispise me, and feel threatened by my membership. I understand that your seniority obviously has weight with the moderators, but just because you're privileged to get away with attacking others is no reason to do it.

 

I would like to engage in discussions on a limited number of threads,...IMO it would be unfair, disrespectful, and rude to post on those threads just to bash a poster. Not once, in 375 posts have I posted solely to bash a poster,....whereas nearly a third of all responses to my posts were ad hominem.

 

V

Whilst your post contains truths of some inequities that took place, I would suggest to you that you have a very close look in the mirror to examine what it is about your manner that attracted to yourself such a general opposition.

 

The very notion that "you did nothing wrong" shows a great deal of self-denial and arrogance. If you wish to become an excepted member here in our lovely little mud-pool then I suggest that you learn to give as much credence to other people's views in as much as you give to your own.

 

Just a kindly word from a long-time survivor of The TaoBums

[C T]

Whilst your post contains truths of some inequities that took place, I would suggest to you that you have a very close look in the mirror to examine what it is about your manner that attracted to yourself such a general opposition.

 

The very notion that "you did nothing wrong" shows a great deal of self-denial and arrogance. If you wish to become an excepted member here in our lovely little mud-pool then I suggest that you learn to give as much credence to other people's views in as much as you give to your own.

 

Just a kindly word from a long-time survivor of The TaoBums

Hear ye! Hear ye!

[Jetsun]

Those people who get agitated by Vmarco's posts should examine within themselves what buttons he is pushing within you to get you worked up, because whatever buttons he is pushing they are not being pushed in me in the slightest, so his offence is no universal phenomenon like some of you seem to be claiming.

[Birch]

Those people who get agitated by Vmarco's posts should examine within themselves what buttons he is pushing within you to get you worked up, because whatever buttons he is pushing they are not being pushed in me in the slightest, so his offence is no universal phenomenon like some of you seem to be claiming.

 

He doesn't bug me either. Wouldn't it be interesting to figure out how why how that sort of thing happens? IMO especially for self-described 'non-dualists'??????

 

More seriously, I don't figure it's quite as simple as 'button pushing'. Had to put that in

[Vmarco]

Look, Vmarco, for the record, you were not stalked as you claim.

 

 

Although there are numerous examples within other threads, let's just look at this one, starting at page one. I post, you respond with an insultive remark,...then someone challenges it, and you go off on a rant about me,...none of which have anything to do with the topic,...and then I followup by responding to your challenger as some reasons why you got a charge.

 

I edited my post above, and Xed out your name as you requested,...so let's see if you'll cease stalking me, as you promised.

 

V

[C T]

Although there are numerous examples within other threads, let's just look at this one, starting at page one. I post, you respond with an insultive remark,...then someone challenges it, and you go off on a rant about me,...none of which have anything to do with the topic,...and then I followup by responding to your challenger as some reasons why you got a charge.

 

I edited my post above, and Xed out your name as you requested,...so let's see if you'll cease stalking me, as you promised.

 

Thank you. That's very gracious and redeeming of you.

[Jetsun]

He doesn't bug me either. Wouldn't it be interesting to figure out how why how that sort of thing happens? IMO especially for self-described 'non-dualists'??????

 

More seriously, I don't figure it's quite as simple as 'button pushing'. Had to put that in

 

My psycho explanation is that people often get irritated by other people when they see them express a trait they dislike within themselves. On forums quite often I find my self irritated by the way a particular person posts or how they express themselves, but when I really investigate it without completely blaming the other person for my own emotional reaction I find that they are just triggering something I dislike within myself, as few other people on the board have the same reaction, so really the issue is within me and not so much with the other person. I wouldn't call this a rule set in stone as sometimes people are just dicks and it is about them and not about me, so seeing the reality of the situation can be difficult but even then I doubt everyone takes offence or takes offence on the same level, so why are you offended and the other person isn't?. Basically imo everyone is insane to a certain degree.

[Birch]

"sometimes people are just dicks and it is about them and not about me"

 

 

"Basically imo everyone is insane to a certain degree."

 

 

That pretty much sums it up for me :-)