The Power of "Ignore"

[Coaster]

I was just posting for the sake of others reading the thread - who might accept something posted as truth if not challenged.

[Owledge]

I was just posting for the sake of others reading the thread - who might accept something posted as truth if not challenged.

Well, you did yourself a disservice, you selfless warrior of truth.

 

You could try and start modestly by finding typos in my post.

[Marblehead]

The thing I was referring to is that Churchill deliberately misdirected a passenger liner into hostile territory to get them to be attacked, which they then actually were, by a German submarine, and it seems there also were explosives on the ship, or at least it was also used as an ammuinition transport. The passenger list showed an unlikely high number of women and children, and they died. They died at Churchill's hand in order to draw the powerful USA into their war.

American politicians had their hands pretty bloody in that incident as well. The government even had the NY Times put an article on its front page stating that it was safe to ride that ship. Our politicians wanted to get into that was but the majority of the population was against it. Churchill was relieved of duty for his failure with The Gallipoli Campaign, before the Lucitania event.

 

So really, it wasn't Churchill who was responsible for the deaths on the Lusitania.

 

And then the British government called him back into service because they were unable to effectively continue waging war against the Germans.

 

And America was sucked into the Second World War even though the majority of Americans didn't want to get involved. First our politicians threatened Japan and forced them to move against us. This was Americas politicians way of getting involved in the war in Europe because Japan and Germany were allies. (And yes, the British and American politicians were aware that the Japanese were headed to Hawaii but they just let it happen.)

 

Winston was actually pretty squeeky clean compared to many of the British and American politicians.

 

 

 

Edit to add: Hehehe. You and Coaster had a neat little discussion there. Good job.

Edited November 13, 2013 by Marblehead

[Owledge]

@Marblehead

I agree to most of that (will have to read up on some things), although are you sure the newspapers didn't warn about boarding the Lusitania because of the submarine dangers? (Or were there contrary articles maybe, posted by different interest groups?)

Edited November 13, 2013 by Owledge

[Coaster]

It is silly to think that we can have any idea what actually went on 100 years ago, when there may have been no one person at the time who knew and understood all aspects, let alone later. A billion people in a day do roughly 16 billion hours of things, now over 100 years, multiply that by 36,500 days is 584 trillion hours of activity since that war happened. Any particular piece of information would have to survive through vast currents of political maneuvering.

 

The same applies to things that happened 200 years ago 250 years ago, 3,000 years ago, etc.

 

This is not to say that there is not some value in the study of history, but rather not to expect that we can possibly have any accurate information about what happened.

[Marblehead]

@Marblehead

I agree to most of that (will have to read up on some things), although are you sure the newspapers didn't warn about boarding the Lusitania because of the submarine dangers? (Or were there contrary articles maybe, posted by different interest groups?)

It was actually the Germans who took out an add warning Americans to not take that ship. They already knew it would contain war materials and it was their plan to take it out. The American politicians said, "No, the Germans won't sink the ship. You go ahead you simple-minded Americans - go for a ride on that ship." Or words to that effect.

 

The Germans knew that they were taking the chance of getting America directly involved in the war but they had to do what they did.

[Marblehead]

This is not to say that there is not some value in the study of history, but rather not to expect that we can possibly have any accurate information about what happened.

The purpose in studying history is to learn from the mistakes of others so we don't commit the same stupidies. Apparently most. if not all, American politicians slept through their history courses because they keep making the same mistakes over and over again.

 

And BTW If anyone is being bored by this off-topic discussion you can hit the "Ignore" button. Hehehe.

[Owledge]

@Coaster

Wow, you seem to have no clue about the accuracy of those professions. While there are things that have been manipulated in cases where even today a twisted version is opportune, it is very much possible to get accurate information about historical events. You talk like we're still cave people drawing crude sketches on walls. It's almost like saying that you can't possible determine the location of a signal transmitter with only three sensors.

We even know intimate details about the ordinary daily life of Egyptians thousands of years ago. Why? Because we found records and examined their credibility using common sense and an empirical process.

