Asp Forum - Re: Problem with http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/1

Jacob Fugal

7/7/2006 4:07:00 PM

On 7/7/06, Sean O'Halpin <sean.ohalpin@gmail.com> wrote:
> There seems to be a problem with the web interface to ruby-talk at
> http://blade.nagaok....
>
> For example, http://blade.nagaok...cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/1
> returns an email from Robert Klemme dated 15 Dec 2005 and not Matz's
> announcement of the list.
>
> Has anyone else noticed this and are there plans to fix it?

See the discussion here:

http://www.codecomments.com/archive327-2005-12-7...

Forgive the link to an ugly, ad-heavy site, but it was the only source
I could find that had most of the conversation pulled together. Both
blade and google groups have the threading for that period
understandably mixed up. You can also read here:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/browse_frm/thread/104543856edfdd53/0b53da70fb67a86f?tvc=1#0b53da...

for a little more of the story. The first part of that thread is a
separate discussion; as I mentioned, google groups got the threads
mixed up. Start at message "7" in that link.

Anyways, it was due to a glitch in the mailing list that overwrote
some of the older messages in the archive. Wayne Vucenic seems to
have, or at least had, backups of those messages, but it appears no
one's done the restore yet.

Jacob Fugal

9 Answers

Sean O'Halpin

7/7/2006 5:01:00 PM

On 7/7/06, Jacob Fugal <lukfugl@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/7/06, Sean O'Halpin <sean.ohalpin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > There seems to be a problem with the web interface to ruby-talk at
> > http://blade.nagaok....
> >
> > For example, http://blade.nagaok...cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/1
> > returns an email from Robert Klemme dated 15 Dec 2005 and not Matz's
> > announcement of the list.
> >
> > Has anyone else noticed this and are there plans to fix it?
>
> See the discussion here:
>
> http://www.codecomments.com/archive327-2005-12-7...
>
> Forgive the link to an ugly, ad-heavy site, but it was the only source
> I could find that had most of the conversation pulled together. Both
> blade and google groups have the threading for that period
> understandably mixed up. You can also read here:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/browse_frm/thread/104543856edfdd53/0b53da70fb67a86f?tvc=1#0b53da...
>
> for a little more of the story. The first part of that thread is a
> separate discussion; as I mentioned, google groups got the threads
> mixed up. Start at message "7" in that link.
>
> Anyways, it was due to a glitch in the mailing list that overwrote
> some of the older messages in the archive. Wayne Vucenic seems to
> have, or at least had, backups of those messages, but it appears no
> one's done the restore yet.
>
> Jacob Fugal
>
Thanks for the info. It would indeed be a shame if they were lost.

