From LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM Sun May 27 09:27:50 2001
Return-Path: <>
Delivered-To: walterl1@w.pop.ihug.co.nz
Received: (qmail 19719 invoked from network); 26 May 2001 21:38:54 -0000
Received: from mx2-1.ihug.co.nz (HELO mx2.ihug.co.nz) (203.29.168.197)
  by kate.ihug.co.nz with SMTP; 26 May 2001 21:38:54 -0000
Received: from home.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.9] 
	by mx2.ihug.co.nz with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 153liI-00008i-00; Sun, 27 May 2001 09:35:10 +1200
Received: from home (home.ease.lsoft.com) by home.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <1.FFCF465F@home.ease.lsoft.com>; Sat, 26 May 2001 17:27:50 -0400
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 17:27:50 -0400
From: "L-Soft list server at HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM (1.8d)"              <LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Subject: File: "PSYBER-L LOG9805"
To: Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Message-Id: <E153liI-00008i-00@mx2.ihug.co.nz>
X-Rcpt-To: walter@psybernet.co.nz

=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 1 May 1998 14:20:02 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
In-Reply-To:  <v01550105b16ea4955893@[207.54.160.85]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Simon I related to this given that I am reading The Gethsemani Encounter,
>an interfaith dialogue with Buddahists and Catholics

That must be interesting. Personally I don't feel well disposed towards the
Catholic religion; it begets too many psychic horrors. Not that it's alone
in doing so... Are you finding the book valuable?

>tho admittedly this is delicate

Judith, I must confess I don't understand what you're saying here. And
usually when I don't understand something it means I *need* to understand
it!!

>I am moved to Thomas Merton's description
>of a conference in Calcutta in 1968...

Moved how, where, why?

Maybe I'm just feeling contrary today, but I'm having a job making (the)
connections...


>*The deepest level of communication is not communication, but communion. It
>is wordless. It is beyond words, and it is beyond speech, and it is beyond
>concept...not that we discover a new unity. We discover an older unity. My
>dear brothers, we are already one. But we imagine that we are not. And what
>we have to recover is our original unity. What we have to be is what we
>are.*

But that wonderful time when it's possible to share a silent communion with
someone else, to have that deep feeling of connection without words, comes
*after* the words; the words have made it possible. More specifically,
dialogue has made it possible. There again, there's also the silent
dialogue of  the eyes...

Re unity: I have been thinking that maybe the conundrum at the heart of
Dolores' situation (and really, at the heart of all our situations) is how
to reconcile the individual and the 'community' (for want of a better
word). And maybe behind that is the question of how to avoid power
structures and overcome the deep metaphor of original sin, with its duality
of humiliater/humiliated (and thereby hangs one reason for my dislike of
Catholicism).

There is a book by Alexander Durig called 'Autism and the Crisis of
Meaning' which goes into this somewhat. It's a pretty deep book, and I
wouldn't claim to understand it all by any means, but I can recommend it to
all deep enquirers - as long as you don't mind getting your brain
spin-rinsed!

>
>Blessings to all,
>Judith in reverence
>

Judith, it was a pleasure to read your response.

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 1 May 1998 14:25:17 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
In-Reply-To:  <v03110702b16f70c45671@[195.200.13.59]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Judith, I must confess I don't understand what you're saying here. And
>usually when I don't understand something it means I *need* to understand
>it!!

I just realised, I'm talking about the Catholic religion and then I say 'I
must confess'! Perhaps there is something good about Catholicism after
all... There again, I don't think I was sinning.

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 1 May 1998 17:29:53 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Dolores <azure@EASYNET.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: *IT* -replies/Judith
In-Reply-To:  <v01550109b16d5c4829a6@[207.54.160.216]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Thanks to everybody..but it was this, this bit hidden in all the replies
that struck a chord deepest in me from Judith..
Because it lead to my thinking of so many other things, and how right she
was..

when I was grappling
with yearning for someone no longer in my life, I was directed to take that
yearning for another and project it onto myself...sort of as a
fulfillment...subtle shifts occurred...when I looked again it wasn't the
person I was missing, it was the opportunity to express my loving...

