Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Kratom Eye
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

Feedback and Administration > Website Announcements and Feature Feedback
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |  [ show all ]
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746778 -

Quote:
Where is the assumption?


Quote:
The only one who broke a rule in my last S&P thread was a moderator


Subject: Moderator
Action: Break a rule in your last S&P thread, aka The tooth fairy.

So i ask, can you tell me which rule was broken by the moderation ?
When you make a thread without any objective whatsoever, but to question the moderation authority that just puts you in a delicate position.

Still, you rely upon a "disclaimer" idea not even approved by the administration, and make your case around the moderation breaking a non existing rule, is that it ?

Before replying please tell, explain and elucidate everyone regarding the objective and purpose of this thread:

Quote:
DISCLAIMER: I am highly sensitive to having my expressed beliefs questioned or examined by others. Please post only support and encouragement on this thread.

Let's discuss why she leaves money for molars.


MAIA


--------------------
Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala



Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy.
Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Icelander]
    #4746780 -

So when I attempt to stop someone from being fooled by a New-Age con man or correct an erroneous idea, I am most likely doing it out of:

A: Love  :heart:

B: Meanness  :mad2:


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746802 -

Could be either depending on your motives and approch. That seems basic. Do you need examples?


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746806 -

Quote:
Being loving is not a requirement for scrutinizing ideas.


But it is a requirement if you want to achieve a positive spiritual experience, don't you think ?

MAIA


--------------------
Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala



Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy.
Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746857 -

Quote:
So when I attempt to stop someone from being fooled by a New-Age con man or correct an erroneous idea, I am most likely doing it out of:

A: Love

B: Meanness



None, because your argument is based on prejudice per se.
It might sound a bit subjective on my part, but i always believed you had a higher purpose ...

MAIA


--------------------
Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala



Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy.
Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Icelander]
    #4746921 -

Could be either depending on your motives and approch.

Attempting to lead someone towards truth is always better than propagating a lie.

As intention is not apparent, why assume the worst?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: MAIA]
    #4746975 -

Still, you rely upon a "disclaimer" idea not even approved by the administration

Yet I was banned for allegedly violating an unapproved disclaimer. Hard to follow you guys at all.

Side note: I just got the most viscious PM ever from one of the 'loving' people here alongside with the accusation that I should lay off the drugs from someone that knows NOTHING of my private life.

I have never sent anything mean like that in my whole time here. At least I am consistent in public and in private. I don't pretend to be one thing one place and different someplace else to deceive people.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Edited by Swami (10/02/05 09:40 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4747064 -

Swami said:
Could be either depending on your motives and approch.

Quote:
Attempting to lead someone towards truth is always better than propagating a lie.


I'm not totally convinced that I know what the truth is or that I can "lead" another there.

Quote:
As intention is not apparent, why assume the worst?


I don't assume the worst, I look at the evidence in my subjective way and make a decision based on that. I don't assume the best either. I look and see what it seems like.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Icelander]
    #4747091 -

I'm not totally convinced that I know what the truth is or that I can "lead" another there.

There are many things of which I am totally certain, such as van Praagh being a fake. This is based on study, not arrogance.

However, unlike all too many here, I don't pretend to be a mind-reader and assume to know what another member is all about.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4747176 -

Did you examine the painting your self? Put your hands on it and have the skills personally to tell the difference?

And who the hell is van Praagh? :grin:


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Icelander]
    #4747182 -

You fellows ready to stop discussing each other and yourselves and return to the discussion (a scat-free one at that) about S&P?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Phred]
    #4747188 -

If you have imput lets hear it.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Icelander]
    #4747251 -

My input is that you two have convincingly demonstrated you have no further input about the S&P forum to contribute. So why not move on?




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: MAIA]
    #4747504 -

MAIA said:
The tooth fairy thread was closed by the administration, in fact the moderation requested the administration to analyze that thread and reach its own conclusions, no pro or con argumentation was discussed by the S&P moderation.