Regards,
Sean

John Radgosky

6/23/2009 4:17:00 PM

On Jun 23, 10:45 am, expires <expires.4fa99q.2009j...@myway.de> wrote:
> On Tue Jun 23 2009 14:26:47 GMT+0200
>
>
>
>
>
> JRad <jradgo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 23, 4:53 am, expires <expires.4fa99q.2009j...@myway.de> wrote:
> >> The Scholar’s Toolbox I: Primary Sources:http://tinyurl.com/ac...
>
> >> From the Urtext Manuscript:http://tinyurl.com/ac...-urtext-pdf
>
> >> Absolute page #4:
> >> " T 1 B 12b. Miracles are thought-creations. Thought can
> >> " create lower-order or higher-order realities. This is
> >> " the basic distinction between intellectualization and
> >> " thinking. One creates the physical, and the other the
> >> " spiritual, and we believe in what we create.
>
> >> Absolute page #77:
> >> " T 2 B 25. Intellectualization is a poor word, which
> >> " stems from the brain-mind confusion. “Right-Mindedness”
> >> " is better. This device defends the RIGHT MIND, and
> >> " gives it control over the body. “Intellectualization”
> >> " implies a split, whereas “Right-Mindedness” involves
> >> " healing.
>
> >> The above is just something I've come to ponder over
> >> and be puzzles about, particularly when recently seeing
> >> the frequent totally indiscriminate use of the word
> >> "think" in this newsgroup.
>
> >> --expires
>
> > I use the word think a lot in my posts. And, there is a complete
> > purpose associated with it too. It's why I always have used quote
> > marks when using the word , it is a deliberate step to foucs on the
> > word and not to just speak it. In this post though, we are discussing
> > the word, not using it, so the quote marks don't serve that purpose
> > intended.
>
> > The reason for all of that is because the entire course is about our
> > "thought" from which everything is an effect. It is a course about
> > "thought" systems. Including one of the miracle principles that
> > specifically says miracles are thoughts. It's one of the rare
> > mentions in the long list of miracle principles that says what a
> > miracle "is". The others describe effects or characteristics or
> > aspects of miracles and so on.
>
> > And it's where people like MikeR miss the point. He claims revelation
> > and then "thinks" with ego split mind and acts with self will and not
> > God's will. He doesn't get that when God reveals Himself to one,
> > there is never any need to have another's validation of it. The
> > experience is it's own validation and nothing anyone can say or do can
> > change that. I know this, I'm not just theorizing here. I know
> > because I have had 3 episodes 1 of which God revealed Himself to me
> > and spoke to me, as crazy as that sounds, it's true. And if the
> > population of the entire planet doesn't believe me about it, it does
> > not matter. I am the one who experienced what it is I experienced and
> > it cannot be taken away, doubted by me, argued against, ridiculed, or
> > require validation by anyone. As the course says, it is personal.
> > What that means is, it is between me and God. So I don't require
> > anyone else's validation. MikeR demands it. So, it's not personal
> > and therefore it cannot be revelation. He wants it to be pulbicly
> > acknowledged. That is simply ego driven split mindedness. The guy
> > doesn't get the fundamentals. He's a course phony.
>
> > That's not what revelation leads to. And once again as I keep
> > insisting, don't trust me, the author covers all of this in the
> > curriculum. So now that MikeR is demanding validation, and admits
> > doing so by free will, there is only two conclusions to draw. One is,
> > he didn't experience revelation, he hallucinated, and, the other is
> > simply a possibility only, that the man might in fact be clinically
> > insane.
>
> > Revelation and validation fixation are incompatible. And, the whole
> > idea of validation stems from ...."thought".
>
> > If we are mind, what are we supposed to do ... float around like an
> > empty baloon ? I don't think so.
>
> > Peace, enjoyed this opportunity to say these things.
>
> > JR
>
> “Blah blah MikeR blah blah MikeR
> blah blah MikeR blah blah insane
> Blah blah Peace” is what I hear
> you saying :)
> --expires- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Greetings missy,

that's because you want to not hear me .. I undersatand it, and, it is
perfectly reasonable for it to be that way for you with me.

there's a barrier I sense which you have allowed and permitted your
ego to place there in your mind and in your heart and ..so it seems
now ..in your ears too.

think of it all as a classic case about which to observe, attempt to
understand, and to practice with. It's lab work , you see. And
sometimes ya gotta just slice open and cut the frog up into pieces
which is grizzly but accomplishes learning but pisses the frog off big
time.

don't fear my blah, blah, blah MikeR. Embrace it. See if you can
find the false and the true within it. Both are there.

I sense you truly desire to be "lazy" about your curriculum and the
effort required. After all, that's how you entered this ng, carrying a
lazy guide and distributing pamphlets about it. In that sense you are
like the Hari Krishna's dancing down the street clanging and banging
their cute little symbols (pun intended) while truly in need of a good
bath.

Relax and don't be too hasty to judge. It's a terrific classroom.

Peace

JR

John Radgosky

6/23/2009 7:39:00 PM

On Jun 23, 2:57 pm, Deborah <debo...@daddydayo.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:17:14 -0700 (PDT), JRad <jradgo...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >there's a barrier I sense which you have allowed and permitted your
> >ego to place there in your mind and in your heart and ..so it seems
> >now ..in your ears too.
>
> No. It's been pointed out to me that "expires" is an independent
> thinker. And I can see that now. Wouldn't want her to be any other
> way, really. I was a bit worried about her for a minute there. But
> now I think she can fend for herself.
>
> Deborah (BC)

well, I am certainly open to being wrong and God knows I can be hasty
often ... although it seems I can't say a word without missy
challenging it, which is ok but noticeable and surely I can't be that
nit picked about so often .... or , maybe I can ... we'll see.

