From My Informant: DCP & Schryver Ordered to Stand Down

[_TAO]

Still a judgment, and I think you made a fairly big judgment on it, based not on the facts but on how you want to see BY based on your feelings.

My judgement was 'it is a fairly obscure book which contains obscure ideas which are interpreted negatively by many people' before I read those parts.

It was a pretty safe judgment from my point of view.

I have found it to be not as obscure as I thought though, so that's a good thing.

It's no loss for me, but you cannot be taken seriously if you want to have your own definitions that are not generally agreed on.

Yah I know, but people have a hard time taking me seriously anyways ;-).

I don't like them either, and don't feel them hardly at all, but BY sure seemed to like them a little more. I wouldn't describe one as chaotic just because they can have very negative or positive emotions.

Not from what I see, sorry to say. I see a man who was kinda like a Boyd K. Packer... that is.. willing to say things which other people didn't really want to hear, not because he was 'mean', but simply because he doesn't disguise it with fluff. And yah, direct people are like that.

You don't know enough about it to say that, and not just because you don't know much about BY historical evidence, but also you don't know what I have said or think specifically about BY. Again you would need to look at the particular text and what you think the proper context is.

I know what my tone-reader tells me. Which is how I get around life in the first place. No reason for me not to trust it XD. It's the same reader that reads whether people are angry or hesitant or blissful or peppy or whatever. It's pretty much standard.

The tone reader doesn't take in historical evidence, because it tends to be biased. Instead, it creates it's own experiences of things, and relies on them. When it meets a new person, it starts off with a blank sheet.

There is no one quite so deluded as those who think they have none. LOL

I know I have some delusions, trust me.

However, having them isn't of concern to me. Eliminating them after personal thought is ;-).

[_TAO]

Thanks for acknowledging my new sig. The reader must carefully evaluate whether he/she is projecting their own personality into the material, or whether this is genuinely what the writer meant.

Np hehe =D. Sigs are cool =).

That's why I depend on my tone-reader so much. It doesn't tell me what I 'want', it tells me results. It's very much like taking your hand and rubbing against a surface. If it's rough, you cannot deny that and say it's smooth. It isn't capable of lying.

The only sense of inaccuracies it can get is with people who hide their emotions. And usually I can tell that because things don't match up statistically in my mind when that happens.

BY was notoriously inconsistent in what he said. Some of this may have to do with the audience. He may have been bipolar, along with being a sociopath. You could, in particular, look at his quotes from 1856 and 1857 to understand that.

Of course, BY was always exploring new ideas. Like I said, he has a curiosity to just spend time thinking, exploring ideas. He spurts stuff out, and cares to an extent about his audiences, but not completely. And that's only because the audience feels somwhat awkward. Even then, he'll only include extra clauses, but not change his message.

I am sorry that you have difficulty in acknowledging that people are different at different times. It must cause great difficulties for you.

Lol, all people are different MCB. But all people are also readable, so long as they don't hide their emotions.

[_MCB]

Lol, all people are different MCB. But all people are also readable, so long as they don't hide their emotions.

All people are different from each other. All people change from time to time, and in different social contexts.

I once noted that many Mormons I met talked with only their mouths. No facial expressions, no gestures. Hiding emotions? You bet!! (very much like the pseudo-intellectual sophistry of many Mormon writings)

[_TAO]

All people are different from each other. All people change from time to time, and in different social contexts.

Doesn't make 'em any less readable though =D. People have these super-hard-to-control little body urges which tell what they are thinking at the moment. For people who have special conditions, like me, it's a bit different because they are linked differently, but it is also readable.

I once noted that many Mormons I met talked with only their mouths. No facial expressions, no gestures. Hiding emotions? You bet!!

And look, you read it nonetheless. Furthermore, the absence of gestures actually tells you as much about the person as the existence of gestures does.

(very much like the pseudo-intellectual sophistry of many Mormon writings)

Lol, you aren't noticing some of the gestures then. As I said, tone has it's own 'gestures' that are as uncontrollable as facial expressions. It's a sense that you have to learn how to use; that's probably why you can't detect it. If you'd like to learn though, take a book and try figuring out why the author wrote it the way he did and not in another manner. Why did he say "The man in blue jeans went to the zoo" versus "The blue-jeaned man traveled to the San Diego Wild Animal Park". Not only does one develop the story more, it also leaves a bit more of an impression about the Author's personality inside of it.

[_beastie]

LOL. Wee Willie Nomad reminds me of DCP's alter-ego on ZLMB: freethinker. Freethinker would never admit he was DCP until the very end (if he did then, I don't remember), but would always claim that he could speak for DCP because they were in such close email/phone contact.

Nomad isn't even bright enough to try and alter his tells, like despising the "fifth columnists" and attacking Runtu in particular.

I love the fact that it was really Will who was either so poorly read or so poorly able to comprehend text that he claimed that a polity of a million or so would be considered "minor" in Mesoamerica. I think that speaks volumes about his sloppiness and unwarranted confidence.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Once again Beastie proves why real men have a major crush on her... She's fantastic.

[_Kishkumen]

Once again Beastie proves why real men have a major crush on her... She's fantastic.

One of the truest things you've ever posted, Doctor Cam.

[_beastie]

Funnily enough, my long-term sweetie (over 13 years now) and I met on email exmormon discussion group and fell in love with one another based solely on our posts. Once we met in real life and had a physical attraction as well, there was no turning back. I know internet relationships can be quirky, but I truly don't believe I could have met such a perfect soulmate for myself in any other way.

[_RockSlider]

Funnily enough, my long-term sweetie (over 13 years now) and I met on email exmormon discussion group and fell in love with one another based solely on our posts. Once we met in real life and had a physical attraction as well, there was no turning back. I know internet relationships can be quirky, but I truly don't believe I could have met such a perfect soulmate for myself in any other way.

you heart breaker!

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I'm absolutely jealous and heartened by Beastie's relationship! May she and her obviously kickass man enjoy many years to come.