Saying nothing is better than LYING.

So, I will say nothing about Maia's comment ^^^... except that I saw WHAT was posted in The Mod Forum to get Swami banned for 14 days... and I remember WHO posted it, and I remember (roughly) the TITLE of the thread. And my recollection is QUITE different, than Maia's series of events. :smirk:

Let's move on from the Swam-ban drivel.

MAIA said:
You're just adding more drama to this situation with this kind of assumptions.
MAIA


Actually, comments like, " You're just adding more drama to this situation with this kind of assumptions." also, help to add drama to discussions such as this...

Really Maia, if you haven't noticed, THAT Moderation tactic, while allowed, isn't working too well.

Besides, this argument's been played out by both Swami, and you. Start a new thread if you wish to further discuss Swami's ban. If YOU start one, it may not get locked.

But, you DON'T want to fight that fight out here. Not with honest Cerv... watching your every move.  :blush:

Soooooooo.....

How 'bout taking the opportunity to talk about YOUR FORUM, and HOW TO FIX IT, in this thread? :smirk:

There have been many suggestions for you to look at... and comment upon.

I'm rather SHOCKED at the lack of input from S&P mods, in this thread... don't worry, it is safe. This is a scat-free zone.

I really set this discussion up, so YOU wouldn't have to cross any lines.

You're welcome.


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.


Edited by Rose (10/03/05 12:50 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Phred]
    #4747596 -

Phred said:
My input is that you two have convincingly demonstrated you have no further input about the S&P forum to contribute. So why not move on?




Phred


You  first. :wink:


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Icelander]
    #4747604 -

I agree with Phred at this point Ice, he's just keeping this thread moving... you're becoming a roadblock. I know you can do better.


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Rose]
    #4747611 -

Well he could keep it moving by some imput of his own. But I take your point and I bid you goodbye. :heart:


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Icelander]
    #4747614 -

Be sure to come back when you have a point to make. :tongue:

Phred's restricted in what he can, and can't say, in here. No sense in taunting him.


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Rose]
    #4747629 -

On a similar, but completely different note, the PA&L forum covers difficult territory, much like S&P.

I wonder why there is MUCH less drama in PA&L... when Swami posts there too!

Could it be the BETTER set of rules?

Can't we remove subjectivity from the rules in S&P... just have:

Quote:
1. No Flaming

2. Write a disclaimer if you don't want (or can't handle) hurt feelings.



Add a new Mod or two (picked by S&P), and live in harmony?

Two rules, instead of TWO FORUMS.

Worked for PA&L.

How am I wrong here?


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Rose]
    #4747787 -

Cervantes said:
I wonder why there is MUCH less drama in PA&L... when Swami posts there too!


It might have to do with the fact that politics is not based on subjective experiences in the same way that spirituality is.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |  [ show all ]

Feedback and Administration > Website Announcements and Feature Feedback
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* YOu Mother F*#&$r's
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )		 KingOftheThing 17,227 115 11/19/03 04:04 AM
by PoetFirst
* &amp EffedS 1,133 3 09/08/03 07:26 AM
by Seuss
* Other Drugs Discussion: Temporarily Closed & Fully Moderated
( 1 2 all )		 geokillsA 5,314 27 03/17/03 06:36 PM
by geokills
* What discussion board software does The Shroomery run on? LucidDream 1,509 5 01/02/05 03:57 PM
by Jim
* FREE DOOBIE! Calbha 770 1 02/14/04 06:37 PM
by geokills
* This free IPODS spam shit.
( 1 2 all )		 Barbi 3,949 30 07/28/04 04:44 AM
by Shroomism
* Free stuff! Anonymous 547 2 09/05/02 02:59 PM
by Anonymous
* The Other Drugs Discussion problem resin 1,935 13 08/14/03 10:38 AM
by Thor

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Ythan, Thor, Seuss, geokills
13,688 topic views. 0 members, 29 guests and 3 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.037 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 16 queries.