JR

expires

6/23/2009 10:07:00 PM

On Tue Jun 23 2009 18:17:14 GMT+0200
JRad <jradgosky@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 23, 10:45 am, expires <expires.4fa99q.2009j...@myway.de> wrote:
>> On Tue Jun 23 2009 14:26:47 GMT+0200
>> JRad <jradgo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On Jun 23, 4:53 am, expires <expires.4fa99q.2009j...@myway.de> wrote:
>>>> The Scholar?s Toolbox I: Primary Sources:http://tinyurl.com/ac...
>>>> From the Urtext Manuscript:http://tinyurl.com/ac...-urtext-pdf
>>>> Absolute page #4:
>>>> " T 1 B 12b. Miracles are thought-creations. Thought can
>>>> " create lower-order or higher-order realities. This is
>>>> " the basic distinction between intellectualization and
>>>> " thinking. One creates the physical, and the other the
>>>> " spiritual, and we believe in what we create.
>>>> Absolute page #77:
>>>> " T 2 B 25. Intellectualization is a poor word, which
>>>> " stems from the brain-mind confusion. ?Right-Mindedness?
>>>> " is better. This device defends the RIGHT MIND, and
>>>> " gives it control over the body. ?Intellectualization?
>>>> " implies a split, whereas ?Right-Mindedness? involves
>>>> " healing.
>>>> The above is just something I've come to ponder over
>>>> and be puzzles about, particularly when recently seeing
>>>> the frequent totally indiscriminate use of the word
>>>> "think" in this newsgroup.
>>>> --expires
>>> I use the word think a lot in my posts. And, there is a complete
>>> purpose associated with it too. It's why I always have used quote
>>> marks when using the word , it is a deliberate step to foucs on the
>>> word and not to just speak it. In this post though, we are discussing
>>> the word, not using it, so the quote marks don't serve that purpose
>>> intended.
>>> The reason for all of that is because the entire course is about our
>>> "thought" from which everything is an effect. It is a course about
>>> "thought" systems. Including one of the miracle principles that
>>> specifically says miracles are thoughts. It's one of the rare
>>> mentions in the long list of miracle principles that says what a
>>> miracle "is". The others describe effects or characteristics or
>>> aspects of miracles and so on.
>>> And it's where people like MikeR miss the point. He claims revelation
>>> and then "thinks" with ego split mind and acts with self will and not
>>> God's will. He doesn't get that when God reveals Himself to one,
>>> there is never any need to have another's validation of it. The
>>> experience is it's own validation and nothing anyone can say or do can
>>> change that. I know this, I'm not just theorizing here. I know
>>> because I have had 3 episodes 1 of which God revealed Himself to me
>>> and spoke to me, as crazy as that sounds, it's true. And if the
>>> population of the entire planet doesn't believe me about it, it does
>>> not matter. I am the one who experienced what it is I experienced and
>>> it cannot be taken away, doubted by me, argued against, ridiculed, or
>>> require validation by anyone. As the course says, it is personal.
>>> What that means is, it is between me and God. So I don't require
>>> anyone else's validation. MikeR demands it. So, it's not personal
>>> and therefore it cannot be revelation. He wants it to be pulbicly
>>> acknowledged. That is simply ego driven split mindedness. The guy
>>> doesn't get the fundamentals. He's a course phony.
>>> That's not what revelation leads to. And once again as I keep
>>> insisting, don't trust me, the author covers all of this in the
>>> curriculum. So now that MikeR is demanding validation, and admits
>>> doing so by free will, there is only two conclusions to draw. One is,
>>> he didn't experience revelation, he hallucinated, and, the other is
>>> simply a possibility only, that the man might in fact be clinically
>>> insane.
>>> Revelation and validation fixation are incompatible. And, the whole
>>> idea of validation stems from ...."thought".
>>> If we are mind, what are we supposed to do ... float around like an
>>> empty baloon ? I don't think so.
>>> Peace, enjoyed this opportunity to say these things.
>>> JR
>> ?Blah blah MikeR blah blah MikeR
>> blah blah MikeR blah blah insane
>> Blah blah Peace? is what I hear
>> you saying :)
>> --expires- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Greetings missy,
>
> that's because you want to not hear me .. I undersatand it, and, it is
> perfectly reasonable for it to be that way for you with me.
>
> there's a barrier I sense which you have allowed and permitted your
> ego to place there in your mind and in your heart and ..so it seems
> now ..in your ears too.
>
> think of it all as a classic case about which to observe, attempt to
> understand, and to practice with. It's lab work , you see. And
> sometimes ya gotta just slice open and cut the frog up into pieces
> which is grizzly but accomplishes learning but pisses the frog off big
> time.
>
> don't fear my blah, blah, blah MikeR. Embrace it. See if you can
> find the false and the true within it. Both are there.
>
> I sense you truly desire to be "lazy" about your curriculum and the
> effort required. After all, that's how you entered this ng, carrying a
> lazy guide and distributing pamphlets about it. In that sense you are
> like the Hari Krishna's dancing down the street clanging and banging
> their cute little symbols (pun intended) while truly in need of a good
> bath.
>
> Relax and don't be too hasty to judge. It's a terrific classroom.
>
> Peace
>
> JR

