Hi Fintan
>
> Jesus was a Saint,
In which case he just got demoted from being the son of god!!!
> Saint Francis was. John Lennon was.
> Ken Keasy was. Timothy Leary was. Galileo was. Robert Pirsig
> sitting in a pool of urine in a mental hospital in ZAMM was.
> But he recanted. Young David Bowie was. Hendrix was.
> Cobain was. Ginsberg was. Miller was . Neil Young IS.
> Borroughs. Kerouak. Ferlinghetti. Gary Snyder. Corso.
> Colin Wilson. John Osborne. Joyce. Beckett. JP Dunleavy
> Behan. Dylan Thomas. TS Elliot. Wallace Stevens. Peter
> Orlovsky. Neal Cassady. Frank Zappa. Jackson Pollock.
> Picasso. Bacon. Dali. Da Vinci. Michaelangelo who was
> an incarnation of Michael the Archangel. Stravinsky. Brahms.
> Hyden. Handel. Debussy. Yoko Ono. John F Kennedy. James
> Connolly, Patrick Pearse. Bobby Sands. De Gaulle. Tariq Ali.
> Joseph Mary Plunkett executed in 1916: "I see His blood opon
> the rose, and in the stars the glory of His eyes" Peter Finch.
> Redford. Hoffman. Marianne Faithful. Bernadette Devlin. Lila.
None of the above are saints. They are extraordinary people of
originalty and high quality.
>
> So if that be my company then BURN ME. Please BURN ME NOW!
You wish! Your ego has blinded you to the minor problem that you aren't
anywhere near even being in a car park of an adjoining stadium of the same
ballpark as the above. Get real.
> HORSE>
> >As you've now come to the conclusion that the MoQ is a pile of crap perhaps it
> >it's time you retired from the moq_dicuss mailing list and the Lila Squad.
>
> So you can go back to being a cosy mutual admiration club? No way!
You're so far wide of the mark it's not true. The last thing I want is a "cosy mutual
admiration club".
> What's your problem? If you can't stand the heat YOU get out of the kitchen.
The problem I have is that this group is for discussing the MoQ not the MoM. It's
an open list so anyone is free to discuss the MoQ in whichever way they feel is
best. We've managed to get a wide range of perspectives and approaches to the
MoQ, which all have one thing in common - the Metaphysics of Quality. Another
problem I have is that when the basis for the list is referred to as crap it generally
indicates that the proclaimer has no interest in the aims and objectives of the
group but is using it for their own purposes. This is generally referred to as spam.
It's also the disease of the newsgroups where the group is invaded in a parasitic
fashion so that the original aims of the proposer(s) are subverted and destroyed
by a bunch of assholes who have no regard whatsoever for the opinions and
requirements of the other users. I don't want to see that happen to the Lila Squad
or to the list. I've got no intention of leaving the group in the forseeable future due
to spammers.
> Unless debate is to be a sham with rigidly defined acceptable levels of
> of variation from MOQ orthodoxy. Baptists indeed as Diana said.
Debate all you want in whatever style suits you best. As far as I'm aware there
are no definitions of MoQ orthodoxy, rigid or otherwise, and even if there were I
would have no intention of supporting "defined acceptable levels of variation from
MOQ orthodoxy" - there is the MoQ, what it means to each person, how they see
it, where they disagree with it, how it can improved etc. Run down Lila all you
want, rip it to bits and criticize it ad nauseam but at least make a reasonable
case for your critcism and dissention so that others can aspire to disagree with
you.
> Yes you would. But that would be to miss the point.
> No, Bo you will probably have members in droves if you become
> "customer centered" to use the marketing term; instead of Squad
> centered- like wanting to eject skeptics!. Just look at the list of Bio's
> on file and HOW FEW OF THESE PEOPLE contribute any longer.
> Look at the way newcomers come and- more significantly, GO.
> They make a Quality judgement Bo. Period.
Yeah. When they start reading irrelevant rantings that don't even relate to the
MoQ they probably feel short-changed. Maybe I missed a post somewhere but I
don't recall anyone wanting to eject sceptics - sceptics have been accepted in he
past and left when they felt they had no more to say or continue to post whenever
they feel like it. But without exception they have criticized the MoQ and Lila and
not tried to force their own seperate doctrine onto the group. By declaring the
MoQ crap, yourself a saint and the MoM some sort of substitute which we should
all discuss instead you have effectively become a spammer. It also sounds like
you're egotism is promoting you're paranoia.
> More REASON eh! Until we have reasoned the planet to death.
> How clever is your REASON then if it can't stop destroying us ALL.
Not sure where you get the idea that reason is destroying us all. It is the lack of
reason and the excesses of the social that are destroying us all. Who is
destroying the planet - intellectuals! Hardly. They have been amongst the first to
protest destruction of the planet. It's the multi-nationals, governments and selfish
egotistical social concerns that have allowed the destruction to get to the point it
has reached. Reason cleared away the crap and the superstition of religion and
dogma in an attempt to investigate what is the truth. No half-assed messiah or
saint ever came up with a single useful thing or idea that wasn't obvious in the
light of reason. Having said that I also see no reason why the bonds of reason and
logic should constrain Quality and the Dynamic.
> "FLOW MY TEARS THE POLICEMAN SAID" (Kurt Vonnegut Jr.)
"FLOW MY TEARS THE POLICEMAN SAID" (Philip K. Dick - the best science
fiction author ever to have walked the planet)
> Death in Dallas=
> It's good Bo because it's Quality.
I agree. I really liked that.
> Stop HURLING STONES and start ANALYSING the ideas in MoM
> and now they relate to MoQ.
> Stop tying to burn the Heretic at the stake.
If you would stop acting like a total egomaniac and give others a chance this
would probably happen. Something I have noticed in the past is that the majority
in the Lila Squad have open minds and open hearts.
> Grant him one last request.
> Here is that last request:
>
> "Burn Me...but don't burn the manuscript.
> Instead- read it.
> It will speak to you. It is what you have been waiting for.
> I am only here because the secret parts of your heart have
> called me to come here. Those are the parts that shed your tears."
Need I say more?
Horse
"Making history, it turned out, was quite easy.
It was what got written down.
It was as simple as that!"
Sir Sam Vimes.
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:40 BST