*It* Then I decided..is a yearning to love another, perhaps to be loved as
equally, but more importantly, its the yearning to find somebody who can
truly understand me, and through them, through loving them, learning to
love myself.
However, *It* was stolen from me, and the thief who took it, might well
have plunged a dagger into my heart and savagely twisted for all the damage
that was done there.
All the things I am, I could give, are all back inside of me, shielded from
the robber of my trust, the vulnerability I gave when I loved completely.
What a fool I was, he has killed all that is beautiful inside me, only the
exterior remains and I am seeking to kill that off too by various and
calorific means.
Inside me it feels as though a shrivelled nugget of all the beautiful
things that were me, all the beautiful things I had to give, still glow, It
glows because its more than I am, and it wants to survive, ut its light is
so weak, maybe  thats what I reach out to in the darkness, so I can blow on
it, nurture it, and rekindle some spark again before it is extinguished
completely.
In such savage rejection after saying the three words that amount to the
biggest lies in the universe for over a year, I feel so worthless, so plain
just not good enough, so wormlike, so unworthy. I wasn't good enough. My
love wasn't good enough, and Its killing me. And while I loved him, I felt
so good, and I blossomed, and everything about me went and rose to sing
hymns with angels and now I'm back in the bowels of hades, tormenting
myself on my own pitchfork.

I am lost in this intolerable solitude of being, and of having no way to
express it because I can never let it happen again, and curse myself for
letting it have happened in the first place.
So wrong that it is better to have loved and lost than never have loved at
all..it should be its better to been loved and lost than never to have
loved at all, that I could agree with..but nothing is as bad as to have
loved and lost. Thats a real crappy thing to have happen to a body with a
poetic soul with a great capacity to love.
I am so lonely, and theres nothing heals the ache longer than a  band aid
would, not music, nothing. Maybe I do need that rice bowl and mountain.
Course, he was a dickhead, my ex husband said he was a dickhead, everybody
said he was a dickhead, but I could love that dickhead and thats all that
mattered to me. It just never mattered to him.

More fool me.

Help me Judith?

Love

Dolores.

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 1 May 1998 17:36:59 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: *IT* -replies/Judith
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Delores...yes I sensed what was going on...
>Help me Judith?
and of course whereif I can...first I would suggest to be gentle with
yourself...and second, I say gently, don't give your power away no matter
how sh.... you feel in this moment...

This may not be the time to contemplate this thought, however, in my belief
structure, I see life as learning and sometimes I'm singing in the choir
and sometimes I'm in math hell...in my experience those who have come into
my life fall into categories and one can surely be dickhead :-) and another
might be a worthy opponent...lessons to be learned often come raining down
like cosmic bricks, yet I suspect under all the normal emotions of the
experience is learning...sometime later you might want to look at what your
soul is growing from this...

None of this is going to take the pain away, yet another path through the
darkness (meaning other than giving another the flashlight) is to shine
your own light...I have never seen anything constructive come out of giving
someone else the power over, unless it is learning this isn't the most
constructive learning path...sounds to me that you gave it away which means
you can take *it* back...

Judith in blessings

>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L
>

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 1 May 1998 18:11:40 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>>Simon I related to this given that I am reading The Gethsemani Encounter,
>>an interfaith dialogue with Buddahists and Catholics
>
>That must be interesting. Personally I don't feel well disposed towards the
>Catholic religion; it begets too many psychic horrors. Not that it's alone
>in doing so... Are you finding the book valuable?

There are alot of words... and ideas in Christianity which I am finding
illuminating, however as the song goes *my heart beongs to Buddah* :-)
The value is the experience of reading about two seemingly incongruent
belief structures and the dialogue which insued...it is also serving to
give me a deeper understanding of my own resonnance with Buddahism and
opening up a bit of breathing room in Christianity...then from a less
personal place, I see this dialogue process as a powerful means to explore
diversity of beliefs...
>
>>tho admittedly this is delicate

merely venturing into one of those areas which may be off limits to some
>
>Judith, I must confess I don't understand what you're saying here. And
>usually when I don't understand something it means I *need* to understand
>it!!
>
Simon, it might have to do with *civility* :-), seriously, I thought long
about how to respond, however, I am always coming from what is fascinating
me at the moment and what *cutting edge* I am exploring, so I shared what
was up for me...
ever so delicately lest I inadvertantly violate the space here...
>>I am moved to Thomas Merton's description
>>of a conference in Calcutta in 1968...
>
>Moved how, where, why?