Well, fatso, you're quite useful when I'm
in need of a fools mirror, but so far you're
the lousiest teacher I know.
--expires

MikeRyder

6/23/2009 10:47:00 PM

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 05:26:47 -0700 (PDT), JRad <jradgosky@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On Jun 23, 4:53?am, expires <expires.4fa99q.2009j...@myway.de> wrote:
>> The Scholar?s Toolbox I: Primary Sources:http://tinyurl.com/ac...
>>
>> ?From the Urtext Manuscript:http://tinyurl.com/ac...-urtext-pdf
>>
>> Absolute page #4:
>> " T 1 B 12b. Miracles are thought-creations. Thought can
>> " create lower-order or higher-order realities. This is
>> " the basic distinction between intellectualization and
>> " thinking. One creates the physical, and the other the
>> " spiritual, and we believe in what we create.
>>
>> Absolute page #77:
>> " T 2 B 25. ?Intellectualization is a poor word, which
>> " stems from the brain-mind confusion. ?Right-Mindedness?
>> " is better. This device defends the RIGHT MIND, and
>> " gives it control over the body. ?Intellectualization?
>> " implies a split, whereas ?Right-Mindedness? involves
>> " healing.
>>
>> The above is just something I've come to ponder over
>> and be puzzles about, particularly when recently seeing
>> the frequent totally indiscriminate use of the word
>> "think" in this newsgroup.
>>
>> --expires
>
>I use the word think a lot in my posts. And, there is a complete
>purpose associated with it too. It's why I always have used quote
>marks when using the word , it is a deliberate step to foucs on the
>word and not to just speak it. In this post though, we are discussing
>the word, not using it, so the quote marks don't serve that purpose
>intended.
>
>The reason for all of that is because the entire course is about our
>"thought" from which everything is an effect. It is a course about
>"thought" systems. Including one of the miracle principles that
>specifically says miracles are thoughts. It's one of the rare
>mentions in the long list of miracle principles that says what a
>miracle "is". The others describe effects or characteristics or
>aspects of miracles and so on.
>
>And it's where people like MikeR miss the point. He claims revelation
>and then "thinks" with ego split mind and acts with self will and not
>God's will. He doesn't get that when God reveals Himself to one,
>there is never any need to have another's validation of it. The
>experience is it's own validation and nothing anyone can say or do can
>change that. I know this, I'm not just theorizing here. I know
>because I have had 3 episodes 1 of which God revealed Himself to me
>and spoke to me, as crazy as that sounds, it's true. And if the
>population of the entire planet doesn't believe me about it, it does
>not matter. I am the one who experienced what it is I experienced and
>it cannot be taken away, doubted by me, argued against, ridiculed, or
>require validation by anyone. As the course says, it is personal.
>What that means is, it is between me and God. So I don't require
>anyone else's validation. MikeR demands it. So, it's not personal
>and therefore it cannot be revelation. He wants it to be pulbicly
>acknowledged. That is simply ego driven split mindedness. The guy
>doesn't get the fundamentals. He's a course phony.
>
>That's not what revelation leads to. And once again as I keep
>insisting, don't trust me, the author covers all of this in the
>curriculum. So now that MikeR is demanding validation, and admits
>doing so by free will, there is only two conclusions to draw. One is,
>he didn't experience revelation, he hallucinated, and, the other is
>simply a possibility only, that the man might in fact be clinically
>insane.
>
>Revelation and validation fixation are incompatible. And, the whole
>idea of validation stems from ...."thought".
>
>If we are mind, what are we supposed to do ... float around like an
>empty baloon ? I don't think so.
>
>Peace, enjoyed this opportunity to say these things.
>
>JR

