The Hamartian Chronicles - or - Conversations With Bela Z. Bov ======================================================================== http://www.worldcursing.com/WebX?14@@.ef50e61/874 Barry: ...when people exercise power and pull rank, it is my policy to expose that practice. People who are exercising power need to be held accountable, even if being held accountable is a 'big no-no' in their mind. Bela: ???? "Expose" what you want to, I don't care. ======================================================================== Herewith is a transcript of the ensuing offline exchange between Barry and Bela Z. Bov, reprinted per Bela's 'I don't care' remark above. [Bela Z. Bov is Director of Public Negations at the Bunk Institute on Raging.] ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Tue Dec 24 23:14:58 2002 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 20:15:00 -0800 From: To: bkort@musenet.org Subject: resolve what? Cripes, Barry, I don't know what your problem is but you don't need to be such an A-hole. You know damn well whose feelings you are trashing, and she is mostly found on M&S. How cruel and selfish can you be? And your word-games. I just don't understand what is up with you, but it is no longer insteresting to me. You are an energy creature. How many forums have you gotten chased out of? And you imply *I* have to resolve something? I know you mean well (on some level) but you are playing stupid games and hurting people, all the while pretending you have the key to improving the human race. You can't even look in the mirror, Barry. You need to be able to do that. Bela ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Tue Dec 24 23:35:03 2002 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 20:35:11 -0800 From: To: bkort@musenet.org Subject: No > I reject your apology, Bela, and I reject your slap in my face. > I will accept your apology when you demonstrate some decency and some > professionalism. Oh, fuck you Barry, I'm tired of your posturing and your hypocracy. You *don't have a moral leg to stand on* so drop the self-righteous rage. > All beliefs (or lack thereof) welcome; respect for other members is > the sine qua non for this forum. > Bela, have you just abrogated your own social contract? No, Barry, you have. You've been self-indulgant, hurtful, manipulative, selfish, disengenuous, rude, obstinate, and if you don't watch it you will be *bounced from yet another forum* I have no reason to call you. You chill out. Peter is exactly right in his assessment about you. And some people who know you IRL have said the same thing. So drop the game. Grow up. ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Tue Dec 24 23:53:05 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: No To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 23:53:00 -0500 (EST) > > I reject your apology, Bela, and I reject your slap in my face. > > I will accept your apology when demonstrate some decency and some > > professionalism. > Oh, fuck you Barry, I'm tired of your posturing and your hypocracy. Bela, show some professionalism. You're acting like a brat. > You *don't have a moral leg to stand on* so drop the self-righteous rage. This isn't about morals, Bela. This is about ethics and decency. What you permitted Peter to do was unjust, unprofessional, indecent unethical, and outrageous. > > All beliefs (or lack thereof) welcome; respect for other members is > > the sine qua non for this forum. > > Bela, have you just abrogated your own social contract? > No, Barry, you have. You've been self-indulgant, hurtful, manipulative, > selfish, disengenuous, rude, obstinate, and if you don't watch it you > will be *bounced from yet another forum* Bela, you ought to be ashamed of yourself. You are way out of bounds on this one. Way out of bounds. > I have no reason to call you. You chill out. Peter is exactly right > in his assessment about you. And some people who know you IRL have > said the same thing. I have a reason to talk to you on the phone, Bela. I don't get angry very often, and when I don't I usually don't get very angry. Right now I am hopping mad at you, and you are blowing me off as if nothing has happened. Bela, you are making a big mistake here. Don't compound it. > So drop the game. Grow up. This is not a game, Bela. I have never been more serious in my life. Do you understand? Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Wed Dec 25 11:55:21 2002 Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 08:55:22 -0800 From: Bela To: bkort@musenet.org Subject: your back oh Barry I do apologize for my overreaction (ie a few too many emails last night) but you must control yourself. You are back on as participant. Bela ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Wed Dec 25 12:37:49 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: your back on To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 12:37:44 -0500 (EST) > Barry I do apologize for my overreaction (ie a few too many emails last > night) but you must control yourself. You are back on as participant. Thank you for coming back to your senses, Bela. A peaceable person is under control. But if you require me to be a fighter in order to demonstrate that you are mistaken about me, I shall fight you tooth and nail, until such time as you see fit to revise your loathesome belief about me. Is that clear, Bela? Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Wed Dec 25 12:49:59 2002 Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 09:50:01 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: your back on Barry, by your behavior, you have a chance to prove to all of us what kind of guy you are. Now lighten up and be respectful of the other posters. B ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Wed Dec 25 13:44:51 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: your back on To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 13:44:46 -0500 (EST) > Barry, by your behavior, you have a chance to prove to all > of us what kind of guy you are. Bela, your bullshit astounds me. Last week on the People's Forum you had a big fight w/ Kit about this business of proving stuff. If you want to have a civilized discussion about the metaphysics of proof, we can have that. Or we can have a big melodramatic scene to explore the meaning of 'proof'. I'll swing either way, Bela, because that's the kind of guy I am. I'll tell you straight, kiddo, I prefer a civil metaphysical discussion about 'proof' in the tradition of Epistemolgy. But if scholarship annoys or bores you, we can do it with melodrama instead. You choose. I'll play it your way. > Now lighten up and be respectful of the other posters. I expect you and Peter to demonstrate respect, Bela, or I will call another foul and raise holy hell once again. It is not just disrespectful to publish a gratuitous characterization of someone (whether it's a pedestrian insult, an erroneous portrayal, or a perfectly accurate DSM-IV diagnosis). It is disrespectful, unethical, unprofessional, a violation, and a trespass, whether it happens to be an accurate portrayal or not. If you disbelieve me, please ask Artemis who teaches Ethics in Journalism or Linda, who teaches Psychology. As long as you continue to countenance that practice, Bela, bad karma will surely haunt you. Therefore, in the name of the gods, I implore you to cease and desist from that loathesome practice. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Wed Dec 25 12:37:49 2002 From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Sat Dec 28 02:14:32 2002 Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 23:14:35 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: You Bastard! What the fuck Barry? I'm not going to avoid my own forum. Go start your own. I'm tired of your pedantic hypocritical bullshit. You argue with people who do a certain behavior, and then you go and do it yourself. Your concept of "dialogue" is to scavenge through other people's ideas, cram it through your framework, *invalidate* what does not fit your preconceived paradigm, and then *tell* people what they said. What the hell is that? You know *nothing* of Socratic Dialogue because you are unable to practice it. You have also lied, and asked me to do something unethical- to delete the post where you asked for all those posts to be deleted. That is *sleazy*! Talk about your "power plays". Its not working, Barry, and for that I'm sorry. Bela ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Sat Dec 28 07:37:00 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: You Bastard! To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 07:36:54 -0500 (EST) > What the fuck Barry? I'm not going to avoid my own forum. Go start your own. Then avoid me. If you cannot tolerate logic and science, if that irritates and annoys you, then avoid me. Bela, I don't have an iota of power to compel you to learn even the tiniest amount of logic or science. If it is your choice to remain ignorant, I will respect that choice. But if it is your choice to remain oblivious of science and logic then you may not exercise power over me. I do not recognize that ignorant people have any right to exercise power over those who engage in academic inquiry. That is intolerable, Bela. That, my friend, I will fight you over, because the world is not safe when ignorant people exercise power. > I'm tired of your pedantic hypocritical bullshit. You argue with > people who do a certain behavior, and then you go and do it yourself. I am tired of your posturing and intolerance of scholarship, Bela. Yes, I argue with people who do a certain behavior. The name of that certain behavior is to exercise power out of an erroneous belief that they are certain they are right and certain that they have the right to damage other people who disagree with them. > Your concept of "dialogue" is to scavenge through other people's > ideas, cram it through your framework, *invalidate* what does not > fit your preconceived paradigm, and then *tell* people what they said. Bela, you have not even experienced my concept of dialogue yet. You are so steeped in the Argument Culture that you haven't even tasted the Bohm Dialogue Model. I am deeply deeply disappointed in you, Bela. I thought you had an open mind, a mind willling, perhaps even eager to learn. Now I discover you are intolerant of inquiry learning, intolerant of logic, intolerant of science, and willing to use force to stop the learning process. That's unconscionable, Bela. Utterly unconsionable and atrocious behavior. > What the hell is that? You know *nothing* of Socratic Dialogue > because you are unable to practice it. Bela, are you deliberately trying to arouse my anger at you? Is that what you want? To have educated people angry at you? > You have also lied, and asked me to do something unethical- to > delete the post where you asked for all those posts to be deleted. > That is *sleazy*! For Christ's sake, Bela. Move the fucking bullshit posts to a thread called 'Bullshit' so people who want to wallow in bullshit can go there and read it over and over again to their heart's content. I don't care what you do with the bullshit posts, but take them out of the thread where they have no functionality other than to destroy the learning process. Take the bullshit and put it anywhere you like, but take it out of that thread. > Talk about your "power plays". Bela, I expect you to honor your pledge. Take the bullshit anywhere you like, where it will attract the huge jeering crowds that excite you, but take it out of that thread where it does not belong. > Its not working, Barry, and for that I'm sorry. Yes. The practice of filling up that thread with bullshit is dysfunctional, Bela. You see that. I see that. Bullshit is a dysfunctional feature of any inquiry learning process. I don't care if people don't want to learn in their own space on their own time. I don't care if people want to be dysfunctional in their own space and on their own time. I don't care if people want to craft endless bullshit in their own space on their own time. But not in the space where you invited me to escape from the time-wasting dysfunctionalism of the bullshit crowd. Now you have a choice, Bela. Choose the teeming masses of bullshitters and enjoy their numbers, or choose a rare opportunity to discover a smidgeon of systems theory. You have a lifetime to enjoy the teeming masses of bullshitter until you are sick to death of them. You have but one chance to discover something different. Choose, Bela. Now is your moment of choice. Choose. And then honor that choice. Your move. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Sat Dec 28 08:43:56 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Editing Posts To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 08:43:51 -0500 (EST) Bela, I can no longer edit my posts in your forum. The moderation feature means that I have lost the facility to go back and fix my typos and edit bad phrasing. This is yet another annoying dysfunctionality which disables me from crafting coherent presentations of the theories. I am going to have to put the seminar on hold until you fix that, as I need the affordance of the editing feature to do a decent job. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Sat Dec 28 14:18:29 2002 Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 11:18:31 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: You Bastard! Barry, How many times has this happened before? Think about it. >Then avoid me. If you cannot tolerate logic and science, if that >irritates and annoys you, then avoid me. Fuck you. I am not going to avoid my own forum. I love logic and science; just not *your* brand of it. You do not discuss things logically; you pull all sorts of juvenile bullshit: "I will not recognize that word the way you use it, you must use it the way I use it, even if millions of people use it the way you state" "I have the solution but I won't tell you what it is" "you are an idiot for using an non-standard definition/oh, since you ask, I am using a non-standard definition that I made up!" ...etc. None of this is the sign of a 'logical or scientific' mind. >But if it is your choice to remain oblivious of science and logic >then you may not exercise power over me. It is your usual arrogance that someone who is tired of your games and bullshit is rejecting "science and logic". Ha! >Bela, you have not even experienced my concept of dialogue yet. I've waded through your posts for over a year, on 3 different forums. I know your MO. >Now you have a choice, Bela. Choose the teeming masses of bullshitters Obviously, I've made my choice where bullshit is concerned. >or choose a rare opportunity to discover >a smidgeon of systems theory. Oh *goody*! But Barry, you've been peddling this since I've known you. How many converts have you gotten? Why do you have so much trouble carrying on a conversation, or even making yourself understood on line? Why should I be interested in something with no demonstrable advantages to it? >Choose, Bela. Now is your moment of choice. >Choose. And then honor that choice. You will remain on moderation, but I may just go ahead and ban you if you are out of control. I've gotten plenty of support, btw. I think you are in the minority here. Bela ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Sun Dec 29 00:17:00 2002 Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 21:17:08 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: oh yes... And I might want to point out that I have tried to reach you, to communicate with you, a great deal over the last year or so. I responded to your cries for help. I did this not to invalidate you but to communicate. But you rarely even aknowledged what I had to say. Bela ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Sun Dec 29 09:13:40 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: You Bastard! To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 09:13:34 -0500 (EST) Hi Bela, > How many times has this happened before? Think about it. Abusive practices by people in positions of power have happened many many times before, Bela. And many many times those who have been treated abusively by people in power have reacted with many many different methods of response to expose and arrest such abuses. It's nothing new, Bela. And I still don't have a serviceable solution to that recurring problem, which I have run into at such venues as Bell Labs, MITRE, Cafe Utne, Fresh Press, and WebX. > > Then avoid me. If you cannot tolerate logic and science, if that > > irritates and annoys you, then avoid me. > Fuck you. I am not going to avoid my own forum. I love logic > and science; just not *your* brand of it. Bela, you are being abusive. I disrespect abusive behavior, especialluy by people who are excersing power over others. It is an odious practice. You can be disaffected with my brand of science and logic, just as I can be disaffected by your brands of thought or belief or or methods of operation. > You do not discuss things logically; you pull all sorts of > juvenile bullshit: > "I will not recognize that word the way you use it, you must use > it the way I use it, even if millions of people use it the way you state" Bela, it is an abusive practice to offer a fabricated quote. I disrespect your practice of fabricating quotes, and putting words in my mouth which I did not utter. That is an unethical and dishonest practice, Bela, and I disrespect you for it. > "I have the solution but I won't tell you what it is" Not only is that a repetition of the above abusive, unethical, and dishonest practice, it utters a fabricated quote that purports to say the opposite of my actual intent, beleif, and practice. And I am annoyed that you would disrupt and disable my practice of presenting methods of solution, and coerce me into adopting reactive methods rather than proactive methods of expression. > "you are an idiot for using an non-standard definition/oh, since > you ask, I am using a non-standard definition that I made up!" Bela, your stock is in the toilet. I expect you to conduct yourself more honorably than that. > None of this is the sign of a 'logical or scientific' mind. Correct. But all of it is a flight of fancy of your mind. You are welcome to your flights of fancy, Bela, but please own them as products of your fertile imagination. > > But if it is your choice to remain oblivious of science and logic > > then you may not exercise power over me. > It is your usual arrogance that someone who is tired of your > games and bullshit is rejecting "science and logic". You are rejecting what you call 'my brand' of science and logic. I am rejecting your brand of argumentation, including your brand of inventing imaginary quotes, your brand of insults, your brand of the argument cultue, and your brand of silencing those whose ideas you don't appreciate. > Ha! I am unclear on what you are cackling over. > > Bela, you have not even experienced my concept of dialogue yet. > I've waded through your posts for over a year, on 3 different forums. > I know your MO. What is the name of my modus operandi, Bela. What is the name of my MO in this E-Mail? > > Now you have a choice, Bela. Choose the teeming masses of bullshitters > Obviously, I've made my choice where bullshit is concerned. It is not obvious to me. But it appears to me that you invite bullshit into those threads where the ideas make you uncomfortable. > > or choose a rare opportunity to discover a smidgeon of systems theory. > Oh *goody*! That's a childish response, Bela. You do have a right to remain ignorant, Bela. I have no power to compel you to learn any subject against your will. But if that is your choice, say so openly and honestly. It is disingenous of you to extend what appears on the face of it to be a sincere invitation to me to articulate the theories which I have been working on for the past 18 years and then shut down that venue with a combination of invited hectoring and silencing my voice. > But Barry, you've been peddling this since I've known you. How many > converts have you gotten? This is not a religious mission, Bela. Even if only one person there genuinely desires to learn about my work on the theories of emotions and learning, you have an obligation to respect their right to learn, even if you and others detest those theories and don't want anyone else to learn about them. Bela, it is an evil practice to deny others the freedom to learn. Do you hear me, Bela? It is an evil and unbecoming practice to deny others the freedom to learn, and to learn by the methods of learning which best works for them. > Why do you have so much trouble carrying on a conversation, or > even making yourself understood on line? Because of hectoring behavior by a small number of disruptive posters who object to others learning something they don't understand or care to learn. > Why should I be interested in something with no demonstrable advantages > to it? You interest or lack of interest in any subject is your business, Bela. You have the freedom to direct your attention to whatever interests you and turn your attention away from whatever bores or bewilders or frightens or disgusts you. But it is logically impossible to know in advance if any subject of learning is advantageous or not until you master it and find out whether and how to use it to advantage. But even if some subject brings no personal advantage to you, why would you deny others the opportunity to learn something which they belief will be worthwhile? > > Choose, Bela. Now is your moment of choice. > > Choose. And then honor that choice. > You will remain on moderation, but I may just go ahead and ban you > if you are out of control. Bela, you will remain on Observation, but I may just go ahead and ignore you if you are out of your mind. > I've gotten plenty of support, btw. I think you are in the minority here. Bela, I don't care if I am a minority of one. So was Socrates, so was Galileo, so was Gandhi. Did God give up when He was a minority of one? Discovering knowledge is not subject to majority vote, Bela. If I were the last researcher on Earth, which was otherwise inhabited by an ignorant mob, I would go on learning. Bela, I am aghast, galled, and appalled at your attitude, at your childish and unbecoming behavior and practices, and your pathetic use of power to disrupt and shut down the discovery learning processs. That is an unbecoming and ungodly practice, Bela, and I abhor it. I urge you to abandon that abhorrent and unbecoming practice. Nor will I cooperate in such an idiotic and antisocial practice. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Sun Dec 29 10:07:05 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Peace To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 10:06:59 -0500 (EST) Hi Bela, > First I want to apologize for the hostility I have shown you lately. I appreciate your apology and your wish to end our antagonism. I intensely dislike antagonistic relationship, as I believe they are poor ways to relate to others. > Yet, as I read back on our posts, I don't wonder if I would do the > same thing again. What is the name of the 'thing' -- the practice -- that you have in mind here? Do you mean the practice of treating someone who cares about you as an enemy to be hurt, to be disempowered, to be insulted, to be abused, to be slapped in the face, to be alienated, marginalized, and silenced? > And I wish you good luck on your important work. I don't want to > invalidate the importance of what you do. Bela, you express your belief that it has no validity, you can question its validity or accurcy or utility. But you do not have the power to invalidate it by fiat. > However, I cannot handle your forum behavior. I accept that there are situations that you do not yet know how to handle. But you have not specified here the name of the dimension of my behavior to which you take exception. So, while I know that there is some dimension of my practice which troubles you, I don't yet know which dimension of my practice is the one that arouses your negative reaction. > Please take this as communication. I want to be clear. I want you to be clear, too, Bela. I am exasperated by the lack of clarity in our communication. > When I read your posts I see how little you seem to comprehend what > people say to you. Most people in our culture nod politely, smile, and pretend to understand what others say, without having the slightest notion of how little was actually communicated. But if you engage in Active Listening and Socratic Questioning, you will make an astonishing discovery: Only about 1% of what people say is understood correctly. Most of the time it doesn't matter, cuz it's only idle chit-chat anyway. But there are times when it does matter. If you are instructing a computer by means of a computer program, you don't have the luxury of being unclear. Computers will stop cold when they are instructed with sloppily written code. Which is why very few people actually succeed in programming them well. > You are extremely verbose and use arcane terms and assign unique > definitions to words without telling anyone. I use arcane terms so that people will realize I am referring to something arcane -- something that people may not be very familiar with, but which it has become timely to turn one's attention. > You apply mathematical formulas to everything, which is fine, but no > one can understand you, and your conclusions are often unrelated to > what is being discussed, if not wrong in context. Yet you dig in > your heals and tell people what it is they were supposed to have > said! I appreciate that most people do not understand mathematical formulae or the functions which such formulae specify. But if we are to craft functional methods of dealing with problems, we must master the language and art of expressing and construcing functions. When I observe an instance of dysfunctionality -- the absence of a functional process -- I look for the missing function and introduce it (or an approximation of it) into the mix. But please understand, Bela, that functionality is a feature of functions, and functions are required if one desires to craft functional systems. > On several fundamental levels, communication is totally broken down > here. Yes. Because if we limit ourselves to English (especially the articulation of Rules) then we fail to access those dimensions of communication that are inaccessible to the language of words and rules. Bela, you can run on a soccer field, throw and catch a ball, and ride a bike without falling over. You can name these behaviors, make reference to them, and even help little children learn them. Those behaviors, which you once learned as a child, are examples of functions which some section of your brain learned to perform. Somewhere in your brain is a 'wiring diagram' of some neurons which enable you to perform those functions. But you would be hard pressed to express in words how your brain actually does that. Almost no one could actually learn to throw and catch a ball by reading a book about it. I say 'almost no one' because there are in fact a few critters who could learn that by reading a 'book'. I wonder if you are familiar with such 'critters'. > I've watched you in several forums and see how you interact > with people. Sure you have on-line friends and I don't want to > step in the way, yet I am not liking your influence on the forum. Now we are getting somewhere. You don't like my influence. Influence, Bela, is what 'karma' is all about. Everything has an influence on everything else. Sometimes it's a big influence, a clear and direct influence. And sometimes it's a subtle influence, not easy to recognize or trace. But that is the whole point of both 'karma' and (as we call it in my world), Systems Theory. > I get the impression that there are some things I like to look at, > and you are in resistance to looking there, so out of that resistance, > you resort to this "discommunicative" behavior. Perhaps you are > unaware of this mechanism. Bela, there are some 'things' you like to look at which you make elliptic reference to, such that I'm unclear on what the 'thing' is that you are looking at. You call it 'vibrations' or 'resonances' or 'colors' or 'energy' or whatever. And I wonder what actual 'thing' you are looking at when you refer to that 'thing' by those names. In order to look 'there' I need to know where 'there' is. Do you see, Bela, how you use pronouns or metaphors to refer to some 'thing' that doesn't otherwise seem to have a unique name? Now maybe this 'thing' exists, is real, and only needs a name of its own so we can identify it clearly. Think of the 'thing' whose name is 'dreams'. It's one of those 'subtle energy' things that we can experience. Some people say that our dreams are messages from God. But before we can share stories about our dreams (the way Tim does), we need to make sure we understand what 'dreams' are. Children of a certain age have nightmares and don't understand that they are dreaming. They don't understand the notion of 'dreaming' or the possibility that we can have visual scenes in our sleep state that do not correspond to events in the physical space in front of our eyes. But eventually most people come to understand what a 'dream' is and when they are having one (or at least, after the fact, when they had one). Whatever this 'thing' is that you posess, Bela, it needs a better name, since you deny that it corresponds to the literal meaning of the words that you are using as metaphors. > I get angry when I feel that you are doing this deliberately. > However sometimes I wonder that you don't realise what is happening. Stay with that thought, Bela, because it's a good thought. I have a close friend whose father never dreamed. Or at least he never could recall having a dream while in a waking state. Perhaps he had dreams but his conscious mind had no recollection of them. Or perhaps his visual cortex was indeed blank, like a turned-off TV screen, when he slept. Recognition means that some process is occuring and our conscious minds are aware of some aspect of that process. Perhaps we are only aware of the final product of the process, but not the process itself. Dolls and toys appear, as if by magic, but there is no such thing as a factory where they are made or a store where they are sold to parents who buy them for their young children. Perhaps we are aware of factories, but have no clue what actually happens inside them such that a trainload of raw materials arrives one day, and a shipment of dolls and toys comes out the next. But what happens inside the factory is a functional process that at least one person understands and performs. And that one person could take the 'mystery' of how it all works to their grave, or that one person could teach others how to turn trainloads of raw materials into dolls and toys. > Anyway, the above reasons are the cause of our conflict, not whether > I like "science". I suspect there are additional reasons, not yet uncovered, not yet revealed, not yet articulated. But yes, desires and dreads are part of the anatomy of our conflict. > I am on many forums where you would have been banned. I'm not even > sure if letting you stay, moderated, is a good thing. Bela, if I had lived in Germany 60 years ago, I'd not only have been banned from society, I'd have been burned in an oven. A lot of people who lived in my parents generation (including Linda Emerson's own mother) faced that horror. Yes, Linda Emerson's mother is a Holocaust survivior. Bela, do you suppose there is a cause and effect linkage between Linda's friendly and compassionate feelings and beliefs about me and the historical fact that her mother survived the Holocaust? Bela, I've lived long enough to have a crude picture of the kind of person who doesn't like me, the kind of person who would just as soon have a world in which I (and people like me) didn't exist. Bela, for God's sake, don't become one of those kind of people. > What's your plan? My plan? It's still under development. But my goal is clear. My goal is to bring insight and enlightenment into a very dark world. Like every child of God, I carry a light. Bela, please don't hide my light under a bushel. Let my light shine, Bela. It's the decent thing to do. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Sun Dec 29 10:27:31 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: oh yes... To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 10:27:25 -0500 (EST) > And I might want to point out that I have tried to reach you, > to communicate with you, a great deal over the last year or so. > I responded to your cries for help. I did this not to invalidate > you but to communicate. But you rarely even aknowledged what I > had to say. Bela, you 'read' people by means other than words in English. You have a 'language' or 'medium' for sensing and 'reading' people by means other than words. But you haven't availed yourself of my request to increase the bandwidth of our connection to include voice communication by telephone. You didn't avail yourself of the opportunity to hear the melody of my voice, by which you could have read a lot more than can be encoded in mere words. A coupla of days ago, you asked, "What's *up* with you, Barry?" And I answered, "My *dander* is up, Bela." Now don't you find it odd that a person such as yourself, who is so gifted at sensing and reading subtle bioenergy fields could not find the word to name what was up with me? And that's what I think our problem is, Bela. I want to find the exact word which names what's being sensed. Now that I have given you the word which names what was up with me, can you match that word to the ineffable 'thing' what you sensed was up with me? And now that I have told you that my 'dander' was up, enabling you to go to a standard dictionary and review the public meaning of that word, can you go back and find the proximal stimulus or triggers that aroused my aander? If you can do that, Bela, you can fill in a gap in the 'karma model' which (in my version) maps events into the space of emotions and responses to emotions. It takes a hell of a lot of abuse and injustice to get my dander up, Bela. Compare to Xam who is insenced and outraged by a single trivial event -- reporting (nay quoting) a news source with a verbatim quote. In that quote, from a relevant news source, I bore accurate witness. I did not fabricate an invented quote for the purpose of mischaracterizing or disparaging someone else. Yet the news source whom I quote, verbatim and without spin or distortion, took offense. Now I take offense, Bela, at being maligned, misqouoted, derided, disparaged, libeled, misdiagnosed, or disempowered. That gets my dander up, Bela. Do you see the cause and effect linkage between those practices and the detectable state of my dander? And do you appreciate that if my dander is aroused to a sufficiently high level, I will take ever stronger action to restore equilibrium? We are at a state of elevated disequilbrium. The state of disequilbrium in your forum has never been so extreme as it is at this juncture. And because your forum is at an extreme state of disequilbrium, my efforts to devise a means of course correction and remdiation have taken on a new urgency. But we need to work together, Bela, to restore equilibrium, peace and harmony, and right the nearly capsized discovery learning process. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Sun Dec 29 13:34:42 2002 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 10:34:42 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: more Barry, I can see I'm not getting through to you, and probably never will. >> How many times has this happened before? Think about it. > >Abusive practices by people in positions of power have happened >many many times before, Bela. Barry, the elephant in the room is that *you* lack the self-awareness to realize that the common element has been you and your obstinate behavior. Through malice or ignorance, you constantly tread on people's feet (telling someone they are anorexic and bolemic! What the fuck is that?!?!?!?!) and post these bizarre nonsequitars that *no one can understand*. If you are studying *education* for God's sake, I would think you would know how to communicate to an audience. >It's nothing new, Bela. And I still don't have a serviceable >solution to that recurring problem, which I have run into at such >venues as Bell Labs, MITRE, Cafe Utne, Fresh Press, and WebX. Yup. But it's everyone *else's* fault, right? I don't think so. >> > Then avoid me. If you cannot tolerate logic and science, if that >> > irritates and annoys you, then avoid me. No. I'm not going to avoid a part of the forum that I started. What would happen if you started your own forum? >> You do not discuss things logically; you pull all sorts of >> juvenile bullshit: > >> "I will not recognize that word the way you use it, you must use >> it the way I use it, even if millions of people use it the way you state" > >Bela, it is an abusive practice to offer a fabricated quote. Fuck you-- you have *lied about your own quotes* Do you remember this one? http://www.worldcursing.com/WebX?14@@.1ddb692f/52 You *lied* about your own statements. >> "I have the solution but I won't tell you what it is" >Not only is that a repetition of the above abusive, unethical, and >dishonest practice, That has been your whole point all along, Barry, you know the solution to fix the world, but you can't explain it. And so far, who has bought into it? Don't blame *me* for not *understanding* something that *no one else even pretends to understand*. >> I've waded through your posts for over a year, on 3 different forums. >> I know your MO. >What is the name of my modus operandi, Bela. I have pointed it out, clearly, many times, but of course you either don't read or don't comprehend. You use obscure, arcane words, which no one understands. You also assign words your own private definitions, without telling anyone. These are both major impediments to communication. Haven't you seen how many comments you've gotten about this? Its like you deliberately use words in a way that they are a *stumbling block* for the person reading, rather than an extended hand. You take what people say, overlay your theories on top, then reject the parts of people's ideas that don't fit *your* theories, then you tell people they are *wrong* because their ideas don't work. Then you have the gall to tell us you are a "student of Socrates" or whatever. Yet you have the lowest functional ability to hold a conversation on the forum! And you consider yourself some sort of eager student, yet you rarely ask questions, you *tell* people what they meant instead. Also, you refusal to accept my use of the word *energy*, which is used by millions of people in this country alone, was staggeringly rude, and the sing that you are no student. What you were doing was denying that which you didn't already know--- that is not the mark of a student! >> > or choose a rare opportunity to discover a smidgeon of systems theory. > >> Oh *goody*! > >That's a childish response, Bela. You do have a right to remain >ignorant, Bela. I have no power to compel you to learn any subject >against your will. Barry, if *you* exemplify systems theory, why would *I* want to learn it? It seems to go against logic, communication, and true understanding, if you are an example of it. And *how many people have read your theories?* You posted links, and asked everyone to read them. How many did? Looks like "zero", doesn't it? Is it because they are looking at the messenger, and deciding the message isn't worth the time, is my suspicion. >This is not a religious mission, Bela. Even if only one person there >genuinely desires to learn about my work on the theories of emotions >and learning, you have an obligation Barry, I haven't seen anyone on any thread take more than a cursory look at your theories. You make it sound like I've barred the door of a classroom with 100 eager students waiting to get in. The reality is, who read your theories, as posted? Who took your quiz? Who has come back asking for more detail? >Because of hectoring behavior by a small number of disruptive posters >who object to others learning something they don't understand or care >to learn. Just like you in the karma thread, undermining my argument at every terms by *disallowing commonly accepted terms* and *telling me (and others) what we were saying* instead of actually listening. >Bela, I don't care if I am a minority of one. So was Socrates, so was >Galileo, so was Gandhi. Oh, criminey, here comes the PERSECUTED VICTIM schtick. ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Sun Dec 29 14:02:49 2002 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:02:52 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Peace Geez Barry, I can see nothing gets through to you. >> However, I cannot handle your forum behavior. > >I accept that there are situations that you do not yet know how to >handle. But you have not specified here the name of the dimension >of my behavior to which you take exception. This is so obviously fraudulent that I am staggered. I have, very clearly, and for a long time quite delicately "specified" the demensions of your behavior. Yet you cannot even acknowledge that. Can't you see how aggravating that is? You play deaf, people get upset, then you say "I don't understand where this anger is coming from". Its a game of yours; I can't tell if you really lack self-awareness, or if you are playing games. Here, again, is one summary, since you ask: When I read your posts I see how little you seem to comprehend what people say to you. You are extremely verbose and use arcane terms and assign unique definitions to words without telling anyone. You apply mathmatical formulas to everything, which is fine, but no one can understand you, and your conclusions are often unrelated to what is being discussed, if not wrong in context. Yet you dig in your heals and tell people what it is they were supposed to have said! You also rarely ask questions, an important part of a dialogue. And going into a new topic, you *dismiss that which you don't already know*!!!! That amazes me, because you study education. This is not how a student operates when studying a new field. >So, while I know that >there is some dimension of my practice which troubles you, I don't >yet know which dimension of my practice is the one that arouses >your negative reaction. This is clearly a lie or self-delusion, becuase I have stated it clearly, as just above. You have a habit of denying what has been said before, which is another reason communication with you is so difficult. Ok, here is a good example of how you operate: >> When I read your posts I see how little you seem to comprehend what >> people say to you. > >Most people in our culture nod politely...If you are instructing a >computer by means of a computer program, you don't have the luxury >of being unclear. Computers will stop cold when they are instructed >with sloppily written code. Which is why very few people actually >succeed in programming them well. You do this consistantly. You take an immediate, even real example or idea, and suddenly you are talking about computer programming, and leave off at some obscure point without tying it in. What the hell are you talking about? Do you care that no one seems to know? >> You are extremely verbose and use arcane terms and assign unique >> definitions to words without telling anyone. > >I use arcane terms so that people will realize I am referring to >something arcane -- Your intent is not relevant when your language pushes people away from your message. >I appreciate that most people do not understand mathematical formulae >or the functions which such formulae specify. But if we are to craft >functional methods of dealing with problems You *appreciate* it, yet you persist, knowing that such communication doesnt' "work" in this context. You are in a recursive loop. And I have yet to see any functional methods from you, either by testimony or demonstrated on the forum. And I have asked many times! >Yes. Because if we limit ourselves to English (especially the >articulation of Rules) then we fail to access those dimensions of >communication that are inaccessible to the language of words and rules. Yet you resist the terms I use and dismiss them. That is a double standard. >> I've watched you in several forums and see how you interact >> with people. Sure you have on-line friends and I don't want to >> step in the way, yet I am not liking your influence on the forum. > >Now we are getting somewhere. You don't like my influence. Yes. Notice how calm, how many peaceful conversations are going, with you on moderation? >Bela, there are some 'things' you like to look at which you make >elliptic reference to, such that I'm unclear on what the 'thing' is >that you are looking at. >Do you see, Bela, how you use pronouns or metaphors to refer to >some 'thing' that doesn't otherwise seem to have a unique name? >Now maybe this 'thing' exists, is real, and only needs a name of >its own so we can identify it clearly. What you are doing is, despite knowing that "my" useage of the word "energy" is accepted by millions of people, you are saying you refuse to recognize it, as if your opinion has any relevance to the useage of this word! No one needs your permission to use it this way! >Whatever this 'thing' is that you posess, Bela, it needs a better name, >since you deny that it corresponds to the literal meaning of the words >that you are using as metaphors. No, it does not need a *better name*, you need to *accept* this common useage of the word, or else admit that you are not *really* interested in learning about it! >> I get angry when I feel that you are doing this deliberately. >> However sometimes I wonder that you don't realise what is happening. > >Stay with that thought, Bela, because it's a good thought. Seriously, Barry, I can't tell if you are a complete asshole, or simply lack self-awareness. Artemis has mentioned how often you are "misunderstood" and how you also "misunderstand" others. This is fine but your defensive and arrogant posture, and your annoying use of obscure $5 words, and your denying what actually has been said makes me wonder... > But what happens inside the factory is a functional >process that at least one person understands and performs. And that >one person could take the 'mystery' of how it all works to their grave, >or that one person could teach others how to turn trainloads of raw >materials into dolls and toys. > >> Anyway, the above reasons are the cause of our conflict, not whether >> I like "science". ????????? i'm sure that meant something to you (no doubt it pertains to "StoryCraft" or something) but it makes no sense and you didn't even bother to tie it in to the topic at hand. Typical. >> I am on many forums where you would have been banned. I'm not even >> sure if letting you stay, moderated, is a good thing. > >Bela, if I had lived in Germany 60 years ago, I'd not only have been >banned from society, I'd have been burned in an oven. Well that's not my fucking fault and don't compare me to a fucking nazi! >Bela, do you suppose there is a cause and effect linkage between Linda's >friendly and compassionate feelings and beliefs about me and the historical >fact that her mother survived the Holocaust? Yes. She feels sorry for you. She has found a match with your victim posture. >> What's your plan? > >My plan? It's still under development. > >But my goal is clear. > >My goal is to bring insight and enlightenment into a very dark world. Then why are yo having the opposite effect? You sow confusion and discord. Hence you get banned from forums, etc. >Bela, please don't hide my light under a bushel. >Let my light shine, Bela. It's the decent thing to do. You are in no position to tell me what is "decent". I have caught you lying and being sneaky on the MBS forum. Plus you threatened me with violence. WTF? If you want your light to shine, you have to arrange it in a way where other people can see it. You have it so covered with your intellectual claptrap that it is almost completely hidden. You have to look at your responsibilty for how you behave in a forum. Simply, that is the message here. ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Sun Dec 29 14:20:55 2002 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:21:02 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: oh yes... Barry, here is a prime example of you not registering that which gets said to you. >> And I might want to point out that I have tried to reach you, >> to communicate with you, a great deal over the last year or so. > >Bela, you 'read' people by means other than words in English. Barry, I have engaged you in varioous conversations over the last year or so, in English. I've offered suggestions, asked questions. You generally did not respond, or you changed the subject. So your contention is utter *bullshit* and if you go through old messages you will see this is true. >But you haven't availed yourself of my request to increase the >bandwidth of our connection to include voice communication by >telephone. You didn't avail yourself of the opportunity to >hear the melody of my voice, Why the fuck should I call you on Christmas Eve? I was with my family. What would it serve me to have you spew your anger into my ear? What a ridiculous idea. >A coupla of days ago, you asked, "What's *up* with you, Barry?" > >And I answered, "My *dander* is up, Bela." > >Now don't you find it odd that a person such as yourself, who is >so gifted at sensing and reading subtle bioenergy fields could >not find the word to name what was up with me? Barry, let me explain something. I had a very good idea what was up with you. A very good idea. *However*, in the interests of *dialogue*, I invited you to express yourself. It seemed like the decent thing to do, and would be conducive to an actual *dialogue*. Have you ever done this? Asked someone how they felt, or what they meant? >Now that I have given you the word which names what was up with me, >can you match that word to the ineffable 'thing' what you sensed was >up with me? I saw a man who was very stuck, and very frustrated, and didn't know what to do. >And now that I have told you that my 'dander' was up, enabling you >to go to a standard dictionary and review the public meaning of >that word, Again, why do you make conversation so *difficult*? I KNOW what "dander" means, but you assumed I didn't and instead of offering a definition or meaningful context, you used the word in that coy and cryptic way of yours, so I am expected to do research? Why do you throw obstacles in the way of your own communication? You handicap yourself, you install speedbumbs right in the middle of the point you are making. Can't you see this, and how it is *not* in the interests of "discourse"? >Now I take offense, Bela, at being maligned, misqouoted, derided, >disparaged, libeled, misdiagnosed, or disempowered. And yet you don't see that you bring that upon yourself by your behavior. You communicate in a cryptic and nebulous language, you use pet definitions for words but don't tell anyone, you tell people what they were supposed to have said instead of *listening and asking*. So look in the mirror. You bring this on yourself, as the incidents of your life prove. You are not a victim. You have more influence in this scenario than you realize. >We are at a state of elevated disequilbrium. The state of disequilbrium >in your forum has never been so extreme as it is at this juncture. No, now that you are moderated, if you take a look, it is as peaceful and calm as it was a week ago. >And because your forum is at an extreme state of disequilbrium, my >efforts to devise a means of course correction and remdiation have >taken on a new urgency. But the forum is *not* in a state of "disequilbrium". It is running smoothly again. Can't you see that? >But we need to work together, Bela, to restore equilibrium, peace >and harmony, and right the nearly capsized discovery learning process. Barry, you have to take care of your own shit first. And due to the level of denial and lack of self-awareness you exhibit, I am not very hopeful that you actually *want* to grow or open up in this way. Bela. ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Sun Dec 29 16:57:56 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: More To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:57:50 -0500 (EST) > Barry, I can see I'm not getting through to you, and probably never will. It's not hopeless. I sense more progress than you seem to perceive. > > > How many times has this happened before? Think about it. > > Abusive practices by people in positions of power have happened > > many many times before, Bela. > Barry, the elephant in the room is that *you* lack the self-awareness to > realize that the common element has been you and your obstinate behavior. Bela, I am obstinately opposed to certain practices in our culture that arise from time to time in venues where I dwell. If you see a firefighter in a building on fire, you cannot infer that the fire was caused by the firefighter. Correlation is not causation. > Through malice or ignorance, you constantly tread on people's feet > (telling someone they are anorexic and bolemic! What the fuck is > that?!?!?!?!) and post these bizarre nonsequitars that *no one can > understand*. If you are studying *education* for God's sake, I would > think you would know how to communicate to an audience. Bela there is a distinction between asking a question which seeks clarification and asserting a diagnosis. I you go back and read carefully what I wrote (and not what Xam erroneously asserted) you will see that I asked her a question. Bela, I am incensed that you would propagate a vicious lie. Please do not repeat the erroneous reports of those whose misperceptions are so erratic that they cannot distinguish a question from a declarative statement. In the name of the Gods, Bela, I implore you to attribute my words to me and Xam's words to her, and to recognize that her failure to distinguish a question from a declarative statement is an insufficient cause to direct your unwarranted anger at me. > > It's nothing new, Bela. And I still don't have a serviceable > > solution to that recurring problem, which I have run into at such > > venues as Bell Labs, MITRE, Cafe Utne, Fresh Press, and WebX. > Yup. But it's everyone *else's* fault, right? I don't think so. Bela, have you not been reading me? I do not believe in the idiotic concept of fault. I believe in cause and effect and the duty to form accurate models of the operation of cause and effect. It is unbecoming of you to attribute to me a belief that I do not subscribe to. > > > > Then avoid me. If you cannot tolerate logic and science, if that > > > > irritates and annoys you, then avoid me. > No. I'm not going to avoid a part of the forum that I started. What would > happen if you started your own forum? I do have my own forum. Several of them, in fact. > > > You do not discuss things logically; you pull all sorts of > > > juvenile bullshit: > > > "I will not recognize that word the way you use it, you must use > > > it the way I use it, even if millions of people use it the ways > > > you state" > > Bela, it is an abusive practice to offer a fabricated quote. > Fuck you-- you have *lied about your own quotes* Do you remember this one? Bela, I do not appreciate your use of expletives. It is unbecoming and unprofessional practice. > http://www.worldcursing.com/WebX?14@@.1ddb692f/52 > You *lied* about your own statements. What are you referring to Bela? You cited one of your posts, not one of mine. How can you accuse me of lying about my own quotes and offers as proof a document that you fabricated? That makes no sense to me at all. > > > "I have the solution but I won't tell you what it is" > > Not only is that a repetition of the above abusive, unethical, and > > dishonest practice, > That has been your whole point all along, Barry, you know the > solution to fix the world, but you can't explain it. And so far, > who has bought into it? Don't blame *me* for not *understanding* > something that *no one else even pretends to understand*. Bela, you don't seem to have grasped my point, which is that it is possible to construct a scientific system model of cause and effect and employ that model in an exercise known as model-based reasoning. So far, you haven't even acknowledged looking at the model, let alone saying whether you understand it or how to use it to do model-based reasoning. > > > I've waded through your posts for over a year, on 3 different forums. > > > I know your MO. > > What is the name of my modus operandi, Bela. > I have pointed it out, clearly, many times, but of course you either > don't read or don't comprehend. Bela I can read the word 'it' which a pronoun with no real word as its antecedent. What is the Name of my Modus Operandi, Bela, the name of the practice you claim to be pointing at with the word 'it'? Bela, you seem to have a Modus Operandi of your own, which is to allude to things by means of vaguely defined metaphors, allusions, and unreferenced pronouns, all of which suggest some antecedent that you have in mind, but no exhibition of the antecedent and no reference to a source definition tagged by a proper name. > You use obscure, arcane words, which no one understands. You also > assign words your own private definitions, without telling anyone. Bela, if you don't understand the meaning of 'resonance' or 'vibration' or 'sinusoid' or 'amplitude' or 'modulation' or 'frequency' or 'wavelength' or propagation I will be glad to define them for you, or to point you to standard references on Harmonic Motion and Harmonic Resonance. > These are both major impediments to communication. Haven't you seen > how many comments you've gotten about this? Its like you deliberately > use words in a way that they are a *stumbling block* for the person > reading, rather than an extended hand. I agree that defining subtle abstractions are difficult. But if we are going to have a dialogue about subtle effects, we need to devise a common, shared vocabulary that names the identifiable elements of our investigation. > You take what people say, overlay your theories on top, then reject > the parts of people's ideas that don't fit *your* theories, then you > tell people they are *wrong* because their ideas don't work. I can only interpret what people say in the light of my understanding of the meanings of words, Bela. If people wish to name some concepts outside of my awareness, they will need to do two things: 1) outline the concept itself, and 2) assign it a distinct name so that we can reference the concept in an unambigous manner. > Then you have the gall to tell us you are a "student of Socrates" > or whatever. Yet you have the lowest functional ability to hold > a conversation on the forum! Why should it gall you for me to honestly disclose that I study the methods of Socrates? It's a fact. I do study the methods of Socrates. I've been doing that ever since college, when I first studied syllogisms. Socrates is not about conversation. Socrates is about dialogue. The word means 'through logic'. Most ordinary conversations are not conducted 'through logic' but 'with verse'. > And you consider yourself some sort of eager student, yet you rarely ask > questions, you *tell* people what they meant instead. Also, your refusal to > accept my use of the word *energy*, which is used by millions of people > in this country alone, was staggeringly rude, and the sing that you are > no student. Bela, if I were you, I would not take up the role of teacher. You are not well suited to that role. > What you were doing was denying that which you didn't already > know --- that is not the mark of a student! Bela, you have not communicated the antecedent to the pronoun 'that' in the above sentence. What I am denying is having apprehended the undefined antecedent that corresponds to the pronoun 'that' which purports to refer back to your as yet unexplained concept. > > > > or choose a rare opportunity to discover a smidgeon of systems theory. > > > Oh *goody*! > > That's a childish response, Bela. You do have a right to remain > > ignorant, Bela. I have no power to compel you to learn any subject > > against your will. > Barry, if *you* exemplify systems theory, why would *I* want to > learn it? I have scant evidence that you do want to learn it and copious evidence that you don't want to learn it. If it is your desire to remain oblivious of systems thinking, that is your perogative. I have no power to compel you to learn any subject against your will. > It seems to go against logic, communication, and true understanding, > if you are an example of it. Bela, we are not doing systems theory. We haven't even begun to do systems theory. At your insistence, I shifted stance and adopted a posture of antagonism so that we could experience the utter failure of the argument culture which I abhor because, unlike systems thinking it utterly fails to make any useful progress toward anything of mutual interest. If you don't like this kind of futile argument, I propose we abandon it in favor of an exploration of an alternative method of discourse which we have not yet begun to employ. > And *how many people have read your theories?