The GMG Peace Corps

[karlhenning]

Well, so now even this thread is an occasion for you to play victim.

I withdraw all criticism of your behavior, poor Saul.

We all understand by now that you are just perfect as you are, and that anyone who finds fault in the things you say, or in the way in which you comport yourself, are just wolves attacking the poor, poor, innocent sheep.

You make me shed a tear.

That was my final attempt to take manly sense with you.  It is clear that you are an irredeemable troll, and I shan't remove you from the ignore pit again.

[(poco) Sforzando]

I always tried to separate the topic from the member, and not go into personal attacks. I was the one who was always attacked personally, and that's why I created the thread, that even though I and some others have been attacked, still for the sake of forgiveness, we should all come together.

Please, Saul. This pretense of being an innocent victim convinces nobody. I've seen you in operation, both here and at That Other Board, and you can get pretty nasty at times. Shall I quote you chapter and verse from some of your choice moments? Now I will freely admit that I have been sarcastic towards you and certain others who have made statements I consider arrogant and/or foolish. But you're hardly free from blame here, and certainly neither is the Lady Teresa. As the French proverb goes, "Every sin is a collaboration."

[Saul]

Well, so now even this thread is an occasion for you to play victim.

I withdraw all criticism of your behavior, poor Saul.

We all understand by now that you are just perfect as you are, and that anyone who finds fault in the things you say, or in the way in which you comport yourself, are just wolves attacking the poor, poor, innocent sheep.

You make me shed a tear.

That was my final attempt to take manly sense with you.  It is clear that you are an irredeemable troll, and I shan't remove you from the ignore pit again.

Not only me but others as well who have been on the receiving end of the barrage of insults, yes just like now, calling us 'Trolls' and making fun of us.

This is wrong, Karl, stop it. You're not behaving properly, and you need to respect others.

No one's perfect, and that's includes you too.

You want to ignore me, go rite ahead, but I will never ignore you, even though you can be very offensive, you do have a good cheerful side, I'm able to separate between the two.

Its time you learn this too, that people are not Trolls or monsters, or any other things, they are human beings that have good qualities too, and shouldn't be generalized like that.

[Saul]

Please, Saul. This pretense of being an innocent victim convinces nobody. I've seen you in operation, both here and at That Other Board, and you can get pretty nasty at times. Shall I quote you chapter and verse from some of your choice moments Now I will freely admit that I have been sarcastic towards you and certain others who have made statements I consider arrogant and/or foolish. But you're hardly free from blame here, and certainly neither is the Lady Teresa. As the French proverb goes, "Every sin is a collaboration."

You're right I also wasn't 100 percent at all times, part of been human.

This thread was created for all to BOND AND FORGIVE, not only me...


I thought I made that VERY CLEAR at the BEGINING of the thread, didn't I?

[(poco) Sforzando]

You're right I also wasn't 100 percent at all times, part of been human.

This thread was created for all to BOND AND FORGIVE, not only me...


I thought I made that VERY CLEAR at the BEGINING of the thread, didn't I?

Case in point:
Saul 1: I always tried to separate the topic from the member, and not go into personal attacks.

Saul 2: This is wrong, Karl, stop it. You're not behaving properly, and you need to respect others.
No one's perfect, and that's includes you too.
You want to ignore me, go rite ahead, but I will never ignore you, even though you can be very offensive.

No personal attacks there. All bonding and forgiveness.

[Saul]

Case in point:
Saul 1: I always tried to separate the topic from the member, and not go into personal attacks.

Saul 2: This is wrong, Karl, stop it. You're not behaving properly, and you need to respect others.
No one's perfect, and that's includes you too.
You want to ignore me, go rite ahead, but I will never ignore you, even though you can be very offensive.

No personal attacks there. All bonding and forgiveness.

Youre taking things out of context.

[karlhenning]

Saul 2: . . . even though you can be very offensive.

No personal attacks there. All bonding and forgiveness.

Yup, I'm feeling the love.

[Saul]

Yup, I'm feeling the love.

Well you should...

[karlhenning]

1.  Criticize ideas, not people.

A note that, of course, this only works when everyone is being honest.  If you criticize my idea(s), but I really don't want to face that criticism, it is a commonplace that I might protest how you are (supposedly) criticizing me, and being horribly, horribly offensive at it, too!

See!  Presto-change-o, I have no need to address the criticism of my idea(s)!  I've avoided the unpleasantness and inconvenience of examining my own ideas.

Just as well, since I'm rite all the time.

[karlhenning]

Looking at a post of Alan's, and smiling. I think, If I were an oat flake . . . .

[jowcol]

     rubbish

     

     One tiny quibble, if I may (I don't know how much longer I can do this). I think we need more evidence of the value of opinions, whether it arrives as scholarship, reasoning or what have you. It amazes me how seldom you read "I think this, and this is why." I don't just want to read peoples opinions, I want to see the good part, the reasons for holding them. I will prefer a dubious opinion that's well justified to something that has initial plausibility but no support other than "you're crazy to think otherwise". Giving reasons is not only good for making posts more interesting to read, but because (oh well, what the hell) it shows respect for those who are reading. It says "I owe you reasons, because I'm not so self-infatuated that I think my opinion is valuable just because it's mine". Anyway it's a good habit to give reasons since it encourages you to find better reasons to give, or even better opinions.