On and on you babble. lol

John Radgosky

6/24/2009 12:49:00 AM

On Jun 23, 6:46 pm, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 05:26:47 -0700 (PDT), JRad <jradgo...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jun 23, 4:53 am, expires <expires.4fa99q.2009j...@myway.de> wrote:
> >> The Scholar’s Toolbox I: Primary Sources:http://tinyurl.com/ac...
>
> >> From the Urtext Manuscript:http://tinyurl.com/ac...-urtext-pdf
>
> >> Absolute page #4:
> >> " T 1 B 12b. Miracles are thought-creations. Thought can
> >> " create lower-order or higher-order realities. This is
> >> " the basic distinction between intellectualization and
> >> " thinking. One creates the physical, and the other the
> >> " spiritual, and we believe in what we create.
>
> >> Absolute page #77:
> >> " T 2 B 25. Intellectualization is a poor word, which
> >> " stems from the brain-mind confusion. “Right-Mindedness”
> >> " is better. This device defends the RIGHT MIND, and
> >> " gives it control over the body. “Intellectualization”
> >> " implies a split, whereas “Right-Mindedness” involves
> >> " healing.
>
> >> The above is just something I've come to ponder over
> >> and be puzzles about, particularly when recently seeing
> >> the frequent totally indiscriminate use of the word
> >> "think" in this newsgroup.
>
> >> --expires
>
> >I use the word think a lot in my posts. And, there is a complete
> >purpose associated with it too. It's why I always have used quote
> >marks when using the word , it is a deliberate step to foucs on the
> >word and not to just speak it. In this post though, we are discussing
> >the word, not using it, so the quote marks don't serve that purpose
> >intended.
>
> >The reason for all of that is because the entire course is about our
> >"thought" from which everything is an effect. It is a course about
> >"thought" systems. Including one of the miracle principles that
> >specifically says miracles are thoughts. It's one of the rare
> >mentions in the long list of miracle principles that says what a
> >miracle "is". The others describe effects or characteristics or
> >aspects of miracles and so on.
>
> >And it's where people like MikeR miss the point. He claims revelation
> >and then "thinks" with ego split mind and acts with self will and not
> >God's will. He doesn't get that when God reveals Himself to one,
> >there is never any need to have another's validation of it. The
> >experience is it's own validation and nothing anyone can say or do can
> >change that. I know this, I'm not just theorizing here. I know
> >because I have had 3 episodes 1 of which God revealed Himself to me
> >and spoke to me, as crazy as that sounds, it's true. And if the
> >population of the entire planet doesn't believe me about it, it does
> >not matter. I am the one who experienced what it is I experienced and
> >it cannot be taken away, doubted by me, argued against, ridiculed, or
> >require validation by anyone. As the course says, it is personal.
> >What that means is, it is between me and God. So I don't require
> >anyone else's validation. MikeR demands it. So, it's not personal
> >and therefore it cannot be revelation. He wants it to be pulbicly
> >acknowledged. That is simply ego driven split mindedness. The guy
> >doesn't get the fundamentals. He's a course phony.
>
> >That's not what revelation leads to. And once again as I keep
> >insisting, don't trust me, the author covers all of this in the
> >curriculum. So now that MikeR is demanding validation, and admits
> >doing so by free will, there is only two conclusions to draw. One is,
> >he didn't experience revelation, he hallucinated, and, the other is
> >simply a possibility only, that the man might in fact be clinically
> >insane.
>
> >Revelation and validation fixation are incompatible. And, the whole
> >idea of validation stems from ...."thought".
>
> >If we are mind, what are we supposed to do ... float around like an
> >empty baloon ? I don't think so.
>
> >Peace, enjoyed this opportunity to say these things.
>
> >JR
>
> On and on you babble. lol- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

and you still out post everyone .... idiot.