 

Not every human being on Earch devotes their life to the obscuring of historical information, and not one human has to know everything to give historians an accurate picture. That's what collecting and correlating is for.

Edited November 13, 2013 by Owledge

[Marblehead]

I apologize Owledge and Coaster. I seem to have gotten in the middle of your discussion. Just push the "Ignore" button.

 

 

Edit to add:

 

Good edit there Owledge. Hehehe. I got two sentences into reading your post and had to start over to make sure you weren't talking to me.

Edited November 13, 2013 by Marblehead

[Coaster]

The purpose in studying history is to learn from the mistakes of others so we don't commit the same stupidies. Apparently most. if not all, American politicians slept through their history courses because they keep making the same mistakes over and over again.

They don't see any mistakes since their only goal is re-election. Gerrymandering of districts insures re-election. Later they will make milliions working for lobbying firms. Seems like no mistakes for them.

 

Then media makes millions giving voters the idea that politicians care about the best interests of voters.

[Owledge]

I agree with that. "Mistake" is very relative, and politicians usually are very careful not to make a mistake that might endanger their re-election.

[RiverSnake]

In continuation of the topic of this thread I'd share what I feel is another important point of having a thread like this. The point is to be having an active conversation about trolls so that we are all aware of the dynamics that can go on in an Internet discussion forum.

 

If we are aware that there are people whom intentionally insult others, mudsling, and play the my teacher is superior to yours game....then we can be psychologically and emotionally ready to handle a written confrontation when it occurs....or simply have the foresight to stay clear and report it before we become emotionally involved in the situation.

 

It's kind of like martial arts, you train to fight and to kill another person.....if necessary. Though a mature martial artist never goes looking for fights, because as he masters his art he also masters him self and knows that is rare that a physical confrontation cannot be diffused with other methods (talking, persuasion, negotiation, understanding....etc). Martial artists whom have really put the time in and grown in there field are usually some of the nicest and kindest people. This is because they know how fragile life is and how easy it is to take. Therefore they value it infinitely more than others....at least that has been my experience.

 

Thus when we talk about trolling, when we understand trolling, when we train in mental and emotional control....then we see trolling for what it is.....and thus it no longer effects us. IMO, it is an unintelligent approach to only address these situations when they are occurring and were all soaked up in the drama, we must be aware off ourselves and of the many social dynamics on the Internet that uplift and also drag us down. It is also important to continue conversing about such things so others who are unaware become so. Will make more posts on this into the future.

 

My 2 cents, Peace

Edited November 14, 2013 by OldChi

[Jetsun]

About dealing with difficult people Gurdjieff used to say that the most valuable suffering for your own development you can ever endure is to bear with the unpleasant manifestations of other people. In his own teaching house he used to pay this really unpleasant guy to stay there because if you are skillful you can use unpleasant emotions and difficult situations as a reminding factor to be conscious, whereas if everything is nice and pleasant you can easily fall into stupor.

 

They say something similar in Tibetan Buddhism to treat the unpleasant person as the most precious jewell, like you have found a diamond in the rough.

 

The ego sees everything back to front, for your spiritual development the annoying, challenging person is far more useful to you than someone who agrees with you.

[Marblehead]

I read those last two posts as indicators that I should remain as I am so that others can test themselves of their abilities to deal with situations not expected.

[9th]

In the strategic inventories of warriors, self-importance figures as the activity that consumes the greatest amount of energy, hence, their effort to eradicate it. One of the first concerns of warriors is to free that energy in order to face the unknown with it. The action of rechanneling that energy is impeccability. The most effective strategy for rechanneling that energy consists of six elements that interplay with one another. Five of them are called the attributes of warriorship: control, discipline, forbearance, timing, and will . They pertain to the world of the warrior who is fighting to lose self-importance. The sixth element, which is perhaps the most important of all, pertains to the outside world and is called the petty tyrant.

 

A petty tyrant is a tormentor. Someone who either holds the power of life and death over warriors or simply annoys them to distraction.

 

Petty tyrants teach us detachment. The ingredients of the new seers' strategy shows how efficient and clever is the device of using a petty tyrant. The strategy not only gets rid of self-importance; it also prepares warriors for the final realization that impeccability is the only thing that counts in the path of knowledge.