This is a really good point-- we don't have to be scholarly-- even a "you say toMAto and I say toMAHto " discussion can be great if we apply some introspection and try to provide more understanding for why we don't like something we are "supposed" to like.  There are a lot of acknowledge "greats" that just don't work for me.  In some cases it's highly personal, subjective, and utter lacking in any scholarship.  (Tchaikovsky carries baggage with me for saying bad things about Mussorgsky, Beethoven's orchestration just doesn't look right to me-- this is more of synesthesia-perceptual thing-- I know I'm not qualified to critique his scores.  I hate the Clapton Song "I shot the sherriff" because it was popular during one of the roughest summers I ever went through).  Our likes and dislikes are driven by a web of assumptions we consciously and subconciously make, and it is not reasonable to expect a stranger to carry the same set of associations. 


As far as some of the other stuff going on in this thread, I'm going to have to open another can of whupass zen:

The pupils of the Tendai school used to study meditation before Zen entered Japan. Four of them who were intimate friends promised one another to observe seven days of silence.

On the first day all were silent. Their meditation had begun auspiciously, but when night came and the oil lamps were growing dim one of the pupils could not help exclaiming to a servant: "Fix those lamps."

The second pupils was surprised to hear the first one talk. "We are not supposed to say a word," he remarked.

"You two are stupid. Why did you talk?" asked the third.

"I am the only one who has not talked," concluded the fourth pupil.


In posting this, I am the fourth pupil, and must be the silliest of all, in that I've not been able to benefit at all from the previous three.

You will excuse me, but it is now time for me to surrender to the musical embrace of Richard Clayderman, the only artist I know who can surpass the summits of musical bliss scaled by Liberace.

[karlhenning]

I hate "I Shot the Sherriff" just on its merits.

(Just saying.)

[mc ukrneal]

This is a really good point-- we don't have to be scholarly-- even a "you say toMAto and I say toMAHto " discussion can be great if we apply some introspection and try to provide more understanding for why we don't like something we are "supposed" to like.  There are a lot of acknowledge "greats" that just don't work for me.  In some cases it's highly personal, subjective, and utter lacking in any scholarship.  (Tchaikovsky carries baggage with me for saying bad things about Mussorgsky, Beethoven's orchestration just doesn't look right to me-- this is more of synesthesia-perceptual thing-- I know I'm not qualified to critique his scores.  I hate the Clapton Song "I shot the sherriff" because it was popular during one of the roughest summers I ever went through).  Our likes and dislikes are driven by a web of assumptions we consciously and subconciously make, and it is not reasonable to expect a stranger to carry the same set of associations. 


As far as some of the other stuff going on in this thread, I'm going to have to open another can of whupass zen:

The pupils of the Tendai school used to study meditation before Zen entered Japan. Four of them who were intimate friends promised one another to observe seven days of silence.

On the first day all were silent. Their meditation had begun auspiciously, but when night came and the oil lamps were growing dim one of the pupils could not help exclaiming to a servant: "Fix those lamps."

The second pupils was surprised to hear the first one talk. "We are not supposed to say a word," he remarked.

"You two are stupid. Why did you talk?" asked the third.

"I am the only one who has not talked," concluded the fourth pupil.


In posting this, I am the fourth pupil, and must be the silliest of all, in that I've not been able to benefit at all from the previous three.

You will excuse me, but it is now time for me to surrender to the musical embrace of Richard Clayderman, the only artist I know who can surpass the summits of musical bliss scaled by Liberace.

I love these stories and they are SO on target (particularly liked the first though). I hope that all of us will take them to heart.

[MN Dave]

Saul starts a "peace" thread.

MN Dave LOLs. 

[Saul]

Saul starts a "peace" thread.

MN Dave LOLs. 

Well at least it made you laugh... a good thing by all accounts.

[karlhenning]

Saul starts a "peace" thread.

MN Dave LOLs. 

Dave and Karl walk in a forest.

Dave says, "My iPod needs recharging."

Karl says, "The birches are very musical this afternoon."

A chipmunk scurries.  Dave hears it.

No tree falls.

[MN Dave]

Saul posts something. It reads: "You are ignoring this."

MN Dave LOLs.

[karlhenning]

A nutria dashes off in terror at Dave's hearty chuckles.

[Cato]

A nutria dashes off in terror at Dave's hearty chuckles.

How many nutrients are in a nutria?

It is not impossible not to ignore this question! 

0:)

[jowcol]

Dave and Karl walk in a forest.

Dave says, "My iPod needs recharging."

Karl says, "The birches are very musical this afternoon."

A chipmunk scurries.  Dave hears it.

No tree falls.

I think I have just been enlightened?  (Or was it gas?)  Either way, this is heavy stuff.