JR

John Radgosky

6/24/2009 12:52:00 AM

On Jun 23, 6:50 pm, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:38:34 -0700 (PDT), JRad <jradgo...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jun 23, 2:57 pm, Deborah <debo...@daddydayo.net> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:17:14 -0700 (PDT), JRad <jradgo...@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >there's a barrier I sense which you have allowed and permitted your
> >> >ego to place there in your mind and in your heart and ..so it seems
> >> >now ..in your ears too.
>
> >> No. It's been pointed out to me that "expires" is an independent
> >> thinker. And I can see that now. Wouldn't want her to be any other
> >> way, really. I was a bit worried about her for a minute there. But
> >> now I think she can fend for herself.
>
> >> Deborah (BC)
>
> >well, I am certainly open to being wrong
>
> LOL--NO you're not.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I agree ...WHICH GOES TO PROVE IT ... hahahaha .... you're a very
stupid person.

JR

John Radgosky

6/30/2009 2:25:00 AM

On Jun 23, 6:06 pm, expires <expires.4fa99q.2009j...@myway.de> wrote:
> On Tue Jun 23 2009 18:17:14 GMT+0200
>
>
>
>
>
> JRad <jradgo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 23, 10:45 am, expires <expires.4fa99q.2009j...@myway.de> wrote:
> >> On Tue Jun 23 2009 14:26:47 GMT+0200
> >> JRad <jradgo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> On Jun 23, 4:53 am, expires <expires.4fa99q.2009j...@myway.de> wrote:
> >>>> The Scholar’s Toolbox I: Primary Sources:http://tinyurl.com/ac...
> >>>> From the Urtext Manuscript:http://tinyurl.com/ac...-urtext-pdf
> >>>> Absolute page #4:
> >>>> " T 1 B 12b. Miracles are thought-creations. Thought can
> >>>> " create lower-order or higher-order realities. This is
> >>>> " the basic distinction between intellectualization and
> >>>> " thinking. One creates the physical, and the other the
> >>>> " spiritual, and we believe in what we create.
> >>>> Absolute page #77:
> >>>> " T 2 B 25. Intellectualization is a poor word, which
> >>>> " stems from the brain-mind confusion. “Right-Mindedness”
> >>>> " is better. This device defends the RIGHT MIND, and
> >>>> " gives it control over the body. “Intellectualization”
> >>>> " implies a split, whereas “Right-Mindedness” involves
> >>>> " healing.
> >>>> The above is just something I've come to ponder over
> >>>> and be puzzles about, particularly when recently seeing
> >>>> the frequent totally indiscriminate use of the word
> >>>> "think" in this newsgroup.
> >>>> --expires
> >>> I use the word think a lot in my posts. And, there is a complete
> >>> purpose associated with it too. It's why I always have used quote
> >>> marks when using the word , it is a deliberate step to foucs on the
> >>> word and not to just speak it. In this post though, we are discussing
> >>> the word, not using it, so the quote marks don't serve that purpose
> >>> intended.
> >>> The reason for all of that is because the entire course is about our
> >>> "thought" from which everything is an effect. It is a course about
> >>> "thought" systems. Including one of the miracle principles that
> >>> specifically says miracles are thoughts. It's one of the rare
> >>> mentions in the long list of miracle principles that says what a
> >>> miracle "is". The others describe effects or characteristics or
> >>> aspects of miracles and so on.
> >>> And it's where people like MikeR miss the point. He claims revelation
> >>> and then "thinks" with ego split mind and acts with self will and not
> >>> God's will. He doesn't get that when God reveals Himself to one,
> >>> there is never any need to have another's validation of it. The
> >>> experience is it's own validation and nothing anyone can say or do can
> >>> change that. I know this, I'm not just theorizing here. I know
> >>> because I have had 3 episodes 1 of which God revealed Himself to me
> >>> and spoke to me, as crazy as that sounds, it's true. And if the
> >>> population of the entire planet doesn't believe me about it, it does
> >>> not matter. I am the one who experienced what it is I experienced and
