Most all forum threads are started with a serious question and participant attention is given to it. Then something deteriorating happens. One participant even wrote that his thread was essentially "killed off". I have followed several threads, witnessing 'authoritarianism', subtle personal attacks, off-the-wall distractions, or defensiveness which seemed to end a thread from my perspective. What types of responses "kill" a thread for you and why?

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." J. Krishnamurti

Ruth Marie Bass wrote:
What types of responses "kill" a thread for you and why?

Ruth I'll tell you what kind of responses kill my interest. 1. No response at all to posts you've taken time to reply to. 2.Those replies which clearly have not read your post and want realy to talk about their own post rather than replying directly the the points you make in your post.

There is a divinity that shapes our ends, rough-hew them as we will

Ruth Marie Bass wrote:
What types of responses "kill" a thread for you and why?

Life is like the tamarind fruit bound in its shell

1.Exhibitionism-there are many sorts of it.2.Comments just to pull your leg and nothing to contribute to the ongoing discussion.3Knowing the answer to the question posed by oneself and asking others to respond to it, thereby others are exhibited as ignoramuses.
What keeps me going on with the thread Is: sensitivity and seriousness. Care and understanding to each others point of view.In-depth-study and honesty.

Life is like the tamarind fruit bound in its shell

Hi Ruth,
First thank you for asking the question. Since we are all responsible for what goes on in this forum I will not deflect responsibility to fictitious ?others?. But something that I just read about conditioning may help. Being what we are but wanting to be something else. The conflict between what is, and what should be. I think here is the problem. Staying with what is staying with the facts is very difficult.

Life is relationship

people are suffering ,they are unable to operate beyond their emotions. if only they could perceive their reactions it would be the beginning ..

the superficiality of existence is thriving

Monic Devi wrote:
unable to operate beyond their emotion

why unable, why not unwilling? could you refer me to words of JK encouraging people to set their feelings aside?

Health care is everyone's job, not just in treating illness but in promoting healthy living. We must take personal responsibility, engaging our minds and hands in meaningful work - all essential components of healthy, secure lifestyles and communities.

Therese Okamoto wrote:

Monic Devi wrote:
unable to operate beyond their emotion

why unable, why not unwilling? could you refer me to words of JK encouraging people to set their feelings aside?

. As you said we should listen to the heart and not to the voices in our heads. K once said that we feel the heart with the things of the mind, and our hearts get confused....

Life is relationship

Therese Okamoto wrote:

Monic Devi wrote:
unable to operate beyond their emotion

why unable, why not unwilling? could you refer me to words of JK encouraging people to set their feelings aside?

Are words important or the essence, echo of the message?
The messengers are not important: Krishnamurti, Jesus, Buddha, and the rest of them, are but labels; their message is the same, is it not? It is the message once integrated purifies the Self.

operating beyond the emotions does not imply suppressing the emotions.

the superficiality of existence is thriving

edward morrison wrote:
Ruth I'll tell you what kind of responses kill my interest. 1. No response at all to posts you've taken time to reply to. 2.Those replies which clearly have not read your post and want realy to talk about their own post rather than replying directly the the points you make in your post.

Edward, thank you for responding to the question. It takes a lot of energy to tend the forum thread and bring all the pieces together. Dialogue assumes that many people have pieces of the puzzle and that they can put them together to find common ground. Whereas, debate assumes that there is a right answer and that someone has it. Let's assume all posts are relevant to the original, then would it be negligent to not respond? I think sensitivity requires it.

Krishnan Srinivasan wrote:
1.Exhibitionism-there are many sorts of it.2.Comments just to pull your leg and nothing to contribute to the ongoing discussion.3Knowing the answer to the question posed by oneself and asking others to respond to it, thereby others are exhibited as ignoramuses. What keeps me going on with the thread Is: sensitivity and seriousness. Care and understanding to each others point of view.In-depth-study and honesty.

Krishan, yes, it seems we are meeting some huge egos and clowns in this world of ours. If only we could approach dialogue with an open-minded attitude; an openess to being wrong and an openess to change, then perhaps, participants can work together to understand their individual and collective beliefs and incoherences. If one poses a question with a conclusion in mind, would one not lose the open-endeness of dialogue?

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." J. Krishnamurti

This post was last updated by Ruth Bass Fri, 31 Jul 2009.

Eve Goodmon wrote:
Since we are all responsible for what goes on in this forum I will not deflect responsibility to fictitious ?others?. But something that I just read about conditioning may help. Being what we are but wanting to be something else. The conflict between what is, and what should be. I think here is the problem. Staying with what is staying with the facts is very difficult.

Eve, do I understand you correctly that one of the things that "kills" a thread for you is when participants do not stay with the facts; the question? Also, you mentioned "ficticious" others, does the anonymity and multiple-personalities affect the thread for you? Unfortunately, only admin can tell the fictitious from the real in this forum.

