Open Discussions About The Paranormal (page 9)

IP_SEC

The Hillary_Step is a bottleneck .

thinner at the top than at the bottom.

Discribes the old chap quite well eh? alt

OUTLAW

The last time hillary and I hooked up he was quite fit..Give him a guitar and he will blow you off the planet..LOL!!...OUTLAW

IP_SEC

*psst* it was just a joke. i wouldnt know hs if passed gas and blew me off the planet.

OUTLAW

IP_Sec..LOL!!..We got some funny people on this board..Ya gotta love it!!...OUTLAW

Dear Hilliary_Step:

Normally, when I finish with a discussion I never
return for any reason. However, Blueblades sent me
a personal message to see your commentary and I
complied because of my trust in his judgment.

Personally, I thought it was an exceptional
commentary (the second one) which answered
the question and overtook the discussion
in a positive manner.

My thoughts are, if reply's such as your last
commentary were on a more frequent basis
you would bring up the level of dis-
cussion regarding almost any matter.

Just my opinion ...

Respectfully,

Richard

(The Wanderer)

bluebell

i must admit to being very sceptical about the paranormal, so i just choose not to share in those threads.

hillary_step

Outlaw,

Bwa-Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!..HS you are such a trouble maker!..I near spit a beer on the screen!..LOL!!...OUTLAW

HS

hillary_step

Wanderer,

Normally, when I finish with a discussion I never return for any reason.

Can you not hear the arrogant tone in that statement? Read it again as others would see it. When you finish with a discussion, is it over or just your part in it? Perhaps in this conundrum is the answer to many of the issues that you have raised.

However, Blueblades sent me a personal message to see your commentary and I complied because of my trust in his judgment.

You seem to make a classic error in dealing with these discussion Boards, that is, concluding that what you see is what you get. These Boards are one-dimensional and it is the source of most of its problems when we allow our minds to interpret this one dimension into three. Those whose judgments you question, may indeed be the ones who have the most to give. I thank Blueblades for his peaceful intent.

Personally, I thought it was an exceptional commentary (the second one) which answered the question and overtook the discussion
in a positive manner.

Shaking head.....you are still not seeing this clearly Wanderer. What is 'positive' in your eyes in a discussion may not actually be positive from the point of truth and honesty in a debate. You still seem to be submerged in the WTS thinking that has its adherents believe nonsense for the sake of 'unity' within the congregations. If someone stands up for themselves in the congregation and says, 'NO, this is wrong!', are they viewed as 'positive'? Are they, as the WTS would have us believe wrong in making such statements and that everybody should play nicely in the sandpit for the sake of a 'good witness'?

Many people on this Board are new to the subject of opinions, having had theirs stifled for years. They may become vociferous and combatitive in the display of such opinions but I celebrate this, this is the beginning of their journey of mental freedom.

My thoughts are, if reply's such as your last commentary were on a more frequent basis you would bring up the level of dis-
cussion regarding almost any matter. Just my opinion ...

You are entitled to your opinion, as long as it does not come attached with condescending and repeated instructions as to how we should conduct ourselves during discussions, and it is at this point that I entered conversation with you on the thread with AlanF.

HS

BlackSwan of Memphis

Many people on this Board are new to the subject of opinions, having had theirs stifled for years. They may become vociferous and combatitive in the display of such opinions but I celebrate this, this is the beginning of their journey of mental freedom.

I realize this was meant for Wanderer. I just wanted to say, this is exactly what I got out of your post.

And this is exactly what I had not quite thought of. And many of us here are at the beginning of that journey.......

The wanderer

Dear Hill:

I understand your perspective on matters, however,
my perspective regarding topics of discussion
are just that.

They are topics of discussion not debates. Notice,
the blurb or headline of the web thread "Open
Discussions About The Paranormal."

Design of The Intended Article

Since mentioning to me on past occasions how you
felt about the color scheme and the "Watchtower"
approach format regarding the articles I will
explain the why?

Target Audience

I think it is safe to conclude that most individuals
on this board were either Jehovah's Witnesses, former
Jehovah's Witnesses or associated and familiar with
the Watchtower Society in some manner.

Hence, therefore, the idea of formatting the articles
similar to what they were seeing in the magazines was
partly done for purposes of spoofing (parody) and partly
for added shock value.

The difference in The Wanderer's articles is that it
allows audience participation whereas the Watchtower's
questions always ended with what they wanted the
reader to conclude in their magazines.

Anyway, my approach to individuals on this board is
to build bridges of communication and not to construct
walls of division. I have friendly relationships on this
board.

Respectfully,

Richard

Just because a person chooses to "Wander" does not mean he is lost. -The Wanderer

Open Discussions About The Paranormal

Design of The Intended Article

Target Audience

Share this