[MD] Where I'm at [Administrator Message]

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 9:24 AM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Dan, Thanks for the appearance, i still remember your last posting
> about the book of changes , and the constructive proposals,
> and the moment after that , few days later i think , you'v got extremely
> pissed at Bodvar re-appearance here , posting a total incomprihensible
> drivelmostruosity, i still see your words in my mind , saying that you would
> wish us all sayonara...
> I was very pissed that you were so dissapointed.Glad you'r back.

Dan:
Bodvar is an old friend; we go way back. I wasn't exactly pissed...
frustrated might be a better word. And I don't like nonsense.


>Adrie:
> Thx for reading in on  the roll-out of  postings
> First , i agree with DMB, Arlo, Horse.
> Horse own's a positive injunctionright, his toolbox to interfere is lesser
> filled than members that are lesser bound, lesser committed.
>
> I agree with this peoples content and context. Solid stuff.
>
> I hope to have a good influence on JC's case, i like him, and our attitude
> here in Europe towards the great problems of life, as he is encountering, is
> slightly different than in America.
> Belgians are very open minded, we talk about our trouble's very easy among
> each-other.
> So my optic is to help him to reboot himself, jumpstart him if possible, I
> think its time for him to act.
>
> Try to see it in my perspective, he lost his job, wife and now maybe his
> house, maybe he is enhancing it a little bit, but in the core
> it looks genuine. Did he derail? yes, clearly-and needed some recognition
> probably.
> Was he off-scale in the postings? yes he was ......But nothing of the human
> spirit is strange to me. Everybody will recognise a lesser moment.
> By being here among friends, in this list , he became part of the product,
> part of the matter, part of the question.

Dan:
I understand. I like John and Lu a great deal. But, like dmb, I am not
sure the Internet is the place. Let's face it... we all have problems.
I can recite a list if you'd like. But I prefer to carry my own water.

Adrie:
> So it is not entirely unnatural that he seeks at least a part of the
> solution here.....and i tend to think that a part of the solution is truly
> residing here in The moq, the presence of the material, the presence of the
> knowledge, the impacting power of other listers...

Dan:
Forgive me, but it seems to me such a solution would be better found
in the presence of loved ones, not on an Internet discussion group.

>Adrie:
> Did i just declare him innocent and holier than the pope, ...Nope,The
> beginning of the conflict with DMb was induced by him...
> And Dave was very hard on him, but honestly, my opinion is that it was
> nessesary to confront him with the matters in front of him,
> i did the same thing ,to serve the purpose to help him.
> Dave's outlisted mail was clearly meant not to deface him in the public
> domain. It was a hard but solid approach.

Dan:
Any conflict between John and dmb is just that... between John and
dmb. I happen to agree more with dmb's side of things but that may
only be on account of our long association. John is a relatively new
member while dmb and myself go back a dozen years or so.

>
>Adrie:
> Clearly he took as well the medicine from Dave, as mine,and honoured it with
> switching to a more solid attitude.
> Yesterday he produced a very nice posting, very nicely written, showing out
> that he has talent as a narrator and value as a
> content providing member. I like to have him within the thinktank of this
> list.
>
> I left out some things , bit shortcutting, but you'r all capable of making
> the correct associations and abstractions.
>
>
> Wat really worries me , is that another listmember is launching threads
> about the questions of death panels, the questions of death,
> The choice of death-,,the choice to die or to live, the answers of the moq
> on this matter, or the non-answers? at the same moments of
> Jc encountering this loosing of his job, wife, maybe house, clearly
> derailing-----

Dan:
Platt is our resident Conservative. He is harmless, mostly. Most of
his posts seem designed to get a rise out of people rather than an
effort at discussion, which is too bad. He is very intelligent. I am
unsure that his post had anything to do with John's but who knows?

>Adrie:
> Nobody here dares to say it out loud , but this member is
> suggesting/autosuggesting to THINK about the death question on this moments.
>
> The launch of this thread is no coincidence in my opinion.
> I have no intention what so ever to call this a criminal intention, and i do
> not want to imply it, as i can see it , the religious call out there
> to herd JC back to the flock before he leaves...is prominent and implied by
> suggestion/autosuggestion.
>
> But religion or the question of death are not the issue now, the real issue
> is this imho
> Newly emerging listquality in content an context is aborted sideways by
> contaminating the conversations in a structured way
> and in a structured attack, guided in the background of the listnoise.
> The use of shredded monologue's, re-shredded monologue's, omitted mails is
> not feared.....as a tool.
> It is only some weeks ago that this environment, what i call a thinktank,
> looked like a freakshow.
> FREAKSHOWS are launched by freaks, because that is what they do.and a freak
> will always stay a freak.

Dan:
If I understand you correctly, this is why I got a bit miffed with
Bodvar. He seemed to have a habit of "hijacking" threads and turning
them into his own personal attacks on the MOQ. It was some weeks ago,
if I remember, that virtually every thread ended with Bodvar
admonishing us that his SOL was the "one true MOQ".

Now, you and some of the newer member may not realize it, but us older
members have put up with that nonsense for years and years. And it is
nonsense. It polluted the discussion group to the point that I was
ready to leave, and I imagine other members may have felt the same
way.

>Adrie:
> Rest me to say, Dan, that quality is on the horizon, and i'm pointing out
> towards DMB's proposals to open the fields of congruence,
> to explore unseen matter and evidence, people here should honour Dave for
> all the work he is doing to show material and expirience.

Dan:
I think the discussion group is fortunate indeed to have contributors
like David Buchanan. His posts are first-rate and his thinking seems
to be continually evolving rather than stagnating, as so many
contributors tend towards.

>Adrie:
> Does this imply that to stay alive in a pond full of croc's, one has to stay
> friends with the master croc?, no...but do not try to
> kill the master croc,....maybe its your friend and guardian.

Dan:
You never know who's got your back, it's true.


>
> THx for reading this Dan
> Adrie

You're welcome. Thank you for writing.

Dan