* You posted links, and asked > everyone to read them. As far as I know, only two people have acknowledged reading them -- Linda and Artemis, whose reference to the elements of the theories is recognizable and accurate. > How many did? Two. Linda and Artemis. As near as I can tell, no one else has bothered to take a look or make any attempt to apprehend the theories. > Looks like "zero", doesn't it? No. Looks like two. But I accept your confession that you have not read the theory, and therefore cannot be familiar with ih. > Is it because they are looking at the messenger, and deciding the > message isn't worth the time, is my suspicion. No. It is because they are exercising their God-given right to remain ignorant and oblivious of that which they do not yet desire to begin learning. > > This is not a religious mission, Bela. Even if only one person there > > genuinely desires to learn about my work on the theories of emotions > > and learning, you have an obligation > Barry, I haven't seen anyone on any thread take more than a cursory > look at your theories. There is a reason that Artemis and Linda haven't begun discussing the theories on that thread. While I believe they are ready to discuss them, others on the thread are not yet ready to permit that to begin happening. > You make it sound like I've barred the door of a classroom with > 100 eager students waiting to get in. No. You have invited into classroom a sizeable number of disruptive hectors, led by yourself, who have prevented the three of us who genuinely wish to explore the theory from proceeding. And you have barred me from speaking freely. > The reality is, who read your theories, as posted? Artemis and Linda. > Who took your quiz? > What quiz? > Who has come back asking for more detail? Come back from where? From waiting for the disruptive hectors to tire of their game? > > Because of hectoring behavior by a small number of disruptive posters > > who object to others learning something they don't understand or care > > to learn. > Just like you in the karma thread, undermining my argument at > every terms by *disallowing commonly accepted terms* and *telling > me (and others) what we were saying* instead of actually listening. I told you the meaning of what you were saying (to the extent what you were saying had any meaning) when I parsed the words uttered according to the definitions of those words as I understand them. > > Bela, I don't care if I am a minority of one. So was Socrates, so was > > Galileo, so was Gandhi. > Oh, criminey, here comes the PERSECUTED VICTIM schtick. If you feel persecuted, Bela, just say so. But I don't understand why you keep invoking that schtick, since I don't believe I am persecuting you and I don't believe you are a victim. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Sun Dec 29 17:29:32 2002 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:29:35 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: More >> > > How many times has this happened before? Think about it. > >> > Abusive practices by people in positions of power have happened >> > many many times before, Bela. No, Barry, what has happened is you have annoyed the living fuck out of people and they finally told you that they had had enough. I know now that you cannot see this, so you project it onto others as "injustices". Until you can see this disfunctional dynamic, you will *repeat it*... study up on recursion to understand my point. >Bela there is a distinction between asking a question which seeks >clarification and asserting a diagnosis. I you go back and read >carefully what I wrote (and not what Xam erroneously asserted) >you will see that I asked her a question. "Did I read that correctly, Xam? You suffer from alternating Bulimia and Anorexia?" http://www.worldcursing.com/WebX?14@@.1ddb36c6/260 Barry, you asked her to *confirm your labels or judgements*. That is different. > recognize that her failure to >distinguish a question from a declarative statement is an insufficient >cause to direct your unwarranted anger at me. Barry, my response was "Barry, lets be careful about such labeling here." That showed extreme tolerance, because I wanted to nail you for your insensitivity. >Bela, have you not been reading me? I do not believe in the idiotic >concept of fault. You have been trying to blame your ostracism on my "odious dictatorial powers" or whatever. > It is >unbecoming of you to attribute to me a belief that I do not subscribe >to. I sometimes wonder if you actually *know* what your beliefs are because you are so inconsistant around them. It is partly why it is so difficult to converse with you. >What are you referring to Bela. You cited one of your posts, not >one of mine. How can you accuse me of lying about my own quotes >and offers as proof a document that you fabricated? You are being a dishonest weasely bastard here Barry. You are sitting in a lie so big you can't even recognize it. I even provided a *link to your original post* when I quoted it. So again (and I don't know why I go through the tedium of proving to you what you have already posted) Look here: http://www.worldcursing.com/WebX?14@@.1ddb692f/45 and here: http://www.worldcursing.com/WebX?14@@.1ddb692f/48 Here you will find the two posts, of yours, unaltered, where you say two different things, and when I point it out to you, you either 1) ignore it, or 2) lie about it, like you just did in this email Look at your own words! >> > > "I have the solution but I won't tell you what it is" > >> > Not only is that a repetition of the above abusive, unethical, and >> > dishonest practice Don't call me dishonest. I have caught you lying before, like above. Now it could be that you don't even know what you say, but you are still misrepresenting yourself. Point out where I am lying. >So far, you haven't even acknowledged looking at the model, let alone >saying whether you understand it or how to use it to do model-based >reasoning. I am waiting for you to show me an example, or give a demonstration of how it works! And so far you haven't! You say karma can "easily be solved" yet I ask you point blank, 5 times, and you are evasive! So I have opened it up: I have asked other posters to report if they think they understand your idea. What is the Name of my Modus Operandi, Bela, the >name of the practice you claim to be pointing at with the word 'it'? In other words, you are going to ignore my communication to you. OK, if you want it in a bite-sized chunk, your MO is "bullshit projected upon others due to lack of awareness of the self". > >Bela, if you don't understand the meaning of 'resonance' or 'vibration' >or 'sinusoid' or 'amplitude' or 'modulation' or 'frequency' or 'wavelength' >or propagation I understand these terms, Barry, but you have yet to make them relevant. >I agree that defining subtle abstractions are difficult. But if we >are going to have a dialogue about subtle effects, we need to devise >a common, shared vocabulary that names the identifiable elements of our >investigation. BARRY A VOCABULARY ALREADY EXISTS BUT YOU REFUSE TO ACCEPT IT OR TO LEARN IT!!!!!!! > If people wish to name some concepts >outside of my awareness, they will need to do two things: 1) outline >the concept itself, and 2) assign it a distinct name so that we can >reference the concept in an unambigous manner. That is fine in your world, Barry, but MBS deals with matters *spiritual* and as many people have told you, your analytical model DOES NOT WORK here. Anyway, if the above are your requirements, and you refuse to accept the communication as offered, then you are out. Understand? Familiar situation? >Bela, if I were you, I would not take up the role of teacher. You are >not well suited to that role. ASSHOLE. I am an excellent teacher, I have been told this by many people. I have been told many times that I am a "natural" teacher. Now, as for you... has anyone understood your theories yet? >Bela, you have not communicated the antecedent to the pronoun 'that' >in the above sentence. What I am denying is having apprehended the >undefined antecedent that corresponds to the pronoun 'that' which >purports to refer back to your as yet unexplained concept. Re-read that and ask yourself if it would fall on the ears as dissembling bullshit, a dodge, a smokescreen. >> And *how many people have read your theories?* You posted links, and asked >> everyone to read them. > >As far as I know, only two people have acknowledged reading them -- >Linda and Artemis, whose reference to the elements of the theories >is recognizable and accurate. But Artemis has worked with you for 7 years, right? I mean, she had read them before? >No. It is because they are exercising their God-given right to remain >ignorant and oblivious of that which they do not yet desire to begin >learning. No, it means they see your bullshit and figure its not worth the tedium of reading. >I told you the meaning of what you were saying (to the extent what >you were saying had any meaning) when I parsed the words uttered >according to the definitions of those words as I understand them. Exactly. As usual, instead of asking for clarification, you *told me what I had said* and then you *declared me to be wrong*. What is wrong is your interpretation! Yet you can't see this! >> > Bela, I don't care if I am a minority of one. So was Socrates, so was >> > Galileo, so was Gandhi. > >> Oh, criminey, here comes the PERSECUTED VICTIM schtick. > >If you feel persecuted, Bela, just say so. ...I don't believe I am >persecuting you and I don't believe you are a victim. Luck, fuckwit, you compare me to nazis, and yourself to Ghandi. You're the one with the victim complex, as I, and you, have demonstrated many times. ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Sun Dec 29 18:00:51 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Peace To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 18:00:45 -0500 (EST) > Geez Barry, I can see nothing gets through to you. Stop transmitting 'sweet nothing' and you might have more luck. > > > However, I cannot handle your forum behavior. > > I accept that there are situations that you do not yet know how to > > handle. But you have not specified here the name of the dimension > > of my behavior to which you take exception. > This is so obviously fraudulent that I am staggered. If you are staggering at the realization of your fraudulence, Bela, you can abandon the fraudulence and regain your balance. > I have, very clearly, and for a long time quite delicately "specified" > the demensions of your behavior. Yet you cannot even acknowledge that. > Can't you see how aggravating that is? I can see how aggravating you are. I can feel how aggravating you are. How aggravated do I have to feel before you are satisfied that I am feeling sufficiently aggravated? > You play deaf, people get upset, then you say "I don't understand > where this anger is coming from". Its a game of yours; I can't tell > if you really lack self-awareness, or if you are playing games. I agree that you can't tell. Therefore I would appreciate it if you would discontinue the annoying practice of making negative judgments and acting on them. It aggravates me. > Here, again, is one summary, since you ask: > When I read your posts I see how little you seem to comprehend what > people say to you. You are extremely verbose and use arcane terms > and assign unique definitions to words without telling anyone. You > apply mathmatical formulas to everything, which is fine, but no one > can understand you, and your conclusions are often unrelated to what > is being discussed, if not wrong in context. Yet you dig in your heals > and tell people what it is they were supposed to have said! Consider the possibility, Bela, that the incomprehensible utterances of others are incomprehensible to me because they are incomprehensible utterances. If others cannot understand me, then we need to enter a clarification phase until we arrive at a mutually understood common language. > You also rarely ask questions, an important part of a dialogue. And > going into a new topic, you *dismiss that which you don't already > know*!!!! That amazes me, because you study education. This is not > how a student operates when studying a new field. We have not entered dialogue yet, Bela. We are still in the accusatory mode of the argument culture. I'm not clear why you wanted to adopt the debate model of the argument culture. And I'm not sure why I'm even humoring your desire to operate within that dysfunctional paaradigm. But any time you want to evolve from the Argument Culture to the Bohm Dialogue Model, I'm ready. It's up to you, since we cannot migrate to the Dialogue Model until you are ready to advance. > > So, while I know that there is some dimension of my practice > > which troubles you, I don't yet know which dimension of my > > practice is the one that arouses your negative reaction. > This is clearly a lie or self-delusion, because I have stated it > clearly, as just above. You have a habit of denying what has been > said before, which is another reason communication with you is so > difficult. Why am I obliged to adopt your erroneous beliefs, Bela? > Ok, here is a good example of how you operate: > > > When I read your posts I see how little you seem to comprehend what > > > people say to you. > > Most people in our culture nod politely...If you are instructing a > > computer by means of a computer program, you don't have the luxury > > of being unclear. Computers will stop cold when they are instructed > > with sloppily written code. Which is why very few people actually > > succeed in programming them well. > You do this consistantly. You take an immediate, even real example or > idea, and suddenly you are talking about computer programming, and > leave off at some obscure point without tying it in. What the hell > are you talking about? Do you care that no one seems to know? Are you saying that you don't understand the analogy, Bela? Is that the practice of mine that troubles you? My use of analogies to explain an idea or illustrate a point? > > > You are extremely verbose and use arcane terms and assign unique > > > definitions to words without telling anyone. > > I use arcane terms so that people will realize I am referring to > > something arcane -- > Your intent is not relevant when your language pushes people away > from your message. Pushes them away? Or are they fleeing because they are terrified of the message itself, which challenges their belief system? When people express a belief in something, but cannot articulate the something they purport to believe in, my questions are very threatening, because I am liable to topple their empty house of cards. > > I appreciate that most people do not understand mathematical formulae > > or the functions which such formulae specify. But if we are to craft > > functional methods of dealing with problems > You *appreciate* it, yet you persist, knowing that such communication > doesn't "work" in this context. You are in a recursive loop. And I > have yet to see any functional methods from you, either by testimony > or demonstrated on the forum. And I have asked many times! And yet it does work in other contexts. I now have a group of poets finally getting the concept of 'function'. It wasn't easy but they worked at it and now it makes sense to them. You haven't seen a lot of stuff, Bela. You haven't see a lot of stuff because, for reasons unbeknownst to me, you have declined to look. You asked to see some models and theories. I told you where to look. By your own admission, you have not looked. Why, Bela? Why did you ask to be shown something and then not bother to look? > > Yes. Because if we limit ourselves to English (especially the > > articulation of Rules) then we fail to access those dimensions of > > communication that are inaccessible to the language of words and rules. > Yet you resist the terms I use and dismiss them. That is a double standard. I suspect that what you wish to describe is a process or function that you perform when you do a reading. If that's true, then you must do more than just name the process or function or allude to it by an elliptic metaphorical reference or unreferenced pronoun. You must either demonstrate the function itself by performing it, or you must specify the underlying process itself. In any event, you cannot do that in words because functional processes cannot, in general, be specified in words. > > > I've watched you in several forums and see how you interact > > > with people. Sure you have on-line friends and I don't want to > > > step in the way, yet I am not liking your influence on the forum. > > Now we are getting somewhere. You don't like my influence. > Yes. Notice how calm, how many peaceful conversations are going, > with you on moderation? Now that Peter and Xam are gone, most of the nastiness is gone, too. But if you only want conversation, Bela, and not dialogue, then you have to stop inviting dialogue and then responding with debate. In conversation, people take turns telling stories. But that's not what dialogue is. Dialogue is a constructive process, design to craft new insights, not to tell old stories. And dialogue is not debate, which is a contest between two competing beliefs. > > Bela, there are some 'things' you like to look at which you make > > elliptic reference to, such that I'm unclear on what the 'thing' is > > that you are looking at. > > Do you see, Bela, how you use pronouns or metaphors to refer to > > some 'thing' that doesn't otherwise seem to have a unique name? > >Now maybe this 'thing' exists, is real, and only needs a name of > >its own so we can identify it clearly. > What you are doing is, despite knowing that "my" useage of the word > "energy" is accepted by millions of people, you are saying you refuse > to recognize it, as if your opinion has any relevance to the useage > of this word! Bela, how can you assert that I 'know' your usage of the word 'energy' when my attempts to apphrehend your meaning have entirely failed? Every time I attempt to construct a copy of what I imagine to be your meaning, you inform me that my understanding of your meaning is not correct. That means that I do not possess an understanding of what you mean by that word. Therefore, you cannot logically assert that I 'know' what you mean by that word. All the evidence before you, by your own testimony, is that my understanding of what you mean is not an accurate understanding of what you actually mean. > No one needs your permission to use it this way! It's not about permission. It's about transmitting a definition that I can successfully apprehend. > > Whatever this 'thing' is that you posess, Bela, it needs a better name, > > since you deny that it corresponds to the literal meaning of the words > > that you are using as metaphors. > No, it does not need a *better name*, you need to *accept* this > common useage of the word, or else admit that you are not *really* > interested in learning> about it! The 'common usage' that you alluded to by directing me to a Google search turned out to be the ordinary meaning of the word 'energy'. > > > I get angry when I feel that you are doing this deliberately. > > > However sometimes I wonder that you don't realise what is happening. > > Stay with that thought, Bela, because it's a good thought. > Seriously, Barry, I can't tell if you are a complete asshole, or > simply lack self-awareness. Artemis has mentioned how often you > are "misunderstood" and how you also "misunderstand" others. Bela, we've definitively established that I lack awarness of what you have in mind when you use the word 'energy'. I think we both agree on that conclusion. As to self-awareness, I have no idea what you mean. There are many processes going on inside my body all the time. Some of them I'm aware of, others I don't bother to monitor. Right now, since I began processing this batch of E-Mails, I have become aware of a painful feeling that has arisen in my digestive system, centered in the middle of my esophagus. I have also become aware of a tightening of my shoulder muscles and arm muscles. I have also become aware of the fact that my jaw hurts because I am clenching my teeth. I am aware that all of that emotional distress has arisen in the time I began process these E-Mails from you. > This is fine but your defensive and arrogant posture, and your > annoying use of obscure $5 words, and your denying what actually > has been said makes me wonder... Keep the 'wonder' part, Bela. That's the good part. Begin to wonder why, despite intense efforts to decode the meaning of your words, I have utterly failed to construct a coherent understanding or model of what you have in mind. Right now, my model of what you have in mind is the Null Model. Previously, I had a non-null model, which I reported back to you, and you insisted it was wrong, so I discarded it. I now have, in its place, the Null Model. All the previous models that I had constructed, which you dismissed as profoundly in error, I have discarded, leaving me with the Null Model. > > But what happens inside the factory is a functional > > process that at least one person understands and performs. And that > > one person could take the 'mystery' of how it all works to their grave, > > or that one person could teach others how to turn trainloads of raw > > materials into dolls and toys. > > > Anyway, the above reasons are the cause of our conflict, not whether > > > I like "science". > ????????? i'm sure that meant something to you (no doubt it pertains to > "StoryCraft" or something) but it makes no sense and you didn't even > bother to tie it in to the topic at hand. Typical. If by 'that' you are referring to my analogy about the doll and toy factory, then that constitutes the second datum suggesting that you are not just failing to decode my specific analogy, you are failing to appreciate the very concept of reasoning by analogy. So let me ask you, Bela: Are you familiar with the notion of an Analogy? Are you familiar with the notion of Reasoning by Analogy? If so, do you understand the point of the two analogies I used? If the notion of Analogy and Reasoning by Analogy are outside the scope of your experience or practice, then I understand why you are not understanding me. > > > I am on many forums where you would have been banned. I'm not even > > > sure if letting you stay, moderated, is a good thing. > > Bela, if I had lived in Germany 60 years ago, I'd not only have been > > banned from society, I'd have been burned in an oven. > Well that's not my fucking fault and don't compare me to a fucking nazi! I'd appreciate it, Bela, if you would discontinue the practice of discriminating against tribes whose members you do not happen to like. > > Bela, do you suppose there is a cause and effect linkage between > > Linda's friendly and compassionate feelings and beliefs about me > > and the historical fact that her mother survived the Holocaust? > Yes. She feels sorry for you. She has found a match with your > victim posture. I disbelieve your theory that 'Linda feels sorry for me'. I believe she feels compassion for me, but not pity because I am not in despair. I am annoyed and irritated and vexed and perplexed, but I am not in a state of hopelessness or despair. If I were, I wouldn't be motivated to continue this painful process. > > > What's your plan? > > > My plan? It's still under development. > >But my goal is clear. > > My goal is to bring insight and enlightenment into a very dark world. > Then why are you having the opposite effect? You sow confusion and > discord. Hence you get banned from forums, etc. I accept that you remain in the dark and unenlightened, but it's not universally true. > > Bela, please don't hide my light under a bushel. > > Let my light shine, Bela. It's the decent thing to do. > You are in no position to tell me what is "decent". I have caught > you lying and being sneaky on the MBS forum. Plus you threatened > me with violence. WTF? I threatened you with metaphysical violence. I threatened to 'beat the metaphysical crap out of you'. And so that is what I am going to do right now. I am appalled, disgusted, galled, and angered by your idiotic and indefensible behavior, Bela. You should be ashamed of yourself. If you had a shred of decency, you would don sackloth and ashes and beg for penitence for your odious, egregious and unbecoming conduct. > If you want your light to shine, you have to arrange it in a way > where other people can see it. You have it so covered with your > intellectual claptrap that it is almost completely hidden. Bela, who are you to decide who should see my light and when they should be permitted to see it? How arrogant of you to assume the right to make that judgment! How utterly and unconscionably arrogant of you! Burning books is a practice that only a fucking Nazi would do. > You have to look at your responsibilty for how you behave in a > forum. Simply, that is the message here. I will take responsibility for how I conduct myself, Bela. I expect you to do no less. And your behavior has been not merely atrocious, Bela. Your behavior is gastrocious! That means, your behavior literally makes me sick to my stomach. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Sun Dec 29 18:19:16 2002 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 15:19:19 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Peace Barry, Unfortunately your entire email was evasive, dissembling, innacurate, and tedious, except for this part: >As to self-awareness, I have no idea what you mean. There are many >processes going on inside my body all the time. Some of them I'm >aware of, others I don't bother to monitor. You have no idea how important self-awareness is, do you? ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Sun Dec 29 18:37:03 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: oh yes... To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 18:36:57 -0500 (EST) > Barry, here is a prime example of you not registering that which gets > said to you. > > > And I might want to point out that I have tried to reach you, > > > to communicate with you, a great deal over the last year or so. > > Bela, you 'read' people by means other than words in English. > Barry, I have engaged you in varioous conversations over the last year > or so, in English. I've offered suggestions, asked questions. You > generally did not respond, or you changed the subject. Could the reason for that be that you have long been using words in a manner that did not match my understanding of what those words mean? > So your contention is utter *bullshit* and if you go through old > messages you will see this is true. How about you disprove my contention by deigning to speak to me by voice by telephone? > > But you haven't availed yourself of my request to increase the > > bandwidth of our connection to include voice communication by > > telephone. You didn't avail yourself of the opportunity to > > hear the melody of my voice, > Why the fuck should I call you on Christmas Eve? I was with my family. > What would it serve me to have you spew your anger into my ear? What > a ridiculous idea. You saw fit to spew your written, verbal anger at me on Christmas Eve, Bela. It would have been a lot better for us to work this out by voice, where you could hear the melody of my voice and find out just how angry or conciliatory I might really be. > > A coupla of days ago, you asked, "What's *up* with you, Barry?" > > And I answered, "My *dander* is up, Bela." > > Now don't you find it odd that a person such as yourself, who is > > so gifted at sensing and reading subtle bioenergy fields could > > not find the word to name what was up with me? > Barry, let me explain something. I had a very good idea what was > up with you. A very good idea. Then you must also have had a very good idea of the cause of my aroused anger. And to me, that means you knowingly, deliberately, and intentionally permitted and promoted all that baiting and insulting and incivility for the purpose of arousing my ire, so that you could learn what I would do when I became sufficiently pissed off at you. > *However*, in the interests of *dialogue*, I invited you to express > yourself. I wish to express my anger at you directly, by telephone, so that you can read and experience your blessed karma firsthand. > It seemed like the decent thing to do, and would be conducive to an actual > *dialogue*. Bela, you ignorant slut. Dialogue is a cooperative process, not an antagonistic process. You sought antagonist drama, not dialogue. So you got the karma you sought. Antagonistic drama, full of 'fuck yous' and all that tommyrot. Which is why I now have all that tummy rot to deal with. > Have you ever done this? Asked someone how they felt, or what they meant? All the time. I do it every week at the science museum. > > Now that I have given you the word which names what was up with me, > > can you match that word to the ineffable 'thing' what you sensed was > > up with me? > I saw a man who was very stuck, and very frustrated, and didn't > know what to do. Bela, I don't know what to do with you any more than Linda's mother knew what do with Hitler. > > And now that I have told you that my 'dander' was up, enabling you > > to go to a standard dictionary and review the public meaning of > > that word, > Again, why do you make conversation so *difficult*? I KNOW what > "dander" means, but you assumed I didn't and instead of offering > a definition or meaningful context, you used the word in that coy > and cryptic way of yours, so I am expected to do research? Why do > you throw obstacles in the way of your own communication? We are not engaged in either conversation or dialogue, Bela. We are engaged in a knock down drag out fight. We are engaged in an argument, because that's what you wanted. I assumed you knew the meaning of the word 'dander' but not the fact that it corresponded to the name of my affective emotional state at that point in time. I know the names of lots of emotions, but that doesn't mean I know which nameable emotional state someone happens to be in at any given moment. > You handicap yourself, you install speedbumbs right in the middle > of the point you are making. Can't you see this, and how it is *not* > in the interests of "discourse"? Bela, the speedbumps were inserted by all those disruptive hectors whom you enabled, supported, empowerd, led by example, and egged on. I asked you to shitcan the obstacles course. > > Now I take offense, Bela, at being maligned, misqouoted, derided, > > disparaged, libeled, misdiagnosed, or disempowered. > And yet you don't see that you bring that upon yourself by your > behavior. Bela, there is no excuse for you or anyone else bringing that kind of abuse into that forum. No excuse whatsoever. I'm shocked that you would not only permit it but encourage it and participate it in yourself. > You communicate in a cryptic and nebulous language, you > use pet definitions for words but don't tell anyone, you > tell people what they were supposed to have said instead > of *listening and asking*. Bela, you were supposed to apologize here, don sackcloth and ashes, and beg my forgiveness for your utterly unconscionable behavior. Instead you continue to hurl your meaningless bullshit at me. > So look in the mirror. You bring this on yourself, as the incidents > of your life prove. Unbelievable! You throw shit at someone and then say it's their fault? Unfuckingbelievable. That's exactly what the Nazis did. Bela, you really need to seek help, buddy. You are going over to the dark side. > You are not a victim. You have more influence in this scenario > than you realize. You damn right I do. And I am going to continue beat the metaphysical crap out of you until you wake up from your nazi nightmare and exorcise that evil demon from your breast. > > We are at a state of elevated disequilbrium. The state of disequilbrium > > in your forum has never been so extreme as it is at this juncture. > No, now that you are moderated, if you take a look, it is as peaceful > and calm as it was a week ago. In case you forgot, I was there a week ago when it was peaceful and calm, which means your theory is full of shit. The only plausible variable that explains the unrest was the appearance of Peter, who brought unprecedented strife in that forum. Peter Sith, the bringer of black clouds of sooty grime. Now that he is gone, along with his childish, flip-floppy muse, the dust is settling of its own accord. And your abusive treatment of me is now the primary reason for the ongoing strife between us. > > And because your forum is at an extreme state of disequilbrium, my > > efforts to devise a means of course correction and remdiation have > > taken on a new urgency. > But the forum is *not* in a state of "disequilbrium". It is running > smoothly again. Can't you see that? The forum is not running smoothly at all, Bela. The forum is dysfunctional and broken because you broke it again. > > But we need to work together, Bela, to restore equilibrium, peace > > and harmony, and right the nearly capsized discovery learning process. > Barry, you have to take care of your own shit first. And due to the > level of denial and lack of self-awareness you exhibit, I am not very > hopeful that you actually *want* to grow or open up in this way. Bela, I have to take care of you first. You have conducted yourself in a sickeningly atrocious manner. What you did in that forum and to me is unconscionable. You broke your own forum, Bela, and you don't even seem to see that. First you allowed it to break by inviting in Peter Sith, then, when he left, you continuted to break it of your own accord Why Bela? Why? If you are in despair, Bela, I suggest you get help, before you sink into utter depression. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Sun Dec 29 18:45:47 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Peace To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 18:45:43 -0500 (EST) > Unfortunately your entire email was evasive, dissembling, innacurate, and > tedious, except for this part: > > As to self-awareness, I have no idea what you mean. There are many > > processes going on inside my body all the time. Some of them I'm > > aware of, others I don't bother to monitor. > You have no idea how important self-awareness is, do you? Are you aware of my ideas on that subject at all, Bela? You admitted an utter disinterest in my ideas, including my ideas of awareness, self-awareness, and metacognition. If you want to discover how important I believe self-awareness is, Bela, I suggest you trouble yourseld to read the results of 18 years of research on the cognition, emotions, and learning. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Sun Dec 29 19:00:32 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: More To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 19:00:28 -0500 (EST) > > > > > How many times has this happened before? Think about it. > > > > Abusive practices by people in positions of power have happened > > > > many many times before, Bela. > No, Barry, what has happened is you have annoyed the living fuck > out of people and they finally told you that they had had enough. Bela, no one is obliged to read anything I write. If they are annoyed by my pedantry, all they need to do is to not look. > I know now that you cannot see this, so you project it onto others as > "injustices". Until you can see this disfunctional dynamic, you will > *repeat it*... study up on recursion to understand my point. Your 'point' is bullshit, Bela. Nobody is forced to read any of my theories or ideas or models. > > Bela there is a distinction between asking a question which seeks > > clarification and asserting a diagnosis. I you go back and read > > carefully what I wrote (and not what Xam erroneously asserted) > > you will see that I asked her a question. > "Did I read that correctly, Xam? You suffer from alternating Bulimia and > Anorexia?" http://www.worldcursing.com/WebX?14@@.1ddb36c6/260 Yes. Did I read that correctly, Xam? That's a question. Not a judgment, not a label, a question, asking her to clarify her meaning. > Barry, you asked her to *confirm your labels or judgements*. Bela, a judgment is a declarative assertion. There is no declarative assertion in that quote. There are questions, meaning that I have not formed a conclusion. The questions mean I am trying to construct an accurate reading of what Xam said. > That is different. Yes. A question is different from an assertion. > > recognize that her failure to > > distinguish a question from a declarative statement is an insufficient > > cause to direct your unwarranted anger at me. > Barry, my response was "Barry, lets be careful about such labeling here." Which is an unwarranted admonition, since I had not labeled anything. And I am surprised at you for labeling me as judgmental. To my mind, that's an unwarranted and unsupportable judgmental act on your part. > That showed extreme tolerance, because I wanted to nail you for your > insensitivity. You wanted to nail me for asking a question. Now you are adopting the role of Pontious Pilate? What's up with you, Bela? Have you no tolerance for Rabbinic scholarship? > > Bela, have you not been reading me? I do not believe in the idiotic > > concept of fault. > You have been trying to blame your ostracism on my "odious > dictatorial powers" or whatever. Bela, if it please you to engage in the odious practice of ostracism, then wear the mantle of the high priest who selects the scapegoat du jour to bear the sins of the community. But hear me out, Mr. ScapeGoat Picker-Outer, I reject the Babylonian custom of scapegoating. I reject the Roman practice of scapegoating. I reject the Nazi practice of scapegoating. And I reject your practice of scapegoating. You'll find no Azazel here, Bela. And if you believe you can engage in that hoary practice and get away with it, you have another karmic lesson coming, buddy. I discarded the belief in and practice of scapegoating, and I suggest you discard it too. It's an uholy, unbecoming practice, Bela. It's an evil practice. So knock it off. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Sun Dec 29 19:59:15 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: More To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 19:59:09 -0500 (EST) > > It is unbecoming of you to attribute to me a belief that I do not > > subscribe to. > I sometimes wonder if you actually *know* what your beliefs are because > you are so inconsistant around them. It is partly why it is so difficult > to converse with you. The reason you seem to be having so much trouble, Bela, is because you continually form erronous beliefs about my beliefs, and then act as if your erroneous mental model of my beliefs is an accurate reading. Bela, if you cannot construct an accurate reading of my beliefs by reading my words, how can you construct an accurate beleif about anything else you purport to be reading? From where I sit, Bela, you appear to be reading disabled. > > What are you referring to Bela. You cited one of your posts, not > > one of mine. How can you accuse me of lying about my own quotes > > and offers as proof a document that you fabricated? > You are being a dishonest weasely bastard here Barry. What are you referring to Bela? > You are sitting in a lie so big you can't even recognize it. What are you referring to here Bela? You appear to be referring yet again to one of your imaginary beliefs, an erroneous belief to which I do not have access. > I even provided a *link to your original post* when I quoted it. You provided a link that brought up one of your posts, full of your writings, not mine. > So again (and I don't know why I go through the tedium of proving to > you what you have already posted) If you want to refer me to something I posted, you have to cite a posting that I wrote, one one that you wrote. > Look here: http://www.worldcursing.com/WebX?14@@.1ddb692f/45 I looked. What is your objection about that? > and here: http://www.worldcursing.com/WebX?14@@.1ddb692f/48 What's wrong with that? It looks perfectly cogent and accurate to me. > Here you will find the two posts, of yours, unaltered, where you say two > different things, and when I point it out to you, you either 1) ignore it, > or 2) lie about it, like you just did in this email > Look at your own words! I did. What I said in those two posts is self-consistent, accurate, cogent, and mutually reinforcing. I don't see how you concluded that those two post are either inconsistent, contradictory, or factually in error. You're gonna have to do more than just make an assertion to that effect, Bela. If you post a theorem, you have to demonstrate how you proved it to yourself. > > > > > "I have the solution but I won't tell you what it is" > > > > Not only is that a repetition of the above abusive, unethical, and > > > > dishonest practice > Don't call me dishonest. I have caught you lying before, like above. > Now it could be that you don't even know what you say, but you are still > misrepresenting yourself. Bela, you fabricated a quote, purporting to come from me, but it's not quote from me but an imaginary quote that you made up, and one that does not state my position. > Point out where I am lying. You lied when you published this line of text: "I have the solution but I won't tell you what it is" which purports to be a quote from me, but which is not a quote from me, nor does it represent my position. It's a lie, Bela. I neither said that, nor do I hold that position. When you publish a quote from someone, it has to be something they actually said. It is dishonest to publish a fabricated quote. A journalist can be fired for that practice. It's not only unethical, it's unprofessional to fabricate quotes and attribute them to someone who never uttered them. > > So far, you haven't even acknowledged looking at the model, let alone > > saying whether you understand it or how to use it to do model-based > > reasoning. > I am waiting for you to show me an example, or give a demonstration of > how it works! And so far you haven't! > You say karma can "easily be solved" yet I ask you point blank, 5 times, > and you are evasive! Models can be solved, Bela. But so far, you haven't even looked at any models. > So I have opened it up: I have asked other posters to report if they > think they understand your idea. Then I propose you ungag me so that I can respond to them. > > What is the Name of my Modus Operandi, Bela, the name of the practice > > you claim to be pointing at with the word 'it'? > In other words, you are going to ignore my communication to you. What communication, Bela? You made reference to an unarticulated ellipsis again. > OK, if you want it in a bite-sized chunk, your MO is "bullshit > projected upon others due to lack of awareness of the self". Now that's your articulation of your theory of my practice. But you have not demonstrated that it's an accurate theory or characterization. It reads like a pejorative insult, rather than a thoughtful construction of a description of a practice. From which I conclude that you do not possess a model or theory about my MO that is even remotely close to accurate and defensible, let alone expressible in a professional manner. First of all, an MO has to be a sequence of objectively recognizable behaviors forming an idiosyncratic and repeating pattern. And second of all, an MO does not include a causal theory purporting to explain why the subject adopts that MO. So first of all, your proposed MO is not even in the form of an MO, and second of all the portion of it that purports to be the objective description of the sequence or pattern of actions is subjective ("projected bullshit") rather than objectively descriptive. In other words, your proposed MO appears to be self-descriptive rather than descriptive of my practices. > > Bela, if you don't understand the meaning of 'resonance' or > > 'vibration' or 'sinusoid' or 'amplitude' or 'modulation' or > > 'frequency' or 'wavelength' or propagation > I understand these terms, Barry, but you have yet to make them relevant. If we are talking about measuring subtle bioenergy fields, then they are obviously relevant, since this is how periodic time-varying signals are characterized. > > I agree that defining subtle abstractions are difficult. But if we > > are going to have a dialogue about subtle effects, we need to devise > > a common, shared vocabulary that names the identifiable elements of our > > investigation. > BARRY A VOCABULARY ALREADY EXISTS BUT YOU REFUSE TO ACCEPT IT OR TO LEARN > IT!!!!!!! Bela, if you are using an idiosyncratic vocabulary, with definitions other than the ones found in the dictionary, then the onus is on you to define the meanings of your terms. It's not enough to just make a list of the words you use, Bela. I would also need to know what you mean by them, given you mean to use them to refer to something other than what they ordinarily mean. > > If people wish to name some concepts outside of my awareness, > > they will need to do two things: 1) outline the concept itself, > > and 2) assign it a distinct name so that we can reference the > > concept in an unambigous manner. > That is fine in your world, Barry, but MBS deals with matters > *spiritual* and as many people have told you, your analytical > model DOES NOT WORK here. Bela, how can anyone credibly assert that something that they are unfamiliar with, have not yet looked at (and therefore cannot possibly understand) doesn't work? It might not work for them, since they don't possess a working copy, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be used by someone who took the trouble to learn it. > Anyway, if the above are your requirements, and you refuse to accept the > communication as offered, then you are out. Understand? Familiar situation? No, I don't understand. It makes no sense, Bela. > > Bela, if I were you, I would not take up the role of teacher. You are > > not well suited to that role. > ASSHOLE. I am an excellent teacher, I have been told this by many people. > I have been told many times that I am a "natural" teacher. You have taught me not to believe a word you say. You have also taught me not to bother trying to decipher what you say, because most of what you say cannot be deciphered anyway. > Now, as for you... has anyone understood your theories yet? Yes. The National Science Foundation has understood them well enough to fund us for three years to develop, test, and publish them. That URL I gave people to read is one of our papers published in a peer-reviewed professonal journal. One of our papers won the Best Paper Award at the International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. The staff at the Boston Museum of science not only understands the theory, they have adopted it as part of their practice. > > Bela, you have not communicated the antecedent to the pronoun 'that' > > in the above sentence. What I am denying is having apprehended the > > undefined antecedent that corresponds to the pronoun 'that' which > > purports to refer back to your as yet unexplained concept. > Re-read that and ask yourself if it would fall on the ears as dissembling > bullshit, a dodge, a smokescreen. Only if the listener was in denial, Bela. > > > And *how many people have read your theories?* You posted links, > > > and asked everyone to read them. > > > As far as I know, only two people have acknowledged reading them -- > > Linda and Artemis, whose reference to the elements of the theories > > is recognizable and accurate. > But Artemis has worked with you for 7 years, right? I mean, she > had read them before? She has been present while I've constructed those theories, tested them, lectured on them, won NSF funding for them, and published peer-reviewed and prize-winning papers on them. > > No. It is because they are exercising their God-given right to remain > > ignorant and oblivious of that which they do not yet desire to begin > > learning. > No, it means they see your bullshit and figure its not worth the tedium of > reading. It doesn't mean that to me. Your theory is without substance. > > I told you the meaning of what you were saying (to the extent what > > you were saying had any meaning) when I parsed the words uttered > > according to the definitions of those words as I understand them. > Exactly. As usual, instead of asking for clarification, you *told me > what I had said* and then you *declared me to be wrong*. How can you clarify your meaning, except in reference to my understanding of what you said? Are you clairvoyant, and able to imagine my understanding of what you said before I have disclosed to you my understanding of what you said? > What is wrong is your interpretation! Yet you can't see this! That's not an issue. What's an issue is that after I report back my interpretation of what you said, and you announce that my interpretation is not an accurate version of what you have in mind, then it's up to you to express your idea in such a way that it becomes clearer. Instead you just insulted me for not apprehending the meaning you intended to convey. > > > > Bela, I don't care if I am a minority of one. So was Socrates, so was > > > > Galileo, so was Gandhi. > > > Oh, criminey, here comes the PERSECUTED VICTIM schtick. > > If you feel persecuted, Bela, just say so. ...I don't believe I am > > persecuting you and I don't believe you are a victim. > Luck, fuckwit, you compare me to nazis, and yourself to Ghandi. > You're the one with the victim complex, as I, and you, have > demonstrated many times. What's a 'fuckwit'? I compare one of your practices to one of the more odious practices of the Nazis, but you are not your practices, Bela. And you can choose to discontinue those practices which ally you to cultural practices that are not defensible, not constructive, unbecoming, evil, odious, and unholy. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Mon Dec 30 01:05:42 2002 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 22:05:44 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: oh yes... Barry, Barry, Barry. >Bela, you ignorant slut. Dialogue is a cooperative process, not an >antagonistic process. You sought antagonist drama, not dialogue. >So you got the karma you sought. Antagonistic drama, full of 'fuck >yous' and all that tommyrot. I still don't understand your concept of what happened. It looks like you think you were gathered in a meadow, dressed in togas and surrounded by your disciples, then suddenly, I started cursing. It is so weird to think that that is your belief. I did try to have a conversation with you. I provided you with a thread, but you played your weird semantic games. So I became very frustrated because it looked like you were not conversing in good faith. You misrepresented your own words, weren't listening, wouldn't even define your terms, until asked, and it turns out you were using a completely non-standard definition, one of your own imagining. You know how Lynn saw it? ====== http://www.worldcursing.com/WebX?14@@.1ddb6762/112 Bela, I can see your frustration, how you feel Barry isn't hearing you. I think you're just trying to get through to him and when it doesn't work by speaking quietly, you speak louder. I agree he turns everything around into his terms. Perhaps that's the only way he knows how to communicate. And when he does this it blocks the flow of what others are trying to explore. I was appalled at his personal attacks on you. ============ Yes, *she* was appalled by *your* personal attacks on *me*. Got a mirror? This is an excellent opportunity to look into it. >> Have you ever done this? Asked someone how they felt, or what they meant? > >All the time. I do it every week at the science museum. Yeah? that's not what you said when someone asked if you had checked in with Artemis. You said "no", you didn't. >> You handicap yourself, you install speedbumbs right in the middle >> of the point you are making. Can't you see this, and how it is *not* >> in the interests of "discourse"? > >Bela, the speedbumps were inserted by all those disruptive hectors >whom you enabled, supported, empowerd, led by example, and egged on. No, here we go again. *You* installed your own speedbumps. But you turn it around into your persecution/victim thing, and blame others for the situation you find yourself in--yet again. How many times are you going to create this for yourself? Doesn't it get old? Aren't there better things you can do? >> You communicate in a cryptic and nebulous language, you >> use pet definitions for words but don't tell anyone, you >> tell people what they were supposed to have said instead >> of *listening and asking*. > >Bela, you were supposed to apologize here, don sackcloth and ashes, >and beg my forgiveness for your utterly unconscionable behavior. You can't even read what I've written, you just complain and issue demands and call me a nazi. Not impressive. >>You damn right I do. And I am going to continue beat the metaphysical >crap out of you until you wake up from your nazi nightmare and exorcise >that evil demon from your breast. Barry, I have told you not to mess with that. You don't know what you're doing. Now, it so happens I do. For one thing, I know where you are. Not physically, but I have a bead on your energy. I can find you, energetically, and time of the day or night, and if I sense you are sending an attack my way, I will 1) erase your attack energy (ie you will lose a part of yourself) and will 2) contemplate hitting you back. You don't want this to happen. Do you know why? Because I can look at your fears and beliefs and taboos, and see what is primed for a little amplification. Do you understand? This is not something I do but I know how to. If you make a move at a bad time, I may lose my temper. Do you understand me? Now it turns out I am well shielded from "metaphysical" attacks. So I have nothing to worry about. I'm just saying, don't mess with me. >> No, now that you are moderated, if you take a look, it is as peaceful >> and calm as it was a week ago. > >In case you forgot, I was there a week ago when it was peaceful and >calm, which means your theory is full of shit. You were there? Well *so was I*. I was their earlier today, and you weren't and it was going swimmingly. So your theory is the one that is ready for the trash fire. >> > And because your forum is at an extreme state of disequilbrium, my >> > efforts to devise a means of course correction and remdiation have >> > taken on a new urgency. Uh, I just checked in, it looks fine! >Bela, I have to take care of you first. You have conducted yourself >in a sickeningly atrocious manner. What you did in that forum and >to me is unconscionable. Hey, its just a free fucking internet forum, why are you making this such a big thing? You're making it into this big drama complete with nazi villains. You need a hobby. >You broke your own forum, Bela, and you >don't even seem to see that. First you allowed it to break by >inviting in Peter Sith, I didn't invite Peter, I welcomed him after he arrived, like I do everyone else. You are stull unclear on the facts. Bela ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Mon Dec 30 02:02:50 2002 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:02:52 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Peace Barry, I don't know what to say. >If you want to discover how important I believe self-awareness is, >Bela, I suggest you trouble yourseld to read the results of 18 years >of research on the cognition, emotions, and learning. We are having this conversation because of your behavior on the forum. Your style of cognition, emotions, and learning may be great in some circumstances but weren't working in the forum. And I have an interest in all three areas, too. ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Mon Dec 30 02:13:19 2002 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:13:21 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: More Barry, you are still incorrect in your facts: >> "Did I read that correctly, Xam? You suffer from alternating Bulimia and >> Anorexia?" http://www.worldcursing.com/WebX?14@@.1ddb36c6/260 > >That's a question. Not a judgment, not a label, a question, asking >her to clarify her meaning. No, Barry, you had made a judgement or determination, because you say "Did I read that correctly, Xam?" You are asking her, first, to *confirm* your judgement. Second you take a declarative sentance, and add a question mark to it: "You suffer from alternating Bulimia and Anorexia?" In other words: "You suffer from alternating Bulimia and Anorexia" You don't even stop to think what a sensitive issue this is for women. I found your assertion to be supremely insensitive. Ask any woman you know what she thinks. >But hear me out, Mr. ScapeGoat Picker-Outer, I reject the Babylonian >custom of scapegoating. I reject the Roman practice of scapegoating. >I reject the Nazi practice of scapegoating. And I reject your practice >of scapegoating. You called me a nazi *again*! OK, that does it. I am going to post something, to be on display at MBS, that offers my theory of why you are so impossible to communicate with. Bela. ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Mon Dec 30 03:22:51 2002 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 00:22:54 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: More Barry, due to the continued disingenuousness of your responses, I have been forced to post my theory of why you can't communicate. You will see it in MBS. ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Mon Dec 30 07:49:03 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: oh yes... To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 07:48:56 -0500 (EST) Bela, Bela, Bela, > Barry, Barry, Barry. > > Bela, you ignorant slut. Dialogue is a cooperative process, not an > > antagonistic process. You sought antagonist drama, not dialogue. > > So you got the karma you sought. Antagonistic drama, full of 'fuck > > yous' and all that tommyrot. > I still don't understand your concept of what happened. > It looks like you think you were gathered in a meadow, > dressed in togas and surrounded by your disciples, then > suddenly, I started cursing. The cursing only cemented your discontent, which had been silently building over a long time. Your discontent discharged all of a sudden, like a lightning bolt, but the static charge had been slowly accumulating for a very long time. > It is so weird to think that that is your belief. It is weird to apply Maxwell's Equations to the disharge of slowly building discontentment. > I did try to have a conversation with you. I provided you with > a thread, but you played your weird semantic games. So I became > very frustrated because it looked like you were not conversing > in good faith. You misrepresented your own words, weren't listening, > wouldn't even define your terms, until asked, and it turns out you > were using a completely non-standard definition, one of your own > imagining. I don't understand what you wanted, Bela. You say you became frustrated, which means you had a goal in mind. But I have no idea what goal you had in mind for that thread. Whatever goal you had in mind differed dramatically from the purpose of the thread, as I understood it from your opening invitation to explain the theories I'd been working on. Also, I don't understand why you named the thread the way you did, since the name of the thread did not match the text of the invitation, which read: "Barry, if you wish, you can have this thread to discuss your theories." I did wish to introduce the collection of theories of learning and emotions, but others evidently didot wish me to introduce them and even went to great lengths to prevent a discussion of the theories. In retrospect, I should have asked you to change the title of the thread to 'Theories of Emotions and Learning' rather that 'The Real Solutions Thread' since the Imaginable Solutions cannot be imagined until one applies the theories and models. And since the Imaginable Solutions include Cooperative Solutions, they cannot be Realized until people agree to adopt a Cooperative Strategy. > You know how Lynn saw it? With horror, I imagine. > I can see your frustration, how you feel Barry isn't hearing you. > I think you're just trying to get through to him and when it doesn't > work by speaking quietly, you speak louder. I'm confused, Bela. If that thread was a place where you were inviting me to introduce theories and models of emotions and learning, what was it that I was supposed to be hearing? I thought that thread was where you wanted to hear the theories of emotions and learning. > I agree he turns everything around into his terms. Perhaps that's > the only way he knows how to communicate. And when he does this > it blocks the flow of what others are trying to explore. I thought others were there, in that particular thread, to explore the theories of emotions and learning. If they wanted to explore something other than the theories of emotions and learning, why did they choose that thread to explore something else? > I was appalled at his personal attacks on you. I was appalled too at all the personal attacks that began with the arrival of Peter Sith, and which spread like a contagion. > Yes, *she* was appalled by *your* personal attacks on *me*. As I was appalled by the personal attacks on me, including the personal attacks which you introduced into that thread. Why, Bela? Why did you offer me a thread to introduced theories of emotions and learning and then, instead of listening to theories of emotions and learning, hijack the topic by issuing a barrage of personal attacks on me? Did you want to transform that thread into a drama lab? We could have done that later, when we got to the part of the theory that looks into Drama Theory. But that comes much later in the sequence. I didn't understand why you were so eager to skip the opening sections of the theory and jump to the final exam before learning the core ideas about co-constructing mutually agreeable solutions. > Got a mirror? This is an excellent opportunity to look into it. Oh yes, I mirrored back the personal attacks, I sure did. I echoed them right back. Stupid, wasn't it? All learning immediately ground to a halt, didn't it? > > > Have you ever done this? Asked someone how they felt, or what > > > they meant? > > All the time. I do it every week at the science museum. > Yeah? that's not what you said when someone asked if you had checked > in with Artemis. You said "no", you didn't. Artemis was with her family all that week, since it was Christmas week and her daughter was home from college. I've been sitting logged into MicroMuse continuously. That's the first place she turns up when she logs on. She wasn't there. She was idle for days on end. That means she's offline. Which was to be expected. > > > You handicap yourself, you install speedbumbs right in the middle > > > of the point you are making. Can't you see this, and how it is *not* > > > in the interests of "discourse"? > > Bela, the speedbumps were inserted by all those disruptive hectors > > whom you enabled, supported, empowerd, led by example, and egged on. > No, here we go again. *You* installed your own speedbumps. But you > turn it around into your persecution/victim thing, and blame others > for the situation you find yourself in--yet again. The situation I find myself in, yet again, is that people say they are interested in learning something and then change their mind (and the subject) and do anything and everything to avoid learning. OK. If it is your desire to not learn anything about my work, I accept that, Bela. You have a perfect right to not want to learn anything about my work. But please be honest about that. Please don't pretend to be interested and then disrupt the learning process for others just because you changed your mind about wanting to hear about my work. > How many times are you going to create this for yourself? Doesn't > it get old? Bela, as long as even one person says, however disingenuously, that they want to hear about the theories of learning and emotions, I will take them at their word, at face value, and tell them about the theories of emotions and learning. And if, as yet again in this case, it turns out they were being disingenuous and had no intention of actually listening, then it will happen again. And again. And again. Just like when God says something and we don't listen. > Aren't there better things you can do? Yes. I can work with children, whose desire to learn is genuine. > > > You communicate in a cryptic and nebulous language, you > > > use pet definitions for words but don't tell anyone, you > > > tell people what they were supposed to have said instead > > > of *listening and asking*. > > Bela, you were supposed to apologize here, don sackcloth and ashes, > > and beg my forgiveness for your utterly unconscionable behavior. > You can't even read what I've written, you just complain and > issue demands and call me a nazi. Not impressive. The only thing I demand of you, Bela, is that you keep your word when your word is freely given. I did not hold a gun to your head or coerce you to open that topic. I waited a year until you finally, of your own free will, expressed interest in hearing me tell about my work. And then you pulled the rug out from under me. You betrayed me, Bela. You betrayed your word. And that, Bela, is something that can never be healed. It's totally shattered now, Bela. I no longer can trust you to keep your word. You gave your word, then you broke it. Now your word is broken. And there is no known solution for the broken word. None. It's too late. Game over. Fini. Words have been broken. Words no longer have any functionality. Words have become worthless. > > > You damn right I do. And I am going to continue beat the > > > metaphysical crap out of you until you wake up from your > > > nazi nightmare and exorcise that evil demon from your breast. > Barry, > I have told you not to mess with that. You don't know what you're doing. I am using broken words the only way they can be used once they are broken, Bela. Once words are broken, they are rubble. Their only use, once they are broken, is as weapons, to throw like rocks, the way they do in the Middle East. So that is where we are now, throwing words like broken rocks. That is our joint karma, Bela. Enjoy it. Toss me another random, meaningless rock, Bela. Be appalled by it and enjoy it. Enjoy the game of catch, tossing random meaningliess rocks. Rocks which once were sacred words, but now are useless rubble. > Now, it so happens I do. For one thing, I know where you are. > Not physically, but I have a bead on your energy. I can find you, > energetically, and time of the day or night, and if I sense you > are sending an attack my way, I will 1) erase your attack energy > (ie you will lose a part of yourself) and will 2) contemplate > hitting you back. Nice shot, Bela. Nice rocks. Beautiful pile of rubble. What do you want me to do with it. Shall I toss some back at random? Which of these rocks do you want back? How about the ones I don't have any use for? > You don't want this to happen. Do you know why? Because I can > look at your fears and beliefs and taboos, and see what is > primed for a little amplification. Do you understand? This is > not something I do but I know how to. I don't want to play catch with random rocks? Whatever do you mean, Bela? I live to trade rocks that once were sacred words. That's the only game in town any more. All respect for words is gone now. Why bother to respect their meaning. Words no longer have any meaning. They are just random bits of rubble. > If you make a move at a bad time, I may lose my temper. Go ahead and lose. Toss it to someone else. Toss your temper over to Peter Sith. He has a strong throwing arm. I bet he can throw a temper tantrum almost as far as Xam. > Do you understand me? Of course not. How can I possibly understand anyone who is tossing broken words around? > Now it turns out I am well shielded from "metaphysical" attacks. I know that. That's why I threw metaphysical violence at you, because you have a natural immunity to it. > So I have nothing to worry about. I'm just saying, don't mess with me. Moulton messes Bela's hair. > > > No, now that you are moderated, if you take a look, it is as peaceful > > > and calm as it was a week ago. > > In case you forgot, I was there a week ago when it was peaceful and > > calm, which means your theory is full of shit. > You were there? Well *so was I*. I was their earlier today, and you > weren't and it was going swimmingly Have a nice swim. > So your theory is the one that is ready for the trash fire. Light the bonfire, then. Light the bonfire and burn the word down. > > > > And because your forum is at an extreme state of disequilbrium, my > > > > efforts to devise a means of course correction and remdiation have > > > > taken on a new urgency. > Uh, I just checked in, it looks fine! I just checked in, and it looks bleak. All learning has stopped. The Discovery Learning Process has ground to a halt. If that is fine with you, enjoy your nice quiet swim in the waters of no more learning. Because that is the karma you prefer. So be it. > > Bela, I have to take care of you first. You have conducted yourself > > in a sickeningly atrocious manner. What you did in that forum and > > to me is unconscionable. > Hey, its just a free fucking internet forum, why are you making > this such a big thing? You're making it into this big drama complete > with nazi villains. You need a hobby. My hobby used to be helping people learn whatever it is they wanted to learn. But people no longer want to learn anything at all. OK. I'll get a new hobby. What do people want today, in lieu of learning? They want violent psychodrama. Gad, what a choice. But hey, it's The People's Choice. Who am I to impose my will on them? OK. So it's violent psychodrama you want. Coming right up. Have some vicious words. We got tons of them. > > You broke your own forum, Bela, and you don't even seem > > to see that. First you allowed it to break by inviting > > in Peter Sith, > I didn't invite Peter, I welcomed him after he arrived, like I > do everyoneelse. You are stull unclear on the facts. He is still there as of yesterday. Still there, gracing us with his lovely Sithness. Enjoy him, Bela. He's your boy. Barry ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From bkort@musenet.org Mon Dec 30 07:58:26 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Peace To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 07:58:22 -0500 (EST) Hi Bela, > Barry, I don't know what to say. It doesn't matter what you say anymore, Bela. Words no longer have any meaning. They are just random pieces of shattered rubble. > > If you want to discover how important I believe self-awareness is, > > Bela, I suggest you trouble yourseld to read the results of 18 years > > of research on the cognition, emotions, and learning. > We are having this conversation because of your behavior on the forum. > Your style of cognition, emotions, and learning may be great in some > circumstances but weren't working in the forum. Oh, it's great in those circumstances where people genuinely wish to learn, and where people respect the word. > And I have an interest in all three areas, too. Nice random rocks, Bela. Here, let me toss them back at you, since they have no meaning for me... I have an interest in cognition, emotions, and learning. I'm so sorry to learn that you don't have any interest in those subjects. But I respect your desire not to demonstrate any interest those areas. When words have no value, we can always infer the desires of others and respect that, even if we can no longer respect their words. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Mon Dec 30 08:10:34 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: More To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:10:29 -0500 (EST) > Barry, you are still incorrect in your facts: Doesn't matter. I no longer recognize that you have any reliable faculty to articulate facts. > > > "Did I read that correctly, Xam? You suffer from alternating Bulimia and > > > Anorexia?" http://www.worldcursing.com/WebX?14@@.1ddb36c6/260 > > That's a question. Not a judgment, not a label, a question, asking > > her to clarify her meaning. > No, Barry, you had made a judgement or determination, because you say Nice random sequence of meaningless words, Bela. You can have them back. I already have a bigger pile of rocks than I can store here. Bela, you made a judgment, a determination, and then you acted on it. > "Did I read that correctly, Xam?" > You are asking her, first, to *confirm* your judgement. Ask me to confirm if your theory is correct. No, never mind. Don't ask. Just make a random judgment and then act on it by throwing some random rocks around. Whee! Look at all the lovely carbon soot. [Cough. Cough.] > Second you take a declarative sentance, and add a question mark to it: > "You suffer from alternating Bulimia and Anorexia?" > In other words: > "You suffer from alternating Bulimia and Anorexia" Ooh! Other words! Yay. More random words. Other words. Oh. Wait. Those aren't other words. They are the same words, but spoken with a different prosody. The rising intonation at the end of the sentence which signifies a question has been changed into a descending intonation, signifying a declarative assertion. Wow! That was clever. Let's do that some more???? I wonder what it would mean to exclaim a puzzling question!!!! Perhaps: we can; have lots! more fun with (punctuation), > You don't even stop to think what a sensitive issue this is > for women. I found your assertion to be supremely insensitive. > Ask any woman you know what she thinks. What woman? Xam is not woman??!!???? > > But hear me out, Mr. ScapeGoat Picker-Outer, I reject the Babylonian > > custom of scapegoating. I reject the Roman practice of scapegoating. > > I reject the Nazi practice of scapegoating. And I reject your practice > > of scapegoating. > You called me a nazi *again*! Yay! Isn't this fun, throwing big chunks of anthracite around!??!:; Ooh!?? Look at all the carbon soot? > OK, that does it. I am going to post something, to be on display > at MBS, that offers my theory of why you are so impossible to > communicate with. Oh: that's "easy to do" == let's; just randomize the? punctuation (marks) so it will-be clear why it's so hard; to communicate? Barry; ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Mon Dec 30 08:14:18 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: More Meaningless Words To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:14:13 -0500 (EST) Elab, > Barry, due to the continued disingenuousness of your responses, > I have been forced to post my theory of why you can't communicate. M'i ma rrosy hath uoy rea ocerdec niot ostpnig oury htoery. > You will see it in MBS. Eye'm shewer eye will? Barry: From bkort@musenet.org Mon Dec 30 13:25:48 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: More Meaningless Words To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 13:25:40 -0500 (EST) > Barry, due to the continued disingenuousness of your responses, > I have been forced to post my theory of why you can't communicate. Fair enough. How about I don the mantle of Barsoom Tork, Anthropologist from Mars, and portray the character you imagine me to be? Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Mon Dec 30 15:13:06 2002 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:13:05 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: oh yes... Hmmmmmm. >I don't understand what you wanted, Bela. You say you became >frustrated, which means you had a goal in mind. But I have no >idea what goal you had in mind for that thread. For one thing, you said the issues of karma could be "easily solved", and I gave you a forum to prove that. It turns out you had your own, personal, nonstandard definition, therefore your model does not "map" onto karma as we know it. Now don't assume I have not read your work, I have, I have read what you've posted here and at Musenet. > >> You know how Lynn saw it? > >With horror, I imagine. > >> I can see your frustration, how you feel Barry isn't hearing you. >> I think you're just trying to get through to him and when it doesn't >> work by speaking quietly, you speak louder. > The horror Lynn mentioned, was in the ways you attacked me. >> I agree he turns everything around into his terms. Perhaps that's >> the only way he knows how to communicate. And when he does this >> it blocks the flow of what others are trying to explore. > >> I was appalled at his personal attacks on you. > >I was appalled too at all the personal attacks that began with >the arrival of Peter Sith, and which spread like a contagion. > So, Peter is the new "scapegoat" on whom to blame the treatment you end up receiving everywhere you go? >> Yes, *she* was appalled by *your* personal attacks on *me*. > >As I was appalled by the personal attacks on me, including the >personal attacks which you introduced into that thread. > >Artemis was with her family all that week, since it was Christmas >week and her daughter was home from college. I've been sitting logged >into MicroMuse continuously. That's the first place she turns up >when she logs on. You can't pick up the fricken *phone*? Like you've urged me to do? Did you see how heartbroken she was upon reading your posts? Instead you wanted to wait until she checked her *email*??? And yet you lecture us on the theory of emotions!?!?!??! >I know that. That's why I threw metaphysical violence at you, because >you have a natural immunity to it. Barry, I'm serious, don't make me ruin your day. >I just checked in, and it looks bleak. All learning has stopped. >The Discovery Learning Process has ground to a halt. No, Barry the others are conversing and sharing and learning from each other. Did you know learning can occur, even if *you* are not in the room? ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Mon Dec 30 15:36:35 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: oh yes... To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:36:26 -0500 (EST) > Hmmmmmm. Eh? > > I don't understand what you wanted, Bela. You say you became > > frustrated, which means you had a goal in mind. But I have no > > idea what goal you had in mind for that thread. > For one thing, you said the issues of karma could be "easily solved", > and I gave you a forum to prove that. I don't follow your reasoning here, Bela. Yes, they can easily be solved. But you didn't ask me how you could help me solve them. What made you believe I could solve them singlehandedly? > It turns out you had your own, personal, nonstandard definition, > therefore your model does not "map" onto karma as we know it. How do we know karma? How do you know karma. What is karma as you know it, and how does that differ from karma as I know it? > Now don't assume I have not read your work, I have, I have read > what you've posted here and at Musenet. But do you understand it? What is your understanding of it, Bela? > > > You know how Lynn saw it? > > With horror, I imagine. > > > I can see your frustration, how you feel Barry isn't hearing you. > > > I think you're just trying to get through to him and when it doesn't > > > work by speaking quietly, you speak louder. > The horror Lynn mentioned, was in the ways you attacked me. But I attacked you the way you invited me to attack you, in the metaphysical way to which we both know you are entirely immune to harm. > > > I agree he turns everything around into his terms. Perhaps that's > > > the only way he knows how to communicate. And when he does this > > > it blocks the flow of what others are trying to explore. > > > I was appalled at his personal attacks on you. > > I was appalled too at all the personal attacks that began with > > the arrival of Peter Sith, and which spread like a contagion. > So, Peter is the new "scapegoat" on whom to blame the treatment > you end up receiving everywhere you go? There is a difference between a role model whom others freely imitate and a scapegoat who bear 100% of the responsibility. > > > Yes, *she* was appalled by *your* personal attacks on *me*. > > As I was appalled by the personal attacks on me, including the > > personal attacks which you introduced into that thread. > > Artemis was with her family all that week, since it was Christmas > > week and her daughter was home from college. I've been sitting logged > > into MicroMuse continuously. That's the first place she turns up > > when she logs on. > You can't pick up the fricken *phone*? Like you've urged me to do? She was with her family, Bela. She was spending time with them. When she is home alone, she communes with me. > Did you see how heartbroken she was upon reading your posts? We are both heartbroken, Bela. And we've been heartbroken for a long time. > Instead you wanted to wait until she checked her *email*??? E-Mail? We don't communicate by E-Mail. Not at all. > And yet you lecture us on the theory of emotions!?!?!??! What lecture? I invited others to learn it, if they so desired. > > I know that. That's why I threw metaphysical violence at you, > > because you have a natural immunity to it. > Barry, I'm serious, don't make me ruin your day. I have no idea what you are proposing to do to ruin my day, Bela. > > I just checked in, and it looks bleak. All learning has stopped. > > The Discovery Learning Process has ground to a halt. > No, Barry the others are conversing and sharing and learning > from each other. Did you know learning can occur, even if > *you* are not in the room? What are they learning from each other, Bela? Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Mon Dec 30 19:48:39 2002 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:48:41 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: oh yes... Planet earth calling Barry! >> For one thing, you said the issues of karma could be "easily solved", >> and I gave you a forum to prove that. > >I don't follow your reasoning here, Bela. Yes, they can easily be >solved. But you didn't ask me how you could help me solve them. I asked you many times what the solution was, and you (noticeably) have refused to back up your claim. >> No, Barry the others are conversing and sharing and learning >> from each other. Did you know learning can occur, even if >> *you* are not in the room? > >What are they learning from each other, Bela? They are learning how to build bridges and arrive at new understandings collectively. I suggest you learn how to do that. Then you can join in on the "learning economy". If that is your intent. Bela ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Mon Dec 30 20:34:59 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: oh yes... To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:34:54 -0500 (EST) > Planet earth calling Barry! NukNeH? > > > For one thing, you said the issues of karma could be "easily solved", > > > and I gave you a forum to prove that. > > I don't follow your reasoning here, Bela. Yes, they can easily be > > solved. But you didn't ask me how you could help me solve them. > I asked you many times what the solution was, and you (noticeably) > have refused to back up your claim. I told you. The best known solution was cooperation. The least desirable solution is agonistic learning, which for reasons unbeknowst to me you elected to engage in. > > > No, Barry the others are conversing and sharing and learning > > > from each other. Did you know learning can occur, even if > > > *you* are not in the room? > > What are they learning from each other, Bela? > They are learning how to build bridges and arrive at new understandings > collectively. Oh. You didn't say you wanted to limit your forum to peer learning. I'm sorry. I misunderstood your intent. > I suggest you learn how to do that. Then you can join in on the "learning > economy". If that is your intent. The one part of the learning economy that I honestly don't care to join is the segment who prefers agonistic learning. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Mon Dec 30 21:03:05 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: oh yes... To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 21:02:59 -0500 (EST) > Now don't assume I have not read your work, I have, I have read > what you've posted here and at Musenet. MuseNet? Why MuseNet? Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Tue Dec 31 02:58:52 2002 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 23:58:55 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: warning Barry, Look at what I'm doing. I'm on the Karma thread, summarizing things, asking for feedback, getting communication going. What are you doing? Whining on 'This forum is what we make it ' So I have gone to *your* thread, and am working with Artemis to try to get people to read your stuff and see if they understand it. I am *communicating*. You are *feeling sorry for yourself*. This is your last warning. Get it together and contribute like an adult, or I'll ban you from the forum. That is all. (click) ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Tue Dec 31 08:06:32 2002 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Warning To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:06:27 -0500 (EST) > Look at what I'm doing. I'm on the Karma thread, summarizing things, > asking for feedback, getting communication going. What kind of communication? > What are you doing? Whining on 'This forum is what we make it ' Stop whining at me, Bela. It's unbecoming of you. > So I have gone to *your* thread, and am working with Artemis to try to get > people to read your stuff and see if they understand it. Did you read the section on the theory of agonistic drama and agonistic learning? > I am *communicating*. You are communicating problems, not solution. > You are *feeling sorry for yourself*. You are ignorant of my feelings. > This is your last warning. Get it together and contribute like an > adult, or I'll ban you from the forum. Bela, I am not taking ordres from you. Nor am I taking any more shit from you. Get your shit together and haul it to the shitdump. > That is all. (click) No, Bela, that is not all. You have an infinite amount of agonistic karma left in your spiraling descent into karmic hell. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Wed Jan 1 21:43:58 2003 Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 18:43:49 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Sorry Barry. I'm banning you. It's just not working. I've reviewed your post in the que and I'm afraid you must leave. I just posted this in response to your 'do you want to heal or punish' question: == Barry, I've tried the first and it hasn't worked. I've resorted to the second and it hasn't 'worked' either. You have demonstrated no aknowledgment of the behaviors of yours that are at issue. I can't even tell if this behavior is something you are aware of or not. Dragging this out is not helping anyone. I'm sorry I must ask you to leave this forum ======== The forum is about *healing*, Barry, and you are unfortunately "stuck" as far as healing goes. That's why its not working. I wish you well. You will not find what you need on my forum. Whatever healing means to you, I do hope you receive it. Best wishes and much success. Bela ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Wed Jan 1 22:21:17 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 22:21:08 -0500 (EST) First of all, don't say you're sorry. You are not sorry. That's a lie. > I'm banning you. It's just not working. It's not working yet. But it will. Trust me. > I've reviewed your post in the queue and I'm afraid you must leave. Don't be afraid, Bela. There is nothing to fear. Ideas won't kill you. At least not mine. My ideas will heal you. And me. > I just posted this in response to your 'do you want to heal or punish' > question: > == > Barry, I've tried the first and it hasn't worked. I've resorted to > the second and it hasn't 'worked' either. > You have demonstrated no acknowledgment of the behaviors of yours that > are at issue. I can't even tell if this behavior is something you are > aware of or not. > Dragging this out is not helping anyone. I'm sorry I must ask you to > leave this forum > ======== Do what you have to do, Bela. If you believe you must ask me to leave, then do that, Bela. Go ahead and ask me to leave if that is what you believe you must do. > The forum is about *healing*, Barry, and you are unfortunately "stuck" > as far as healing goes. That's why its not working. I wish you well. I believed the forum was about Mind, Body, and Spirit. I have a Mind, I have a Body, and I have Spirit, Bela. How about you? You are grievously mistaken about me, Bela. You are operating from yet another erroneous belief. An erroneous belief that, for reasons unbeknownst to me, you have not yet seen fit to release. > You will not find what you need on my forum. Whatever healing means to > you, I do hope you receive it. Best wishes and much success. How do you know what I need, Bela? How do you know that what is transpiring on Mind, Body, and Spirit is not healing? Are you not mindful of the mysterious ways in which the Healing Process works? Barry ------------------------------------------------------------------ Posted on the Forum.... > Barry, I've tried the first and it hasn't worked. I've resorted to the second and it hasn't 'worked' either. [Bela] Correct. None of your practices have worked, have they Bela? Your practices have proven to be ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst. Your practices have proven to be dysfunctional. And that was a foregone conclusion, Bela, because your practices, relative to me, have been Rule-Based. That guarantees that they fail. And it has been known for millenia (and recently proven) that rule-based practices are dysfunctional. > You have demonstrated no acknowledgment of the behaviors of yours that are at issue. [Bela] I acknowledge that the behavior of mine to which you take exception is intellectual behavior. Bela, God put me on this planet to be who I am. God gave me a brain to use it for the purposes that God intends. If that is something you cannot abide, then do what you have to do, Bela, to save yourself from the scourge of Intellectualism. Do what you have to do, Bela. ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Wed Jan 1 22:55:50 2003 Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 19:55:52 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. Barry, I have tried to establish meaningful communication with you for over a year. Yet you never seem to be able to speak to real issues. Instead you relate everything to your master theories, and brandish them like some sort of torch. >Your practices have proven to be ineffective at best and >counterproductive at worst. Your practices have proven to be >dysfunctional. >... >And it has been known for millenia (and recently proven) that rule-based >practices are dysfunctional. So I get a load of that crap again, for the millionth fucking time, and then this: >I acknowledge that the behavior of mine to which you take exception is >intellectual behavior. You are wrong, of course. Now I was trying to communicate to you about our *communication* in attempts to understand it and salvage it, and I finally realized that it couldn't be done, not in the MBS forum anyway. But you seemed unable to focus. And I've realized that you have been on this forum for almost a year, and yet had no idea what we were talking about when we discussed karma, reincarnation, energy, clairvoyance. You simply weren't taking it in. For what ever reason, you are at odds with the flow of the forum. I am sorry. Dragging it out won't help anyone. I wish you peace. Bela ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Thu Jan 2 12:03:36 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 12:03:29 -0500 (EST) Hi Bela, > I have tried to establish meaningful communication with you for over a year. Why do you believe you have failed? You may not have succeeded yet, but why give up so rashly? Have you no hope? > Yet you never seem to be able to speak to real issues. Instead you relate > everything to your master theories, and brandish them like some sort of > torch. What are the names of the real issues, Bela? Why are you so disaffected by the light of my torch, Bela? The light of my torch is not a weapon. How does the light of my torch threaten you? > >Your practices have proven to be ineffective at best and > >counterproductive at worst. Your practices have proven to be > >dysfunctional. > >... > >And it has been known for millenia (and recently proven) that rule-based > >practices are dysfunctional. > So I get a load of that crap again, for the millionth fucking time, and > then this: > >I acknowledge that the behavior of mine to which you take exception is > >intellectual behavior. > You are wrong, of course. Bela, you have not yet named the dimension of my behavior to which you take exception. Bela, what is the name of the dimension of my behavior to which you take such vigorous exception? > Now I was trying to communicate to you about our *communication* in > attempts to understand it and salvage it, and I finally realized that > it couldn't be done, not in the MBS forum anyway. What method of reasoning did you employ to derive that conclusion? What are the affordances (or lack of affordances) that figured into the suitablility of MBS for the purpose of bridging communication between the mystical ethereal aspects of the human experience and the scientific and ideational aspects of the human experience? > But you seemed unable to focus. How can you say that? I have been focused on key ideas of the Mind from the beginning. And the name of your forum is Mind, Body, and Spirit. > And I've realized that you have been on this forum for almost a > year, and yet had no idea what we were talking about when we > discussed karma, reincarnation, energy, clairvoyance. How can you say that? I had an idea of what you meant, and I articulated in plain English my idea of what you meant by those English words. > You simply weren't taking it in. Bela, what is the name of the concept I wasn't apprehending? > For what ever reason, you are at odds with the flow of the forum. Bela, what is the name of the direction of flow of the forum? > I am sorry. Dragging it out won't help anyone. Bela, the name of your forum is "Mind, Body, and Spirit." Bela, I have a Mind. I use it to construct thoughts and ideas and to form beliefs. I use it to articulate my beliefs and to support them with evidence and reasoning. Bela, I have a Body. I develop my body and report detectable biological processes which are underway within it. Bela, I have a Spirit. I have fears and hopes, dreams and desires. I have pain and joy, suffering and delight, awe and astonishment, agony and ecstacy, perplexity and epiphany. And I am interested in how those subtle and profound emotions arise and affect my life's journey. > I wish you peace. As you know, Artemis and I are at unpeace over recent events in the MBS forum. And yet we all desire peace and understanding, warmth and compassion, validaton and acceptance, growth and healing. I am hurt by your treatment of me, Bela. I am hurt. I am sad and aggrieved and disappointed and chagrinned that you would willfully treat anyone -- especially a scientist -- in such a hurtful manner. Your behavior toward me, Bela, has been hurtful. It has been hurtful to me, and it has been hurtful to Artemis. And it has been hurtful to others in that forum, too. Why do that, Bela? Why do you hurt people? What happened to you to cause you to adopt such hurtful practices? Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Thu Jan 2 12:48:34 2003 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 09:48:37 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. Barry, >Why do you believe you have failed? You may not have succeeded yet, >but why give up so rashly? Have you no hope? I saw the law of diminishing returns quite plainly. Since you refused to communicate honestly or effectively, I saw that the forum would basically have to be ruined for you to get what you need. >What are the names of the real issues, Bela? I described them plenty of times. You just never aknowledged them. I decided to stop waiting. You're still in denial, or oblivious. That is your hairshirt, not mine. BTW, in response to your B Tork post > is alienation the name of an affective emotional state? Someone posted: > is it possible to alienate yourself, but then blame it on others? Heh. That is what has happened here... the old victim schtick again. Someone else posted: > I am sorry to see Barry gone. But his views were indeed very narrow and focused and if anyones ideas didn't fit within those perimeters he wouldn't accept or try to understand them. ...which is quite accurate. >Bela, you have not yet named the dimension of my behavior to which you >take exception. Barry, I'm not going to quibble with you. I have *described* your behavior many times. I have pointed it out very clearly. Names are not important. If you wanted to have received the communication, you already would have. >> But you seemed unable to focus. > >How can you say that? I have been focused on key ideas of the Mind >from the beginning. And the name of your forum is Mind, Body, and >Spirit. No. You revealed over the last week that you don't have the slightest clue what the words reincarnation, karma, clairvoyance, or energy mean, for example. IOW you were using the forum as a soapbox for your same little theories you've been pushing elsewhere, *regardless of the topic at hand*. You have *not* been following along, in fact you have been disruptive and even disrespectful. Someone else just posted this: ====== I believe that people can act as instruments of another's karma. So for example, if Barry is used to getting away with posting in a certain manner which many find disagreeable ( mu on me feeling that way) then it could very well be that Bela is acting as an instrument of Barry's karma by moderating him. So Barry is putting out a certain energy that will induce a certain karmic outcome. ====== >As you know, Artemis and I are at unpeace over recent events in the >MBS forum. I am sorry to hear that. It sounds like Artemis has *taken on* your stuff, which is *her choice* and it sounds like a pattern of hers. However I can't let that sway my decision. >Your behavior toward me, Bela, has been hurtful. It has been hurtful >to me, and it has been hurtful to Artemis. This has nothing to do with Artemis. Her involvement is solely at her own discretion. And it has been hurtful >to others in that forum, too. Not particularly. They seem to be fine. BTW I have deleted your "barsoom tork" posts. Bela ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Thu Jan 2 14:35:45 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 14:35:38 -0500 (EST) Bela, > > Why do you believe you have failed? You may not have succeeded yet, > > but why give up so rashly? Have you no hope? > I saw the law of diminishing returns quite plainly. Since you refused to > communicate honestly or effectively, I saw that the forum would basically > have to be ruined for you to get what you need. Why do you persist in forming illusory theories about me, Bela? You won't make any signficant progress until you release your silly hallucinations about who I am or how things really work. > > What are the names of the real issues, Bela? > I described them plenty of times. You just never aknowledged them. What are the names of the real issues, Bela? > I decided to stop waiting. You're still in denial, or oblivious. > That is your hairshirt, not mine. What is the name of the thing I'm not aware of, Bela? > BTW, in response to your B Tork post > > is alienation the name of an affective emotional state? > Someone posted: > > is it possible to alienate yourself, but then blame it on others? Who is served by introducting into human culture the rather silly notion of 'blame'? > Heh. That is what has happened here... the old victim schtick again. I don't blame you for believing that, Bela. But I am puzzled why you persist in believing such silly notions. > Someone else posted: > > I am sorry to see Barry gone. But his views were indeed very narrow and > focused and if anyones ideas didn't fit within those perimeters he wouldn't > accept or try to understand them. At least my views were 'focused'. But let me yet again focus on the rather curious and undemonstrated belief that I am not trying to understand what others are saying. Bela, did I not say that I would try to be open to your suggestions? > ...which is quite accurate. What is your evidence and reasoning, Bela. How do you know what I am trying to do or not do? Do you have some magical access to my psyche such that you are the unquestioned expert about my desires and intentions? Doesn't that seem a bit indefensible, Bela, to presume to know what someone is trying or not trying to do? > > Bela, you have not yet named the dimension of my behavior to which you > > take exception. > Barry, I'm not going to quibble with you. I have *described* your > behavior many times. I have pointed it out very clearly. Bela you have thrown long sequences of words at me. But those words do not add up to an accurated description, let alone a name for the dimension of my behavior that so troubles you. > Names are not important. If you wanted to have received the communication, > you already would have. I received a sequence of meaningless words, Bela. Do you mean to supply me with an endless sequence of meaningless words? If so, for what purpose? > > > But you seemed unable to focus. > > How can you say that? I have been focused on key ideas of the Mind > > from the beginning. And the name of your forum is Mind, Body, and > > Spirit. > No. You revealed over the last week that you don't have the slightest > clue what the words reincarnation, karma, clairvoyance, or energy mean, > for example. IOW you were using the forum as a soapbox for your same > little theories you've been pushing elsewhere, *regardless of the topic > at hand*. You have *not* been following along, in fact you have been > disruptive and even disrespectful. I agree that I don't have the slightest clue. I have a very strong clue. And I assembled those clues into a picture, which I played back to you. That's a fact. I took the clues, assembled them into a coherent picture, and displayed the picture. How can you say I have no clue? If I have no clue, what, pray tell, did I assemble the picture out of? > Someone else just posted this: > ====== > I believe that people can act as instruments of another's karma. > So for example, if Barry is used to getting away with posting in > a certain manner which many find disagreeable (mu on me feeling > that way) then it could very well be that Bela is acting as an > instrument of Barry's karma by moderating him. I wish you would moderate your own remarks, Bela. I appreciate that other do not wish me to be who I really am. But God made me the way I really am, Bela. I really am an intellectual who appreciates good ideas and clear thinking. Why do you find it necessary to block the introduction into the conversation the ideas and methods of reasoning which I bring to the banquet? Do ideas and scientific methods of reasoning disgust you, Bela? > So Barry is putting out a certain energy that will induce a certain karmic > outcome. > ====== What is the name of that outcome? I believe that the name of that outcome is Enlightenment. What do you believe the name of the outcome is, Bela? > > As you know, Artemis and I are at unpeace over recent events in the > > MBS forum. > I am sorry to hear that. It sounds like Artemis has *taken on* your stuff, > which is *her choice* and it sounds like a pattern of hers. However I > can't let that sway my decision. I understand that your decision is not influenced by any empathy or compassion for Artemis. I am sorry about that. I would have hoped that your behavior would be influenced by your empathy and compassion for her, if not for me. > > Your behavior toward me, Bela, has been hurtful. It has been hurtful > > to me, and it has been hurtful to Artemis. > This has nothing to do with Artemis. Her involvement is solely at her own > discretion. How can you say that this has nothing to do with Artemis? Do you deny and ignore her feelings, her agony, her distress, her pain? > > And it has been hurtful to others in that forum, too. > Not particularly. They seem to be fine. BTW I have deleted your > "barsoom tork" posts. Bela, do you really believe that you have the power to erase from the Noosphere the ideas and methods of reasoning which Linda, Artemis, and I espouse, just because you happen to abhor them? Why are you so afraid of ideas, Bela? Why are you so antagonistic to those who come from the world of science, ideas, and reasoning? In the words of Artemis, why do you persecute intellecuals and the practice of intellectual thought? Why the intolerance, Bela? Why, in a forum called 'Mind, Body, and Spirit' are you so antagonistic toward and intolerate of the product of the dimension of human behavior known as Mindfulness? Have you no compassion for the thinkers of the world, Bela? Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Thu Jan 2 15:17:58 2003 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 12:18:01 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. Barry, >What is your evidence and reasoning, Bela. How do you know what I >am trying to do or not do? Do you have some magical access to my >psyche Barry, it is your forum *behavior*, not your philosophy, that caused me to make my deciscion. And I warned you about your behavior many times but you put your fingers in your ears. So be it. >I wish you would moderate your own remarks, Bela. I appreciate that >other do not wish me to be who I really am. But God made me the way >I really am, Bela. I really am an intellectual who appreciates good >ideas and clear thinking. Barry, I'm glad God made you the way he did. But since you were unable to *employ* good ideas and clear thinking on MBS, it was clearly not a good fit. >I understand that your decision is not influenced by any empathy or >compassion for Artemis. I am sorry about that. Oh, I have plenty of empathy and compassion for both of you. But I will not be *blackmailed* by your *using* Artemis. You have shown exceptional insensitivity to her, BTW, so for you to use this ploy is nauseating. Now if your *game* is to go into pain, and Artemis has to drop everything and try to *heal you*, but without avail, that is *your* game and I will not accept any responsibility for what the two of you have worked out. >How can you say that this has nothing to do with Artemis? Do you deny >and ignore her feelings, her agony, her distress, her pain? Seems to me she was posting about how you broke her heart just the other week... how she was sick at how you treated her, negated years of your relationship with her. She was mortified. Have you no fucking *shame*, Barry? No *decency*? Look in the mirror if you want to see who is causing her pain. >Why are you so afraid of ideas, Bela? Why are you so antagonistic >to those who come from the world of science, ideas, and reasoning? Barry, I love science, however for the reasons stated many times, you just weren't a good "fit". Sorry. Bela. ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Thu Jan 2 16:18:26 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 16:18:19 -0500 (EST) Bela, > Anyway I have wished Barry the best and told him I hoped he would get > what he was looking for, but that this was not the appropriate place > for him to look. I am looking for fairness and respect, Bela. Apparently you are correct. MBS is not the place to get that, and so I will stop looking for it there. > > What is your evidence and reasoning, Bela. How do you know what I > > am trying to do or not do? Do you have some magical access to my > > psyche > Barry, it is your forum *behavior*, not your philosophy, that caused > me to make my deciscion. And I warned you about your behavior many > times but you put your fingers in your ears. So be it. Bela, there are thousands of dimensions to my behavior. You still have not named which dimension of my behavior you find so objectionable. The dimension of your behavior that I most object to, Bela, is your frequent practice of reffering to things elliptically, failing to identify, name, or illustrate that which you have in mind. > > I wish you would moderate your own remarks, Bela. I appreciate that > > other do not wish me to be who I really am. But God made me the way > > I really am, Bela. I really am an intellectual who appreciates good > > ideas and clear thinking. > Barry, I'm glad God made you the way he did. But since you were unable to > *employ* good ideas and clear thinking on MBS, it was clearly not a good > fit. Bela, I am appalled at your judgmentalism. It would be one thing if you recognized my ideas and explained why you do not care for them, but to negatively label things you admit you don't understand and then harm people for introducing such ideas is an unbecoming practice. Can't you simply admit that you don't understand or appreciate these ideas and let it go at that? That's what I do when I regard information that I don't understand or appreciate. Probably 95% of the information that impinges on my senses falls into that category. But I don't use that as an excuse for harming people who offer information that I don't understand or appreciate. > > I understand that your decision is not influenced by any empathy or > > compassion for Artemis. I am sorry about that. > Oh, I have plenty of empathy and compassion for both of you. Then afford me the courtesy of entering MBS and erasing my own posts. I am appalled at the discovery that you have been erasing my posts and turning the record there into swiss cheese. If you are going to permit people there to make gratuitous comments about me, then I expect you to be fair to me and permit me to respond to them. > But I will not be *blackmailed* by your *using* Artemis. You have > shown exceptional insensitivity to her, BTW, so for you to use > this ploy is nauseating. Bela, if your gut is flooded with Gastrin, consider that the source of Gastrin is the Amygdala. Face your fears, Bela. Face them and name them. > Now if your *game* is to go into pain, and Artemis has to drop > everything and try to *heal you*, but without avail, that is > *your* game and I will not accept any responsibility for what > the two of you have worked out. Mu. That means that you are once again hallucinating about things you know nothing about. > > How can you say that this has nothing to do with Artemis? Do you deny > > and ignore her feelings, her agony, her distress, her pain? > Seems to me she was posting about how you broke her heart just the other > week... how she was sick at how you treated her, negated years of your > relationship with her. She was mortified. Now I understand why you do not reveal your true innermost self, Bela. You are evidently afraid that if your innermost feelings came out, people would use them to hurt you and those around you. I suppose if others in your sphere adopted your practice, that would indeed be the likely outcome. To my mind, that is an unbecoming practice, and I urge you to abandon it. > Have you no fucking *shame*, Barry? Aha! Shame is a fiction, invented my manipulators to control other people's behavior. You are found out, Bela. You are a manipulator. I'd suggest you ought to be ashamed of yourself, but unlike you, I don't believe that shame-based relationships are functional. As you may or may not know, shaming and blaming is the single most pervasive cause of violence in our culture. > No *decency*? Look in the mirror if you want to see who is causing > her pain. Bela, I am astonished at your lack of ability to model cause and effect. > > Why are you so afraid of ideas, Bela? Why are you so antagonistic > > to those who come from the world of science, ideas, and reasoning? > Barry, I love science, however for the reasons stated many times, you just > weren't a good "fit". What round hole are you try to fit this square peg into, Bela? > Sorry. I don't believe you are sorry for what you did. I don't believe you have any regrets at all. Nor do I believe you have a realistic idea of what will happen in the future as a result of the curious beliefs and practices which you demonstrated with me and Kit the past few weeks. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Thu Jan 2 16:35:08 2003 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 13:35:09 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. Barry, you are still apparently unaware of what has happened between us. It is a waste of my time becuase, by choice or ignorance, you cannot comprehend what has happened. Sorry. >Bela, I am appalled at your judgmentalism. It would be one thing if >you recognized my ideas and explained why you do not care for them, I did this so many times its ridiculous. And the fact that you still don't even *realize* that I have done so is an indictment on your lack of ability to carry on a conversation.f >I am appalled at the discovery that you have been erasing my posts >and turning the record there into swiss cheese. What the fuck, Barry? I kicked you out of the forum. I gave you *several* warnings, all of which you ignored. So finally I am forced to ban you, and you come back with your stupid pseud. I have every right to erase you posts, and will continue to do so if you sneak back in. That's a promise. >> But I will not be *blackmailed* by your *using* Artemis. You have >> shown exceptional insensitivity to her, BTW, so for you to use >> this ploy is nauseating. > >Bela, if your gut is flooded with Gastrin, consider that the source As usual, you can't even respond, you go off on your stupid fucking tangents. You have the singular ability to ignore that which is germane to the situation, and to go off on some details that are *way over there*. >> Now if your *game* is to go into pain, and Artemis has to drop >> everything and try to *heal you*, but without avail, that is >> *your* game >Mu. That means that you are once again hallucinating about things >you know nothing about. No, your game is quite noticeable. >> Seems to me she was posting about how you broke her heart just the other >> week... how she was sick at how you treated her, negated years of your >> relationship with her. She was mortified. >Now I understand why you do not reveal your true innermost self, Bela. >You are evidently afraid that if your innermost feelings came out, >people would use them to hurt you As usual, you are wrong. You are also changing the subject away from the dynamic that you and she are stuck on... ie the elephant in the room. That is your business. However MBS is not the place for you to parade your denial... to lay your eggshells around the elephant, as it were. Bela. ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Thu Jan 2 16:55:35 2003 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 13:55:36 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: go away Get the fuck away from the forum, Barry, I am deleting everything you are posting, and have complained to the sysops. ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Thu Jan 2 17:02:51 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 17:02:43 -0500 (EST) > Barry, you are still apparently unaware of what has happened between us. I am unaware of your belief about what has happened. > It is a waste of my time becuase, by choice or ignorance, > you cannot comprehend what has happened. Sorry. That's a curious belief. But I disbelieve your belief about my mindset. > > Bela, I am appalled at your judgmentalism. It would be one thing if > > you recognized my ideas and explained why you do not care for them, > I did this so many times its ridiculous. Yes, you have demonstrated your judgmentalism so many times, it's ridiculous. But I am not ridiculing you for your judgmentalism. But I am saddened and appalled by it. > And the fact that you still don't even *realize* that I have done > so is an indictment on your lack of ability to carry on a conversation. How can one carry on a conversation with someone who is closed-minded and judgmental? Are you indicting yourself, Bela? If so, I don't recommend that silly and thoroughly discredited Hammurabic Process. > > I am appalled at the discovery that you have been erasing my posts > > and turning the record there into swiss cheese. > What the fuck, Barry? I kicked you out of the forum. I gave you *several* > warnings, all of which you ignored. So finally I am forced to ban you, > and you come back with your stupid pseud. I have every right to erase > your posts, and will continue to do so if you sneak back in. Of course I ignored your warnings. I don't believe in fear induction. That's such an unbecoming practice. Not a healing practice at all. First you said you 'must ask me to leave'. So I invited you to do what you must. But you didn't ask me to leave. Instead you blocked my access. Blocking my access is not asking me to leave. Asking someone to leave is a civil behavior. Kicking someone out is not a civil behavior. I do not appreciate your incivil conduct, Bela. It's unbecoming. Nor am I sneaking back in. I am walking in the front door. Like any other earthling on World Crossing might do. > That's a promise. What's a promise, Bela? That you will keep your word? It would be wonderful if you would keep your word. > > > But I will not be *blackmailed* by your *using* Artemis. You have > > > shown exceptional insensitivity to her, BTW, so for you to use > > > this ploy is nauseating. > > Bela, if your gut is flooded with Gastrin, consider that the source > As usual, you can't even respond, you go off on your stupid fucking > tangents. You have the singular ability to ignore that which is > germane to the situation, and to go off on some details that are > *way over there*. I don't think the neuropeptides which mediate the emotions which govern your behavior are 'stupid fucking tangents' Bela. I believe they are key parts of the cause and effect chain that have made us soul mates. > > > Now if your *game* is to go into pain, and Artemis has to drop > > > everything and try to *heal you*, but without avail, that is > > > *your* game > > Mu. That means that you are once again hallucinating about things > > you know nothing about. > No, your game is quite noticeable. One can notice a UFO and still know nothing about them. > > > Seems to me she was posting about how you broke her heart just the other > > > week... how she was sick at how you treated her, negated years of your > > > relationship with her. She was mortified. > > Now I understand why you do not reveal your true innermost self, Bela. > > You are evidently afraid that if your innermost feelings came out, > > people would use them to hurt you > As usual, you are wrong. You are also changing the subject away from the > dynamic that you and she are stuck on... ie the elephant in the room. Bela, somehow I have the strong feeling you just don't appreciate me. > That is your business. However MBS is not the place for you to parade your > denial... to lay your eggshells around the elephant, as it were. Bela, you are such a silly man. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Thu Jan 2 17:03:44 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: go away To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 17:03:37 -0500 (EST) > Get the fuck away from the forum, Barry, I am deleting everything you are > posting, and have complained to the sysops. They will tell you how to operate a forum close to the public, Bela. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Thu Jan 2 17:11:48 2003 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 14:11:49 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: go away >They will tell you how to operate a forum close to the public, Bela. We'll see what they say. Well now you are showing people what a sad little destructive fuck you are. The truth comes out! No charge! ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Thu Jan 2 18:02:31 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: go away To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 18:02:26 -0500 (EST) > > They will tell you how to operate a forum close to the public, Bela. > We'll see what they say. Well now you are showing people what a sad little > destructive fuck you are. Bela, are you projecting again? > The truth comes out! No charge! Indeed, the truth about the strange hallucinations that you harbor in your own mind, and project onto others. How many more of those toxic hallucinations do you have in there, Bela? Come on, guy, spit the rest of them out... Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Thu Jan 2 21:51:34 2003 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 18:51:35 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. Barry, now think carefully about what you are doing. You threatened to attack me metaphysically. You are approching the point where I will retaliate. Now leave the forum alone, or I will make myself felt. >Blocking my access is not asking me to leave. Asking someone to >leave is a civil behavior. Kicking someone out is not a civil >behavior. I do not appreciate your incivil conduct, Bela. It's >unbecoming. Oh, I did ask you to leave. You just didn't "hear", which is a habit of yours. Now, you have noticed there is no great uprising on the forum, rather people seem happy to put the disturbance behind them. >Nor am I sneaking back in. I am walking in the front door. Like >any other earthling on World Crossing might do. Yes, but you're not an earthling, are you? You are extraterrestrial. >What's a promise, Bela? That you will keep your word? It would be >wonderful if you would keep your word. I kept my word; that is why you've been banned. Simple, isn't it? >Bela, somehow I have the strong feeling you just don't appreciate me. How can i miss you when you won't go away? ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Thu Jan 2 22:04:12 2003 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 19:04:12 -0800 From: Bela To: "Gastrin_Bombesin@CampusCrossing.Com" Subject: oops! Oops! I deleted your message! Oops! ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Thu Jan 2 23:25:38 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 23:25:30 -0500 (EST) > Barry, now think carefully about what you are doing. What am I doing? > You threatened to attack me metaphysically. Heh. What is a metaphysical attack, Bela? Is it an insult? Is it an idea that unsettles your system of beliefs? Is it a question that arrests you? Are you gonna claim that you are afraid of mere words? > You are approching the point where I will retaliate. Wake up and smell the black roses, Bela. You've been retaliating for days on end now. Has it served your interests? > Now leave the forum alone, or I will make myself felt. I've already felt your wrath, Bela. What else are you proposing to do to inflict further harm on me? Can you be a little more specific? I'm not a big fan of vague threats. > > Blocking my access is not asking me to leave. Asking someone to > > leave is a civil behavior. Kicking someone out is not a civil > > behavior. I do not appreciate your incivil conduct, Bela. It's > > unbecoming. > Oh, I did ask you to leave. You just didn't "hear", which is a habit > of yours. Nope. You said you had decided that you must ask me to leave. But you never enacted that decision. You never actually asked me to leave. > Now, you have noticed there is no great uprising on the forum, > rather people seem happy to put the disturbance behind them. It's not behind them, Bela. Not by a long shot. I'm not a big fan of what Esma Aimeur calls 'learning by disturbing' but I've seen it happen enough times to appreciate her notion. For some people, that's their karma -- learning by being disturbed. > > Nor am I sneaking back in. I am walking in the front door. Like > > any other earthling on World Crossing might do. > Yes, but you're not an earthling, are you? You are extraterrestrial. Heh. Extraterrestrials are members of the public too. Beside, how do you know life didn't arrive this planet by means of panspermia some 4 billion years ago? > > What's a promise, Bela? That you will keep your word? It would be > > wonderful if you would keep your word. > I kept my word; that is why you've been banned. Simple, isn't it? Nope. Banning someone is not the same as asking them to leave. If you had asked to leave in a polite manner, and if I had agreed to your request, you would not have had to ban me, and you would not have had the burden of enforcing your ban. Since you elected not to ask me polite, civil, and respectful manner, but instead elected to use force, you are now obliged to enforce your ban. That means you now have to be supervigilant to make sure that no one posting there is me. And you will have to maintain that vigilance round the clock for the indefinite future. You have demonstrated that you subscribe to, believe in, and practice the Hammurabic Method of Social Control. That's inconsistent with the credo and ethics of a healer, Bela. You cannot consistently claim to be a healer while adopting and practicing the behaviors of a hurter. But, given that you are in fact and in deed a hurter and not a healer, you are obliged to experience the natural consequences -- the 'karma' if you will -- of having made that conscious choice. > > Bela, somehow I have the strong feeling you just don't appreciate me. > How can I miss you when you won't go away? I've heard that line before. It's cute. The way to miss me is to shoot your arrows in another direction. I suggest you take aim on the twin dragons of Fear and Ignorance. They are worth slaying, not me. Peace, Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Thu Jan 2 23:29:48 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: oops! To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 23:29:42 -0500 (EST) > Oops! I deleted your message! Oops! Information wants to be free Bela. It will arrive in your consciousness eventually, by a more circuitous route. That's how karma works, my friend. Sure you can delay the day of enlightenment as long as you want. But eventually the light gets in. There's always a crack in everything, -- even the heavily armored tower, Bela. That's how the light gets in. Barry From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Thu Jan 2 23:46:37 2003 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 20:46:40 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. >If you had asked to leave in a polite manner, and if I had agreed >to your request, you would not have had to ban me, ..."and if I had agreed to your request" What the fuck does that mean? You say nothing. >Since you elected >not to ask me polite, civil, and respectful manner, Oh, but I did, and I told you what forum behaviors I did not want. You never directly addressed my request. How rude. Anyway, you decided not to comply, and I told you what the results would be. You knew what was going to happen, but you had to PLAY YOUR PERSECUTION/VICTIM DRAMA and, as usual, you had to drag someone else into it. And, as usual, Artemis had to wade in and try to fix it. Bravo, Barry. > but instead >elected to use force, you are now obliged to enforce your ban. >That means you now have to be supervigilant to make sure that no >one posting there is me. "supervigilant"? WTF? You are as easy to spot as a $4 bill. Don't flatter yourself. >The way to miss me is to shoot your arrows in another direction. >I suggest you take aim on the twin dragons of Fear and Ignorance. Give it up, Barry. You STILL NOT HAVE ADDRESSED THE FORUM BEHAVIORS THAT RESULTED IN YOUR EXPULSION. Obviously you could never come back until you can deal with that. That was your choice. You made your choice, and the completely predictable results followed. The same results you seem to be making a career out of. ( )*( ) ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Thu Jan 2 23:47:47 2003 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 20:47:49 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: oops! >Sure you can delay the day of enlightenment as long as you want. > >But eventually the light gets in. There's always a crack in >everything, -- even the heavily armored tower, Bela. That's how >the light gets in. Coming from you, that's spectacularly ironic. ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Fri Jan 3 00:35:17 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 00:35:11 -0500 (EST) > > If you had asked to leave in a polite manner, and if I had agreed > > to your request, you would not have had to ban me, > ..."and if I had agreed to your request" > What the fuck does that mean? You say nothing. Are you unfamiliar with the concept of an agreement, Bela? > > Since you elected not to ask me in a polite, civil, and > > respectful manner, > Oh, but I did, and I told you what forum behaviors I did not want. No you didn't. That was the problem in a nutshell. You could not articulate what you objected to. Now I objected to the mean-spirited insults, but you did not see fit to eschew that odious and unbecoming practice. In fact you ramped up your employment of them. Did you imagine that a barrage of insults would repel me? > You never directly addressed my request. How rude. Which request? The request to not be me? > Anyway, you decided not to comply, and I told you what the results > would be. You knew what was going to happen, but you had to PLAY > YOUR PERSECUTION/VICTIM DRAMA and, as usual, you had to drag > someone else into it. I don't know how to comply with a request to not be me. Wouldn't that amount to living a lie? I had no idea what the results of failing to not be me would be. The only other person I dragged into it, Bela, was you. I have dragged you into the results of my failure to implement your request to me to not be me. It feels a little like Achilles dragging Hector around the streets of Troy. > And, as usual, Artemis had to wade in and try to fix it. Bravo, Barry. Of course. She is the most gifted peacemaker I know. Linda is pretty good at it too. But they both failed, didn't they? Yet they are both at peace with me. Who behaved in an unpeaceable manner, Bela, if the most gifted peacemakers are at peace with me, but not with you? > > but instead elected to use force, you are now obliged to enforce > > your ban. That means you now have to be supervigilant to make sure > > that no one posting there is me. > "supervigilant"? WTF? You are as easy to spot as a $4 bill. Are you going to get up at 3AM to make sure that I'm not on in the morning, Eastern time, when Merrllyn is most active? > Don't flatter yourself. What do I need of flattery? Do you take me for someone who can be manipulated by flattery or insults? > > The way to miss me is to shoot your arrows in another direction. > > I suggest you take aim on the twin dragons of Fear and Ignorance. > Give it up, Barry. You STILL NOT HAVE ADDRESSED THE FORUM BEHAVIORS THAT > RESULTED IN YOUR EXPULSION. Of course not, Bela. I have no idea what the 'forum behaviors' are that you refer to unless you actually specify them. Which for reasons that I am beginning to understand, you cannot articulate. > Obviously you could never come back until you can deal with that. There is nothing to deal with, Bela. Unless and until you can define and articulate it, I conclude that the 'forum behaviors' you have in mind is pretty much anything that triggers one of your otherwise undisclosed dreads. Since I don't really have an accurate portrait of your dreads, I have no way to anticipate which of my behaviors you find so dreadful. But I imagine it has something to do with how I use my Mind. > That was your choice. You made your choice, and the completely > predictable results followed. You mean it was predictable that I would question your judgment, your fairness, your ethics, your beliefs, and your practices? > The same results you seem to be making a career out of. Exposing people for what they really are? > ( )*( ) What is that annotation, Bela? Is that a self-portrait, an illustration of what you really are? It kinda looks like an asshole. :) Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Fri Jan 3 00:36:47 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: oops! To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 00:36:42 -0500 (EST) > > Sure you can delay the day of enlightenment as long as you want. > > But eventually the light gets in. There's always a crack in > > everything, -- even the heavily armored tower, Bela. That's how > > the light gets in. > Coming from you, that's spectacularly ironic. Why? I enjoy becoming enlightened. It's my favorite spiritual experience. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Fri Jan 3 01:35:30 2003 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 22:35:31 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. >> > If you had asked to leave in a polite manner, and if I had agreed >> > to your request, you would not have had to ban me, You are rewriting history and are completely innacurate. That's the reason you don't fit at MBS, you lack the self awareness to behave properly. You can't carry on a conversation. You go on tangents. You're evasive. And then you attack people who do the exact same thing you've been doing! >> Oh, but I did, and I told you what forum behaviors I did not want. > >No you didn't. That was the problem in a nutshell. You could not >articulate what you objected to. You are completely in error. I posted this: ====== Barry, can you make a solid effort to read other people's posts, and not use every topic as an opportunity to simply list the properties of your pet theories? Can you accept, for a time, accepted word definitions even if you are not familiar with them? Can you attempt to make a point without getting lost in the minutia of details relevent to a system you are trying to use as an analogy? Can you try to be as clear and succinct as possible, and if you are going to employ a non-standard definition, have the courtesy to let us know? ====== ...and so what did you do? Instead of answering me, you merely continued the above behaviors. Didn't even fucking discuss it. I offered you clear communication and you were completely evasive. I spoke about this at least three more times, yet you never replied directly. You also torpedoed the channeling session that Lynn was excited about. That was selfish. And you know what? I've apologized to the forum several times. You, of course, have not. That says something about you. >The only other person I dragged into it, Bela, was you. No, you dragged Artemis into it, as you no doubt have many many times. >Are you going to get up at 3AM to make sure that I'm not on in the >morning, Eastern time, when Merrllyn is most active? Probably not. You're not going to rearrange your schedule just to hassle me are you? You need a dog or something to keep you busy. >> Give it up, Barry. You STILL NOT HAVE ADDRESSED THE FORUM BEHAVIORS THAT >> RESULTED IN YOUR EXPULSION. > >Of course not, Bela. I have no idea what the 'forum behaviors' are >that you refer to unless you actually specify them. Which I did at least four times, one of which is quoted above, so either you are IN ERROR or LYING. By your standards, perhaps I should assume its a bit of both. B. ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Fri Jan 3 08:38:53 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 08:38:38 -0500 (EST) Hi Bela, > > > > If you had asked to leave in a polite manner, and if I had > > > > agreed to your request, you would not have had to ban me, > You are rewriting history and are completely innacurate. Bela, perhaps you don't fully appreciate how you come across. Perhaps you imagine that you come across differently from how you are perceived. For example, Bela, the phrase 'compeletely inaccurate' means that there is not a shred of accuracy in the portrayal. Is that what you mean to assert, Bela? Not even the tiniest grain of truth? > That's the reason you don't fit at MBS, you lack the self > awareness to behave properly. There you go again, Bela, making references to an undefined term, 'properly'. To my mind, scholarly behavior is appropriate in a forum that investigates the phenomenon of Mindfulness. > You can't carry on a conversation. If you mean carry on an argument, I prefer not to. I frankly don't much care for the Argument Culture. I'd much prefer to engage in authentic Bohmian Dialogue where we construct new insights. > You go on tangents. You're evasive. And then you attack people > who do the exact same thing you've been doing! If you mean I evade insults, yes. I evade insults. If you mean I pause to address misconceptions, yes, I do that. When someone is going off in an unproductive direction, I turn a little to head in a more productive direction. As to tangents, I believe you have your geometry analogy confused here, Bela. I am turning from the tangential path to remain on the footpath that encircles the central point of our conflict. > > > Oh, but I did, and I told you what forum behaviors I did not want. > > No you didn't. That was the problem in a nutshell. You could not > > articulate what you objected to. > You are completely in error. There you go again. Bela, you appear to laboring under the misconception that I can read your mind. Bela, I lack the ability to read minds. If you want me to know what's on your mind, you have to articulate it clearly, in a decodable language. > I posted this: > ====== > Barry, can you make a solid effort to read other people's posts, > and not use every topic as an opportunity to simply list the > properties of your pet theories? Can you accept, for a time, > accepted word definitions even if you are not familiar with them? > Can you attempt to make a point without getting lost in the minutia > of details relevent to a system you are trying to use as an analogy? > Can you try to be as clear and succinct as possible, and if you are > going to employ a non-standard definition, have the courtesy to let > us know? > ====== Yes. That is a fact. You posted that exact sequence of words. > ...and so what did you do? Instead of answering me, you merely > continued the above behaviors. Didn't even fucking discuss it. Bela, did you not read my answer? Here again is my answer: I answered, "Mu." Do you not make a solid effort to read my answer, Bela? Did you not notice that the answer, "Mu." is not a property of any of my pet theories? Can you not accept, for a time, the definition of the word 'Mu' even if you are not familiar with it? What is your point, Bela? I am lost in the minutia of your many misconceptions and multiple expressions suggesting an exasperating level of obliviousness. Can you please succinctly name the dimension of my behavior to which you took and continue to take such violent exception? Can you please define what you mean by 'proper forum behavior'? > I offered you clear communication and you were completely evasive. I am unclear on your so-called 'clear communication' Bela. Much of the time I find myself lost in the fog of your words, unable to extract clear meaning from your sentences. > I spoke about this at least three more times, yet you never > replied directly. I am unclear on the three references that you have in mind here. What are the three references, Bela? Please cite them. > You also torpedoed the channeling session that Lynn was excited > about. That was selfish. I dispute your portrayal of the cause and effect web that led Peter Sith to withdraw from MBS of his own free will. > And you know what? I've apologized to the forum several times. You have not yet apologized in a sincere manner to me for your continuing obnoxious behavior toward me, and you have not yet discontinued the pattern of atrocious practices to which I take vigorous and animated exception. > You, of course, have not. That says something about you. What does it say, Bela? Can you say what it says? Please utter the words, Bela. Please say what it says, for I am not able to read your mind. I truly make a solid effort, Bela. I try to read your mind, but I keep drawing a blank. > > The only other person I dragged into it, Bela, was you. > No, you dragged Artemis into it, as you no doubt have many many times. There you go again, Bela, asserting a belief that deserves more doubt than certainty. > > Are you going to get up at 3AM to make sure that I'm not on in the > > morning, Eastern time, when Merrllyn is most active? > Probably not. You're not going to rearrange your schedule just to > hassle me are you? You need a dog or something to keep you busy. Bela, I live in Boston. When it's 3AM in the San Francisco Bay Area, it's 6AM here, and I'm up for the day. > > > Give it up, Barry. You STILL NOT HAVE ADDRESSED THE FORUM > > > BEHAVIORS THAT RESULTED IN YOUR EXPULSION. > > Of course not, Bela. I have no idea what the 'forum behaviors' > > are that you refer to unless you actually specify them. > Which I did at least four times, one of which is quoted above, > so either you are IN ERROR or LYING. What is the address of the four sentences you are thinking of, that name the forum behaviors that caused you to block my postings from being read by others in a timely manner? Which is the one sentence above, to which you refer? > By your standards, perhaps I should assume its a bit of both. It would be accurate and worthwhile to assume, to infer, to conclude, and to realize that heretofore, you have been frequently doing both of those objectionable practices. In my pet theory, those practices would land a learner in Quadrant II -- laboring under a misconception. Your constellation of recent emotional states is consistent with a learner lost in Quadrant II of my model -- laboring under a misconception. Barry ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Fri Jan 3 14:32:41 2003 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 11:32:42 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. Hey Pointdexter: >For example, Bela, the phrase 'compeletely inaccurate' means >that there is not a shred of accuracy in the portrayal. Is >that what you mean to assert, Bela? Not even the tiniest >grain of truth? Any such shreds are microscopic in size and and arranged so far out of context that they are meaningless. Yes, I assert you are completely wrong. >If you mean I evade insults, yes. I evade insults. No, I've seen you attack Blue, Peter, and myself. You are full of shit. >If you meanI pause to address misconceptions, yes, I do that. > When someone is going off in an unproductive direction, "Unproductive direction"? Who are *you* to be the judge? You were consistantly off topic, and displayed almost no understanding of the concepts being discussed. Yet you are too dense to understand this. >> > > Oh, but I did, and I told you what forum behaviors I did not want. >> > No you didn't. That was the problem in a nutshell. You could not >> > articulate what you objected to. >> You are completely in error. >If you want me to know what's on >your mind, you have to articulate it clearly, in a decodable >language. AGAIN, BARRY, READ THE FOLLOWING. THIS LIST WAS POSTED MORE THAN ONCE; YOUR RESPONSE WAS NOT TO DIRECTLY ADDRESS MY REQUEST, BUT TO PERSIST IN THE BEHAVIORS. THAT IS WHY I BANNED YOUR SKINNY ASS. > ====== >> Barry, can you make a solid effort to read other people's posts, >> and not use every topic as an opportunity to simply list the >> properties of your pet theories? Can you accept, for a time, >> accepted word definitions even if you are not familiar with them? >> Can you attempt to make a point without getting lost in the minutia >> of details relevent to a system you are trying to use as an analogy? >> Can you try to be as clear and succinct as possible, and if you are >> going to employ a non-standard definition, have the courtesy to let >> us know? >> ====== >Bela, did you not read my answer? Here again is my answer: > >I answered, "Mu." Here is my response: FUCK YOU. >Can you please succinctly name the dimension of my behavior >to which you took and continue to take such violent exception? >Can you please define what you mean by 'proper forum behavior'? I did not need to name it, because I DESCRIBED IT. >I am unclear on your so-called 'clear communication' Bela. Much >of the time I find myself lost in the fog of your words, unable >to extract clear meaning from your sentences. And you you put your fingers in your ears and persisted with this sort of bullshit. Which was your clear signal that YOU HAD NO INTENT TO MODIFY YOUR BEHAVIOR TO COMPLEMENT THE FORUM, OR EVEN DISCUSS MY REQUEST OR YOUR BEHAVIOR. >> > > Give it up, Barry. You STILL NOT HAVE ADDRESSED THE FORUM >> > > BEHAVIORS THAT RESULTED IN YOUR EXPULSION. > >> > Of course not, Bela. I have no idea what the 'forum behaviors' >> > are that you refer to unless you actually specify them. AND YOU WERE SURPRISED YOU WERE BANNED? Barry, you need to get help. Seriously, professional help. Don't wear out Artemis, she has enough to deal with. See a physician or psychiatrist. B. ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Fri Jan 3 15:19:11 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 15:19:05 -0500 (EST) > Hey Pointdexter: It's spelled 'poindexter' and that's not my name, Bela. By the way, what is your name? > > For example, Bela, the phrase 'compeletely inaccurate' means > > that there is not a shred of accuracy in the portrayal. Is > > that what you mean to assert, Bela? Not even the tiniest > > grain of truth? > Any such shreds are microscopic in size and and arranged so far > out of context that they are meaningless. Are you oblivious to 'subtle bionergy fields' Bela? Look more carefully. > Yes, I assert you are completely wrong. It it pleases you to believe such nonsense, who am I to deny you your religious ecstacy? > > If you mean I evade insults, yes. I evade insults. > No, I've seen you attack Blue, Peter, and myself. You are full of shit. I am just returning the insults back to the sender. I have no use for them. > > If you mean I pause to address misconceptions, yes, I do that. > > When someone is going off in an unproductive direction, > "Unproductive direction"? Who are *you* to be the judge? You were > consistantly off topic, and displayed almost no understanding of > the concepts being discussed. Yet you are too dense to understand this. I am Barry. I choose the direction of my journey. Who are you? Bela, do you recall deciding what was or wasn't 'pertinant' to the discussion of theories of emotions and learning? How did you judge what pertains and what does not pertain to a discussion of theories of emotions and learning? I was especially dumbfounded by your insistence on determining what pertains and what does not pertain to a theory, given your testimony that you did not understand what the theory was talking about. > > > > > Oh, but I did, and I told you what forum behaviors I did not want. > > > > No you didn't. That was the problem in a nutshell. You could not > > > > articulate what you objected to. > > > You are completely in error. > > If you want me to know what's on your mind, you have to > > articulate it clearly, in a decodable language. > AGAIN, BARRY, READ THE FOLLOWING. THIS LIST WAS POSTED MORE THAN ONCE; YOUR > RESPONSE WAS NOT TO DIRECTLY ADDRESS MY REQUEST, BUT TO PERSIST IN THE > BEHAVIORS. THAT IS WHY I BANNED YOUR SKINNY ASS. Why are you typing in ALL CAPITALS, Bela. I am not impressed by the rhetorical device known as PROOF BY VIGOROUS ASSERTION. > > ====== > >> Barry, can you make a solid effort to read other people's posts, > >> and not use every topic as an opportunity to simply list the > >> properties of your pet theories? Can you accept, for a time, > >> accepted word definitions even if you are not familiar with them? > >> Can you attempt to make a point without getting lost in the minutia > >> of details relevent to a system you are trying to use as an analogy? > >> Can you try to be as clear and succinct as possible, and if you are > >> going to employ a non-standard definition, have the courtesy to let > >> us know? > >> ====== > > Bela, did you not read my answer? Here again is my answer: > > I answered, "Mu." > Here is my response: FUCK YOU. Ah. Now I am beginning to see the depths of your mindfulness and empathy. Bela, how is an Anglo-Saxon epithet pertinant to our conversation? > > Can you please succinctly name the dimension of my behavior > > to which you took and continue to take such violent exception? > > Can you please define what you mean by 'proper forum behavior'? > I did not need to name it, because I DESCRIBED IT. Well, you not only described it, you enacted it. Let me name it for you, then. What you evidently didn't like, Bela, was the impertinance of my remarks. According to your judgment, my remards did not pertain to the purpose of the forum, as you envisioned it. My questions were impertinant by your lights, because they did not, according to your judgment, pertain to the subject at hand. > > I am unclear on your so-called 'clear communication' Bela. Much > > of the time I find myself lost in the fog of your words, unable > > to extract clear meaning from your sentences. > And you you put your fingers in your ears and persisted with this sort of > bullshit. Which was your clear signal that YOU HAD NO INTENT TO MODIFY YOUR > BEHAVIOR TO COMPLEMENT THE FORUM, OR EVEN DISCUSS MY REQUEST OR YOUR BEHAVIOR. Oh, you mean my failure to recognize the pertinance of your impertinant and immoderate remarks? I admit it, Bela, I don't see the pertinance of impertinant and immoderate remarks. > >> > > Give it up, Barry. You STILL NOT HAVE ADDRESSED THE FORUM > >> > > BEHAVIORS THAT RESULTED IN YOUR EXPULSION. > >> > Of course not, Bela. I have no idea what the 'forum behaviors' > >> > are that you refer to unless you actually specify them. > AND YOU WERE SURPRISED YOU WERE BANNED? I was surprised that you would so gleefully demonstrate such an unbecoming practice, given the long history of that practice in spiritual writings. > Barry, you need to get help. Seriously, professional help. Don't wear out > Artemis, she has enough to deal with. See a physician or psychiatrist. > B. Heh. Your unhelpfulness is underrated, Bela. You have helped me learn how to unmask a dispiriting manipulator in record time. But why did you choose me as the revealer of your perfidy, Bela? I am honored that you chose me to unmask you, but how did you know I would be the one to achieve that long-awaited karmic outcome? Barry ----------------------------------------------------------------------- From oversoul25@hotmail.com Fri Jan 3 14:06:37 2003 From: "Peter Sith" To: bkort@musenet.org Subject: consequences... Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 08:58:46 -1000 Barry, I cannot point to any scientific theory that relates to this, but in human relationship theory, something for you to ponder would be, "the only common denominator in all your failed (and successful) relationships is YOU." Or, as Michael would say, "As you sow, so shall you reap." For what it's worth, you might look study some of the Michael teachings to better understand your behavior as I think it would help you. You are a scholar with a goal of discrimination and arrogance as a chief feature. There is a good resource called, the Michael Handbook, by Jose Stevens and Simon Warwick, where you can have many of those terms explained by another scholar (Jose). You might even be able to get a copy on half.com. Good luck, Peter Life is about taking the space you need. _________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Fri Jan 3 14:57:16 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Consequences of Bathing in Archimede's Bathtub To: oversoul25@hotmail.com (Peter Sith) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 14:57:10 -0500 (EST) Peter, > I cannot point to any scientific theory that relates to this, but in > human relationship theory, something for you to ponder would be, "the > only common denominator in all your failed (and successful) relationships > is YOU." The other common denominator is the environment or the culture we live in. A fish lives in water, which mediates everything in the life of a fish. A fish doesn't have the power to change the environment. Nothing the fish can do will change the functional characteristics of seawater. But a captive fish in a small fishtank will, in the due course of time and metabolic processes, foul its own water. But some noncaptive fish learned to jump out of the water, and became amphibians. Now they breathe clear air. That must have inspired them to evolve to reptiles and ultimately to birds who took wing. Unlike fish, humans can and do alter their environment and culture. (But not always mindfully.) > Or, as Michael would say, "As you sow, so shall you reap." For what > it's worth, you might look study some of the Michael teachings to > better understand your behavior as I think it would help you. I had been studying the Michael texts that Merrlynn was typing in to Mind, Body, and Spirit. > You are a scholar with a goal of discrimination and arrogance as > a chief feature. Excuse me? > There is a good resource called, the Michael Handbook, by Jose Stevens > and Simon Warwick, where you can have many of those terms explained by > another scholar (Jose). You might even be able to get a copy on half.com. No thanks. I am not interested in attending to anyone who would be so arrogant and unkind as to gratuitously label me or to assert my goals. To my mind, that practice reveals a chilling lack of insight and empathy, a disturbing lack of mindfulness and compassion, a troubling lack of awareness and lovingkindness, a perplexing lack of Urim and Thummim. > Good luck, Peter Thanks. I hope you find the comforting enlightenment that awaits at the end of your lifelong karmic journey. > Life is about taking the space you need. Oh? Peter, I am not a Taker, I am a Leaver. My body takes up exactly the amount of space that it requires, no more and no less. Have you ever bathed in Archimede's Bathtub? Barry ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Fri Jan 3 16:05:55 2003 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 13:05:57 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. Barry, due to your *illegal* and *unauthorized* posting of *private emails*, I'm afraid I will have to make my presence known to you in a way that I have not previously. Tonight. Note: this is not a *physical* threat in any way. However you have crossed every imaginable line. So be it. ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Fri Jan 3 16:18:42 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 16:18:35 -0500 (EST) Hi Bela, > Barry, due to your *illegal* and *unauthorized* posting of > *private emails*, I'm afraid I will have to make my presence > known to you in a way that I have not previously. What do you propose to do, Bela, to make my aquaintence? > Tonight. What time you wanna come by? I'm gonna be out most of the evening. You might wanna make an appointment. > Note: this is not a *physical* threat in any way. However you have > crossed every imaginable line. So be it. Bela, there are an infinite number of imaginable lines. Seems a little hyperbolic to get so exercised and to say that I have crossed an infinite number of imaginable lines. Barry ________________________________________________________________________ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Fri Jan 3 16:43:28 2003 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 13:43:29 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. > What time you wanna come by? I'm gonna be out most of the evening. How about 11:00 tonight? I'll "see" you then. And again, this is not in any way to be construed as a physical threat, of any sort. Certainly not like the ones you have sent my way. ________________________________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Fri Jan 3 17:45:14 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 17:45:08 -0500 (EST) > > What time you wanna come by? I'm gonna be out most of the evening. > How about 11:00 tonight? I'll "see" you then. OK. I'll be inside my body at that hour. I trust you can find it with your powers of clairvoyance. > And again, this is not in any way to be construed as a physical threat, > of any sort. Certainly not like the ones you have sent my way. You mean the metaphysical one? How will I know it's you? Barry ----------------------------------------------------------------------- From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Fri Jan 3 17:53:07 2003 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 14:53:10 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. Barry, I don't want to do this but you leave me no choice. I see from the Utne posts quoted on your site that you have disrupted forums in this manner before. You need to see a doctor, I mean it, you are ill. And here you tell us you have the "solution" for the world's problems. Sorry Barry, I asked you to leave but you continue to pester me and try to spam my forum. How will you know its me? Good question. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From bkort@musenet.org Fri Jan 3 18:13:21 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 18:13:16 -0500 (EST) Hi Bela, > Barry, I don't want to do this but you leave me no choice. Do what? > I see from the Utne posts quoted on your site that you have > disrupted forums in this manner before. You have amusing visions, Bela. > You need to see a doctor, I mean it, you are ill. It would help a lot, Bela, if you stopped making me so sick. > And here you tell us you have the "solution" for the world's problems. Why do you choose to play the role of Agonist rather than the role of Ecstacist? > Sorry Barry, I asked you to leave but you continue to pester > me and try to spam my forum. Do you feel pestered, Bela? > How will you know its me? Good question. You have not yet answered my question. Barry ----------------------------------------------------------------------- From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Fri Jan 3 18:33:34 2003 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 15:33:33 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. >> I see from the Utne posts quoted on your site that you have >> disrupted forums in this manner before. >You have amusing visions, Bela. No, I've posted on PF some records of your being an asshole on other forums. Its a pattern with you. However it is not up to me to make you recognize it, since self-awareness is not your goal. >It would help a lot, Bela, if you stopped making me so sick. Awwwwww is the little victiim feeling persecuted? Well ask yourself WHO keeps trying to crash into the MBS, who posts whining, moaning complaints about it on M&S and PF. I encouraged you to leave peacefully, to start your own forum, to get on with your life, but you persist in bothering me. Well, tonight I will give you the response you are looking for. Now it would make me happy if you would finally just GO AWAY. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From bkort@musenet.org Sat Jan 4 05:01:18 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Sorry Barry. To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 05:01:12 -0500 (EST) Hi Bela, > > > I see from the Utne posts quoted on your site that you have > > > disrupted forums in this manner before. > > You have amusing visions, Bela. > No, I've posted on PF some records of your being an asshole on > other forums. Its a pattern with you. However it is not up to me > to make you recognize it, since self-awareness is not your goal. I'm well aware of Wyvern and Gnat. They are still on MicroMuse. They never left. > > It would help a lot, Bela, if you stopped making me so sick. > Awwwwww is the little victiim feeling persecuted? More annoyed than persecuted. Does it make you feel good to annoy people, Bela? > Well ask yourself WHO keeps trying to crash into the MBS, who posts > whining, moaning complaints about it on M&S and PF. You mean Peter Sith? What do I care if he crashes into MBS and posts whining, moaning complaints there, just as you post your whining, moaning complaints wherever it pleases you to post them. > I encouraged you to leave peacefully, to start your own forum, > to get on with your life, but you persist in bothering me. Well, > tonight I will give you the response you are looking for. You will respond with kindness and warmth? I will be looking forward to that from you, Bela. > Now it would make me happy if you would finally just GO AWAY. I am very sorry, Bela, but I have an an unalienable right to be present on this planet and to make my views known in venues where my work is being publicly discussed. I regret that you find it so difficult to extend to me the civil rights that all human beings are entitled to, but I shall continue to function as if I am entitled to the civil and human rights that you would prefer to deny me. Barry ----------------------------------------------------------------- From oversoul25@hotmail.com Fri Jan 3 20:30:52 2003 From: "Peter Sith" To: bkort@musenet.org Subject: Re: Consequences of Bathing in Archimede's Bathtub Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 15:27:02 -1000 Well Barry, it's obvious that you can come up with all the witty reparte to try and win all your arguments. AT some point, you will have to ask yourself, "Is everyone in the world fucked-up and wrong and I'm always right, or is it just possible that I am wrong?" I recall a post where you gloated about me not being able to get you banned from the worldcursing thread. I knew I only had to wait and you would get yourself banned. You might delude yourself into thinking that you left, but from the comments of others, it seems like many were happy you were banned for good. Think about that. Why are you banned from so many places and no one else is? You are not that special. Life is about taking the space you need. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From bkort@musenet.org Sat Jan 4 05:21:30 2003 From: Barry Kort Message-Id: <200301041021.h04ALRV17213@aldebaran.musenet.org> Subject: Re: Consequences of Bathing in Archimede's Bathtub To: oversoul25@hotmail.com (Peter Sith) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 05:21:25 -0500 (EST) Hi Peter, > Well Barry, it's obvious that you can come up with all the witty > reparte to try and win all your arguments. What arguments? I'm interesting in the Process of Enlightenment, not the Argument Culture. > AT some point, you will have to ask yourself, "Is everyone in the > world fucked-up and wrong and I'm always right, or is it just > possible that I am wrong?" Lao Tsu said, "Think about Right and Wrong, and one immediately falls into Error." The concepts of Right and Wrong are irrelevant or meaningless in many contexts, especially in science, theology, and spirituality. The process of scientific discovery, the search for God, and the process of enlightenment are not about right and wrong, Peter. They are about growth and development. They are about achieving consciousness and becoming human. I live in a world where we forever seek better and better, enroute to the asymptotic best. In that world, the notions of right and wrong are distractions from the process that God bids us undertake. > I recall a post where you gloated about me not being able to get > you banned from the worldcursing thread. I knew I only had to > wait and you would get yourself banned. Are you claiming responsibility for Bela's actions there? > You might delude yourself into thinking that you left, but from > the comments of others, it seems like many were happy you were > banned for good. I have not left, Peter. Can you not detect my continuing presence there? Why do you keep returning to the deep well of my waters, Peter? Are you thirsty for the ideas I bring to your awareness? > Think about that. Why are you banned from so many places and no > one else is? You are not that special. Why was Socrates handed a cup of hemlock, Peter? Why was Jesus crucified, Peter? Why was Galileo imprisoned by Pope Urban, Peter? Why were six million Jews gassed and cremated in Hitler's ovens? > Life is about taking the space you need. Liebensraum? I think not, Peter. Life is about creating the future. Barry ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com Sat Jan 4 11:58:46 2003 Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 08:58:48 -0800 From: Bela To: Barry Kort Subject: GO AWAY Go away. >> > It would help a lot, Bela, if you stopped making me so sick. Then GO AWAY. Only you have the power to GET THE FUCK AWAY. >More annoyed than persecuted. Does it make you feel good to annoy >people, Bela? Then GO AWAY. >> Well ask yourself WHO keeps trying to crash into the MBS, who posts >> whining, moaning complaints about it on M&S and PF. >You mean Peter Sith? No, fucknut, I mean YOU, and you know it. GET THE FUCK AWAY. >> Now it would make me happy if you would finally just GO AWAY. >I am very sorry, Bela, but I have an an unalienable right to be >present on this planet and to make my views known in venues where >my work is being publicly discussed. Barry, let me point something out: NO ONE ON MBS READ YOUR FUCKING WORK. LYNN TRIED FOR A WHILE, LINDA GAVE IT A SHOT. THAT WAS IT. THERE WAS NO REAL INTEREST. FACE IT, GET OVER IT, AND LEAVE ME AND MBS ALONE. > I regret that you find it so difficult to extend to me the civil > rights that all human beings are entitled to YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE. ___________________________________________________ From bkort@musenet.org Sun Jan 5 00:05:31 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: GO AWAY To: Bela.Z.Bov@worldcursing.com (Bela) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 00:05:24 -0500 (EST) Hi Bela, > Go away. Not gonna happen, Bela. I have a right to be where I am. And you have no power to exclude me from public venues. > > > > It would help a lot, Bela, if you stopped making me so sick. > Then GO AWAY. Only you have the power to GET THE FUCK AWAY. Where do you propose I go, Bela? Back to Mars? > > More annoyed than persecuted. Does it make you feel good to annoy > > people, Bela? > Then GO AWAY. Not gonna happen, Bela. > > > Well ask yourself WHO keeps trying to crash into the MBS, who > > > posts whining, moaning complaints about it on M&S and PF. > > You mean Peter Sith? > No, fucknut, I mean YOU, and you know it. My my, Bela. Such abusive language coming from a person who advertises themselves as a healer? I don't understand that. > GET THE FUCK AWAY. Why do you keep coming after me, if you want me to go away? I am facing you, Bela, because you are coming after me. Do you not see that? > > > Now it would make me happy if you would finally just GO AWAY. > > I am very sorry, Bela, but I have an an unalienable right to be > > present on this planet and to make my views known in venues where > > my work is being publicly discussed. > Barry, let me point something out: NO ONE ON MBS READ YOUR FUCKING > WORK. LYNN TRIED FOR A WHILE, LINDA GAVE IT A SHOT. THAT WAS IT. > THERE WAS NO REAL INTEREST. FACE IT, GET OVER IT, AND LEAVE ME AND > MBS ALONE. I have no objection to people having no interest in my work. People have a perfect right to be interested or not. However, you asked me to explain my work, which led me to believe that you and those whom you had invited to MBS were interested in hearing an explanation of the Theory of Emotions and Learning. Were you deceiving me about that? > > I regret that you find it so difficult to extend to me the civil > > rights that all human beings are entitled to > YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE. And I also have a right to answer my critics in the venue where they see fit to publish their academic criticisms of my work. That's called Equal Time, Bela. I have a right to demand Equal Time to answer my critics. As long as you wish to take time to publish your copious criticism of my work, I expect to be afforded the courtesy of a civil response. Barry ----------------------------------------------------------------------- From oversoul25@hotmail.com Sat Jan 4 11:04:04 2003 From: "Peter Sith" To: bkort@musenet.org Subject: Re: Consequences of Bathing in Archimede's Bathtub Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 06:04:07 -1000 "I have not left, Peter. Can you not detect my continuing presence there?" Buy a clue Barry, you did not leave, you there THROWN OUT. Yes, I know about your other personalities on that site. I also know about you false ID on my site. That says a lot about you that you cannot show up as who you really are and have to create a fake name (very appropo for you also: one who lives in fear) to go somewhere you know you are not wanted. It wouldn't even cross my mind to join a thread that you would start. The only thing more pathetic is when you have to create another personality to agree with yourself when you know that no one else will. If you are still lurking there as Moulton (no one else is that obtuse), then you can see that NO ONE has spoken up to defend your right to stay. How does that feel? Artemis may have stated that the purpose of the forum was compromised, but I did not hear him/her say that they wanted you back. The point I am trying to make is that you ARGUE about everything and people get tired of that. You quote Lao Tze about right and wrong. You spend all your f**king time trying to prove how right you are and how wrong everyone else is trying to shoot holes in their statements. See how much time you spend in error? Just how many other boards have you been thrown out of? How many people in your life have told you that you argue too much? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From bkort@musenet.org Sun Jan 5 00:31:53 2003 From: Barry Kort Subject: Re: Consequences of Bathing in Archimede's Bathtub To: oversoul25@hotmail.com (Peter Sith) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 00:31:48 -0500 (EST) Hi Peter, > "I have not left, Peter. Can you not detect my continuing presence > there?" > Buy a clue Barry, you did not leave, you there THROWN OUT. Yes, I know > about your other personalities on that site. I also know about your > false ID on my site. That says a lot about you that you cannot show > up as who you really are and have to create a fake name (very appropo > for you also: one who lives in fear) to go somewhere you know you are > not wanted. It wouldn't even cross my mind to join a thread that you > would start. The only thing more pathetic is when you have to create > another personality to agree with yourself when you know that no one > else will. If you are still lurking there as Moulton (no one else is > that obtuse), then you can see that NO ONE has spoken up to defend > your right to stay. How does that feel? Artemis may have stated that > the purpose of the forum was compromised, but I did not hear him/her > say that they wanted you back. Peter, are you aware that I am publishing these messages of yours on my web site? As you may know, it is my practice to publish letters from both my supporters and my critics. > The point I am trying to make is that you ARGUE about everything and > people get tired of that. You quote Lao Tze about right and wrong. You > spend all your f**king time trying to prove how right you are and how > wrong everyone else is trying to shoot holes in their statements. See > how much time you spend in error? Just how many other boards have you > been thrown out of? How many people in your life have told you that > you argue too much? I agree that the Argument Culture is banal. You won't get any argument from me on that one. Barry