 

Usually, only four attributes are played. The fifth, will , is always saved for an ultimate confrontation, when warriors are facing the firing squad, so to speak.

 

Will belongs to another sphere, the unknown. The other four belong to the known, exactly where the petty tyrants are lodged. In fact, what turns human beings into petty tyrants is precisely the obsessive manipulation of the known.

 

The interplay of all the five attributes of warriorship is done only by seers who are also impeccable warriors and have mastery over will . Such an interplay is a supreme maneuver that cannot be performed on the daily human stage.

 

Four attributes are all that is needed to deal with the worst of petty tyrants, provided, of course, that a petty tyrant has been found. The petty tyrant is the outside element, the one we cannot control and the element that is perhaps the most important of them all. The warrior who stumbles on a petty tyrant is a lucky one. You're fortunate if you come upon one in your path, because if you don't you have to go out and look for one.

 

If seers can hold their own in facing petty tyrants, they can certainly face the unknown with impunity, and then they can even stand the presence of the unknowable.

 

Nothing can temper the spirit of a warrior as much as the challenge of dealing with impossible people in positions of power. Only under those conditions can warriors acquire the sobriety and serenity to stand the pressure of the unknowable.

 

The perfect ingredient for the making of a superb seer is a petty tyrant with unlimited prerogatives. Seers have to go to extremes to find a worthy one. Most of the time they have to be satisfied with very small fry. Then warriors develop a strategy using the four attributes of warriorship: control, discipline, forbearance, and timing.

 

On the path of knowledge there are four steps. The first step is the decision to become apprentices. After the apprentices change their views about themselves and the world they take the second step and become warriors, which is to say, beings capable of the utmost discipline and control over themselves. The third step, after acquiring forbearance and timing, is to become men of knowledge. When men of knowledge learn to see they have taken the fourth step and have become seers.

 

The mistake average men make in confronting petty tyrants is not to have a strategy to fall back on; the fatal flaw is that average men take themselves too seriously; their actions and feelings, as well as those of the petty tyrants, are all-important. Warriors, on the other hand, not only have a well-thought-out strategy, but are free from self-importance. What restrains their self-importance is that they have understood that reality is an interpretation we make. Petty tyrants take themselves with deadly seriousness while warriors do not. What usually exhausts us is the wear and tear on our self-importance. Any man who has an iota of pride is ripped apart by being made to feel worthless.

 

 

- Castaneda

[Jetsun]

I read those last two posts as indicators that I should remain as I am so that others can test themselves of their abilities to deal with situations not expected.

 

I think you have to up your game a bit if your going to be our own forum petty tyrant, I am disappointed to say I am yet to receive any abusive pm's from you

[Marblehead]

... I am disappointed to say I am yet to receive any abusive pm's from you

Hehehe. That's only because you have yet to properly inspire me.

 

Rather than "petty tyrant" I view myself sometimes as the "devil's advocate", arguing a point solely for the purpose of stimulating thought not only in my own mind but in the mind of others as well.

[Basher]

Don't let "Cat" know, but I'm (very) slowly starting to understand / agree with her point of view.

I'm going to un-ignore the handful of folks whose posts really just seem to be on here to get a reaction.

 

Edit: To remove WWI/WWII "dig".

 

Basher

[RiverSnake]

This post will follow in the spirit of my last one in raising awareness on how to deal with trolls. For clarification purposes this how i understand the word Troll. A troll someone whom is mentally rigid, emotionally immature, and is not open to any conversation outside of their psychological make-up. They only know how to respond with anger (rather than self-reflection) when there perspective is challenged. Its also someone whom feeds off attention and energy (consciously or unconsciously) that is given in order to continue divisive dialogue.

 

The following is a list of some of the most basic ways that i have seen Trolls responded to and what i think are the most effective methods of dealing with such a situation.