> >>> it cannot be taken away, doubted by me, argued against, ridiculed, or
> >>> require validation by anyone. As the course says, it is personal.
> >>> What that means is, it is between me and God. So I don't require
> >>> anyone else's validation. MikeR demands it. So, it's not personal
> >>> and therefore it cannot be revelation. He wants it to be pulbicly
> >>> acknowledged. That is simply ego driven split mindedness. The guy
> >>> doesn't get the fundamentals. He's a course phony.
> >>> That's not what revelation leads to. And once again as I keep
> >>> insisting, don't trust me, the author covers all of this in the
> >>> curriculum. So now that MikeR is demanding validation, and admits
> >>> doing so by free will, there is only two conclusions to draw. One is,
> >>> he didn't experience revelation, he hallucinated, and, the other is
> >>> simply a possibility only, that the man might in fact be clinically
> >>> insane.
> >>> Revelation and validation fixation are incompatible. And, the whole
> >>> idea of validation stems from ...."thought".
> >>> If we are mind, what are we supposed to do ... float around like an
> >>> empty baloon ? I don't think so.
> >>> Peace, enjoyed this opportunity to say these things.
> >>> JR
> >> “Blah blah MikeR blah blah MikeR
> >> blah blah MikeR blah blah insane
> >> Blah blah Peace” is what I hear
> >> you saying :)
> >> --expires- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > Greetings missy,
>
> > that's because you want to not hear me .. I undersatand it, and, it is
> > perfectly reasonable for it to be that way for you with me.
>
> > there's a barrier I sense which you have allowed and permitted your
> > ego to place there in your mind and in your heart and ..so it seems
> > now ..in your ears too.
>
> > think of it all as a classic case about which to observe, attempt to
> > understand, and to practice with. It's lab work , you see. And
> > sometimes ya gotta just slice open and cut the frog up into pieces
> > which is grizzly but accomplishes learning but pisses the frog off big
> > time.
>
> > don't fear my blah, blah, blah MikeR. Embrace it. See if you can
> > find the false and the true within it. Both are there.
>
> > I sense you truly desire to be "lazy" about your curriculum and the
> > effort required. After all, that's how you entered this ng, carrying a
> > lazy guide and distributing pamphlets about it. In that sense you are
> > like the Hari Krishna's dancing down the street clanging and banging
> > their cute little symbols (pun intended) while truly in need of a good
> > bath.
>
> > Relax and don't be too hasty to judge. It's a terrific classroom.
>
> > Peace
>
> > JR
>
> Well, fatso, you're quite useful when I'm
> in need of a fools mirror, but so far you're
> the lousiest teacher I know.
> --expires- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

tsk, tsk, now, now missy.

fatso ?

really sweetie. So beneath you. What will you do when I return to my
target weight of 185? I've already shed 4 pounds so far , simply by
smarter eating choices and am committed to a target based program.
Only 31 pounds to go. Easy peasy. And, only a matter of time. I've
done it before, so I know how to go about it and what to expect.

The thing is, one day I will wake up svelt. While you will continue
to wake up being silly. Give me fatso any day.

What are you trying to learn from me anyway ? I never set myself up
to be a teacher. I repeatedly have stated I am a student. So why you
trying to force me into a role I have not willingly taken on ?

You want a teacher ? Better look somewhere else. I know a really
good teacher.

relax missy.

JR

expires

6/30/2009 2:38:00 AM

On Tue Jun 30 2009 04:24:55 GMT+0200
JRad <jradgosky@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 23, 6:06 pm, expires wrote:
>>
>>
[...]
>>
> relax missy.
>
> JR

That was a week ago. I don't want
to live in your past with you :)
--expires

comp.lang.ruby

Re: Problem with http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/1

Jacob Fugal

Sean O'Halpin

John Radgosky

John Radgosky

expires

MikeRyder

John Radgosky

John Radgosky

John Radgosky

expires

x Login to ForumsZone