Monic Devi wrote:
people are suffering ,they are unable to operate beyond their emotions. if only they could perceive their reactions it would be the beginning ..

Monic, there are many emotional responses in these forum threads. Some participants are easily offended and respond accordingly. It can make for very unpleasant reading and really gets of track. When this derailment occurs the forum thread becomes more like a ping-pong game, hitting hard opinions and insults back and forth. Are there ways to avert the "storm" and re-engage the participant into the question?

Therese Okamoto wrote:
why unable, why not unwilling? could you refer me to words of JK encouraging people to set their feelings aside?

Therese, what types of responses "kill" a thread for you and why? Dialogue can hold a deeply connected quality and yet be very fluid.

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." J. Krishnamurti

This post was last updated by Ruth Bass Fri, 31 Jul 2009.

Ruth Marie Bass wrote:

Most all forum threads are started with a serious question and participant attention is given to it. Then something deteriorating happens. One participant even wrote that his thread was essentially "killed off". I have followed several threads, witnessing 'authoritarianism', subtle personal attacks, off-the-wall distractions, or defensiveness which seemed to end a thread from my perspective. What types of responses "kill" a thread for you and why?

How about anger, which is a response of fear? How about, I don't know, self-pity/pain/sorrow? What about the all pervasive pursuit of pleasure? Don't all those things block real relationship, of any kind?

Participation in these forums is relationship, Randal,yes indeed! But it is a forum, must the emotional responses be so intense? Isn't there some sort of reserve available when communicating here?

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." J. Krishnamurti

This post was last updated by Ruth Bass Sat, 01 Aug 2009.

Looking at the fact, does what do you think? Is there 'reserve'?

Life is relationship

I think if one can relax, breathe deeply, one can find that reserve which gives patience to respond civilly, politely and kindly. These qualities facilitate the dialogue of the forum threads. However, that is not exciting to many. Some are here to raise a ruckus. They delight in this activity; just the type of activity that "kills" a thread, closes a forum topic or derails a group dialogue.

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." J. Krishnamurti

Ruth Marie Bass wrote:
They delight in this activity; just the type of activity that "kills" a thread, closes a forum topic or derails a group dialogue.

Ruth, it is agreeable to a certain extent. Is it also not possible to take such activities and messages as a challenge to progress. For instance, you may see at least some messages are without any link to the topic but cleverly aimed at the messenger.

Unless Advanced, K's Teachings May Remain As Ineffective As of Now

Ruth Marie Bass wrote:
Monic, there are many emotional responses in these forum threads. Some participants are easily offended and respond accordingly. It can make for very unpleasant reading and really gets of track. When this derailment occurs the forum thread becomes more like a ping-pong game, hitting hard opinions and insults back and forth. Are there ways to avert the "storm" and re-engage the participant into the question?

So true. When we react to another, our reaction is instantanteous (instinctive behavior-originates from the animal brain). We do not wait, ponder, or reflect, rationalize (originates from the thinking brain) on what the author's words and the meaning behind those words are. But by nature, we react with whatever emotions manifest. That in itself is quite destructive to the discussion.

I'n not saying the emotions should be suppressed, on the contrary. It is important to observe what is happening within with complete attention; observe the manifstation of the feelings and how it unfolds, evolves and brings change within. From that change one reacts. And that reaction is of a different type; not the one which is becoming an impediment to constructive discussions.

the superficiality of existence is thriving

Prasanna P wrote:
you may see at least some messages are without any link to the topic but cleverly aimed at the messenger

Some years ago I introduced a friend to Kinfonet. He started off with serious questions and sincerity. But then one of his posts inadvertantly aroused some intense emotional responses.

That was a trigger for him. He took off on a wild frenzy, gleeful to antagonize others and disrupt as much as possible.

Monic Devi wrote:
It is important to observe what is happening within with complete attention; observe the manifstation of the feelings and how it unfolds, evolves and brings change within.

Yes, Monic, these forums offer an opportunity for insight; even when the antagonists deliberately instigate, I suppose that is an opportunity, however, unpleasant.

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." J. Krishnamurti

Ruth Marie Bass wrote:

Participation in these forums is relationship, Randal,yes indeed! But it is a forum, must the emotional responses be so intense? Isn't there some sort of reserve available when communicating here?

Randal Shacklett wrote:
Are you saying that We must have our truths sugar coated, so we can look at them more clearly. I find that, yes, most people must be comforted and secure psychologically, before being able to "communicate". Which, I'm sorry to point out, is absurd. Our fear of psychological disruption blocks any "communication". And anyway, all that "communication" is capable of is the exchange of information/opinions/beliefs. There is no direct observation in that. Even though there are many here that claim that there is.

Which begs the question Randal - Why are you here? To point that out? Continuously? That could be quite a rut to get into.