 

Example 1

Troll: (He/She says something negative, personal and patronizing regarding whatever topic is discussed)

TaoBum: (Member becomes emotionally unbalanced and starts to discuss the topic in a very aggravated and annoyed way, thus starting a flame war)

 

Example 2

Troll: (Once again says something personally offensive and divisive)

TaoBum: (Continues to discuss topic with said troll in a level headed manner….but eventually gives up as the dialogue just goes in unproductive circles and is quite emotionally and psychological draining)

 

Example 3

Troll: (Writes something divisive and offensive)

TaoBum: (Looks at the post, sees and understands person as well as the intent behind the post, tells the Troll "Thank you for your contribution" and walks off to other threads completely detached without a 2nd thought.)

 

 

IME examples 2 and 3 are the most skillful and cunning ways of approaching said situation. Example 2 as a technique can have great merit when you are dealing with individuals whom are slightly intellectually open and not overly rigid. IMO it is ones duty as a practitioner to assist others with sharing thoughts and experiences that will help uplift others. But this only works if the said individual is slightly open.

 

However, if said individual is 100% Troll and compares to what one might call a fundamentalist in his ways of thinking….then Example 3 is the most cunning solution as there i no point in depleting oneself emotionally and intellectually in unproductive dialogue. I have found that you can usually sense the intent behind posts and tell whether said person is open at all. In that case of open-ness it is really a joy to discuss and engage such individual and both people can mutually benefit from said discussion.

 

How do you deal with trolls on a practical level?

 

My 2 cents, Peace

Edited November 15, 2013 by OldChi

[RiverSnake]

And to me the follow on question is.. what would motivate one to interact here with someone palpably not even slightly open?

 

Just because your not in a direct 1 on 1 dialogue with said person doesn't mean your not influencing each other.

 

You can still post your thoughts and experiences for which everyone is able to read and be uplifted by……including Trolls….after-all this is an open forum….whether said individuals are receptive is a choice that is up to them.

 

In regards to individuals whom are completely closed, we can only continue self-cultivation so that our own individual lights grow brighter and brighter. Cultivating oneself is the most powerful way to shift the world and people around us (in the longterm) and make it a better place. People just don't give it credit because its subtle influence. One of my favorite quotes from the good book.

 

Mat 5:15: "Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the TaoBums"

 

My 2 cents, Peace

Edited November 15, 2013 by OldChi

[Coaster]

Very good stuff in the last few posts! Some points regarding that:

 

+ The above posts are concerned with human interactions in the Forums, but there is also the aspect of the primary purpose of Forums, the exchange of Information. When one participates in a Forum, it is entirely verbal and so only consists of symbols. The other persons are not there (unlike a phone call), they may even no longer be a member when you read their post. But a hundred people may later read your post, so IMHO the accuracy of information is important.

 

+ Human beings are primates with instincts formed hundreds of thousands of years ago, long before anyone ever lived with a stranger. We instinctively treat strangers as enemies, which probably was very helpful to survival 100,000 years ago. Spirituality includes the practice of control of emotions (the mental manifestation of instincts). Emotions are part of human DNA, they do not "go away". Perfected enlightened masters still feel anger and every other emotion. But they are in control of their reaction.

[zerostao]

my instincts treat strangers as friends i am just meeting.

[RiverSnake]

When one participates in a Forum, it is entirely verbal and so only consists of symbols.

 

I disagree. IME with writing there is also an exchange of energy. The energy and intent is possibly more important than the symbols/vehicles for the transmission…..but i can't say that for sure.

 

my instincts treat strangers as friends i am just meeting.

IME, are instincts respond to intent. If a stranger is friendly or has ill will towards you…..you body will naturally respond accordingly. But perhaps i am getting nit-picky here.

 

My 2 cents, Peace

[zerostao]

you are probably right oldchi, i am just lucky to be meeting friendly strangers. but how does one meet only 'enemies' ?

i guess was what i was objecting to.

symbols have a type of energy dont they? even a powerful type?

oldchi, do you somehow, subjectively perhaps(?) pick up on forum members energies?

[Coaster]

my instincts treat strangers as friends i am just meeting.

That is beautiful, but I don't think it is an instinct, I think it is a learned behavior.