Ruth Marie Bass wrote:
Edward, thank you for responding to the question. It takes a lot of energy to tend the forum thread and bring all the pieces together. Dialogue assumes that many people have pieces of the puzzle and that they can put them together to find common ground. Whereas, debate assumes that there is a right answer and that someone has it. Let's assume all posts are relevant to the original, then would it be negligent to not respond? I think sensitivity requires it.

Yes indeed, it does take a of of energy even to reply to a particular post. I don't know if in every case one can reply to every point made in the thread. Such a all embracing reply sounds a very difficult thing to do. But when someone takes care to reply to a post (in this case myself) not opposing it, not playing games, but sincerely attempting to engage in 'inquiry' (not debate. I completely understand the difference and have many times on other forums pointed this out) then at some point (it may take time because people are busy.) surely to expect a response is not an unreasonable expectation? Sometimes, I would agree, the reply doesn't need a response. It's concludes itself. But when care and respect for the points made and questions asked is evident, then surely it is not unrealistic to expect a response at some point?

I did reply in the above manner to one post, but still await a response. I'm not putting money on my getting one. Another of my posts was in response to a participant in this forum who actually emailed me and asked for a response to his post on conditioning. AT the time I was only posting in another forum. I did respond. And my response may not have been particularly brilliant but it was a detailed one and took effort and thought to construct. The response?: Please go to my website and you will find the answers to your questions.... Nothing whatsoever about what I'd said!! Is this forum merely an place to paste up advertising posters? Or is it a place for inquiry, here in the respective threads not elsewhere in another place? And I don't think it is fair to talk about not having a "right" to a reply, as you seem to be saying elsewhere. Although you didn't address that to me in person. Left it as a generalization with the sort of if-the-cap fits wear it barbs attached. If I was in the equation I regard that as a non sequitur in the context of what I'm saying

Yes I got angry at this insensitive response (not yours - the one mentioned above). Anger, as one respondent on this thread points out, anger is sometimes a valid response. I have no intentions of carrying this much further. And I don't hold on to things for long. Nor do I play games, as is evident with some on this thread.

So I don't know what inspired you to start this thread. But if I wasnot in any in any way a stimulus for part of your motives, please regard this as tears in rain or puff balls in the wind:-)

Why not? Others here do!

edward

There is a divinity that shapes our ends, rough-hew them as we will

edward morrison wrote:

So I don't know what inspired you to start this thread.

I was inspired when a participant who started another topic in a different forum wrote that his thread had been pretty much "killed" off by a few. I went to read that topic to find out how it got killed off. I thought we could see how others relate to the issue.

edward morrison wrote:
Is this forum merely an place to paste up advertising posters?

Apparently, he wasn't "selling" anything more than a new theory. But, I have seen some REAL advertising in other forums. Marketers!! No, not appropriate here.

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." J. Krishnamurti

Randal Shacklett wrote:
Our fear of psychological disruption blocks any "communication".

People tread lightly (and politely) when establishing communication with someone new or even long known, if they prefer relationship with that person. I understand volitility and that communication requires cultivation.

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." J. Krishnamurti

Ruth, Well there you go: another example of the snake turning out to be a piece of rope.

Thanks for the explanation. Good luck with your posts. I'm going to take a rest for a while.

regards, edward

There is a divinity that shapes our ends, rough-hew them as we will

Eve Goodmon wrote:
our hearts get confused

im guessing it takes a realist to really be confused...

Health care is everyone's job, not just in treating illness but in promoting healthy living. We must take personal responsibility, engaging our minds and hands in meaningful work - all essential components of healthy, secure lifestyles and communities.

Ruth Marie Bass wrote:
Therese, what types of responses "kill" a thread for you and why? Dialogue can hold a deeply connected quality and yet be very fluid.

oh you know, Buddha said (i paraphrase) the Enemy is your bestfriend because you learn the most from them... threads dont die, they just unravel

Health care is everyone's job, not just in treating illness but in promoting healthy living. We must take personal responsibility, engaging our minds and hands in meaningful work - all essential components of healthy, secure lifestyles and communities.

Ruth Marie Bass wrote:

Randal Shacklett wrote:
Our fear of psychological disruption blocks any "communication".

People tread lightly (and politely) when establishing communication with someone new or even long known, if they prefer relationship with that person. I understand volitility and that communication requires cultivation.

Randal,
You may critique others' views and interpretations as much as you like. I just hope you are open to being wrong.

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." J. Krishnamurti

Ruth Marie Bass wrote:

Randal,
You may critique others' views and interpretations as much as you like. I just hope you are open to being wrong.

Randal Shacklett wrote:
the mind is full of incorrect views and interpretations).

Are you sure ? You mean minds can never perceive correctly? Can you please elaborate on this.

Unless Advanced, K's Teachings May Remain As Ineffective As of Now