Communication leading to communion...I think this is relevant in the
cyberspace experience...generally we experience these in f2f, meaning in
the same space...between two people quietly sitting by the lake, or in
conversation at lunch or in a group working on a project, communication
between people over time which opens a space of communion...there are
certain assumptions about these I think and I am playing with what this
means here...taking your lead about how you had experience this past week
or so among us...and I am feeling something in the silences where I
continue  to feel connected
>
>Maybe I'm just feeling contrary today, but I'm having a job making (the)
>connections...

I'm not receiving your inquiry as contrary... and I've not completely made
the connections which is the explorer in me...commenting on the journey...
>
>
>>*The deepest level of communication is not communication, but communion. It
>>is wordless. It is beyond words, and it is beyond speech, and it is beyond
>>concept...not that we discover a new unity. We discover an older unity. My
>>dear brothers, we are already one. But we imagine that we are not. And what
>>we have to recover is our original unity. What we have to be is what we
>>are.*
>
>But that wonderful time when it's possible to share a silent communion with
>someone else, to have that deep feeling of connection without words, comes
>*after* the words; the words have made it possible. More specifically,
>dialogue has made it possible. There again, there's also the silent
>dialogue of  the eyes...

ah, yes, the windows of the soul, eh?
>
>Re unity: I have been thinking that maybe the conundrum at the heart of
>Dolores' situation (and really, at the heart of all our situations) is how
>to reconcile the individual and the 'community' (for want of a better
>word). And maybe behind that is the question of how to avoid power
>structures and overcome the deep metaphor of original sin, with its duality
>of humiliater/humiliated (and thereby hangs one reason for my dislike of
>Catholicism).

my turn to inquire...I don't have a way in to humiliater/humiliated...
>
>There is a book by Alexander Durig called 'Autism and the Crisis of
>Meaning' which goes into this somewhat. It's a pretty deep book, and I
>wouldn't claim to understand it all by any means, but I can recommend it to
>all deep enquirers - as long as you don't mind getting your brain
>spin-rinsed!
>
>>
>>Blessings to all,
>>Judith in reverence
>>
>
>Judith, it was a pleasure to read your response.
>
>Simon

And so yours, Simon
Judith heading out of her head into her paper studio
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 2 May 1998 06:05:41 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: *IT* -replies/Judith
In-Reply-To:  <3.0.5.32.19980501172953.007d0100@easynet.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dolores,

Thank you Dolores for bringing yourself into this place so fully.
I know my battle field image did not fit.  I feel a bit thick
putting it that way while you were in a reflective moment in a
library!  On reflection your post does have the tone you felt.
Soooo... the battle image comes from me!  For all that you *hurt*
so much ... I am not misreading that surely!

Having loved and lost is painful ... I live in fear of it still.
"Better than not having loved at all." is little consolation.

You have a raw wound ... there was a separation and ending ...

Am I way off beam or out of place in thinking that there is no
accident that you bring your feelings and struggles here?  Now at
this time?  Or to put it another way:  Is it an accident that as
you are feeling as you do that Psyber-L is discussing list
splits? I know I may well be off beam as far as you are concerned
... yet look at this story of the two lists ... "Once upon a time
there was a "L-thing" which cruised along for a while reasonably
happily.  Then there was some inner turmoil ... more turmoil and
then, poof, an ending ... and then there were two "L-things".
Apart.

These struggles come here, to Psyber-L ... and that is no
accident, Psyber-L has these struggles within the bounds of its
life.

Thus we can all ride this wave of ... agony(?), tuning in to the
patterns of the soul.

It has nothing to do with this list I know, and there may be some
*indiscretion* in talking about the two *separate* Jung lists
here ... but we have, this *does* affect some of us.

I'm not sure if I am at all in tune with you Dolores ... if not
please simply see this as exclusively about me.  My yearning is
also for an *it* and so far it is closely related to the
discussion with Simon where he says:

Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
Thu, 30 Apr 1998 17:03:20 +0100 :

> ... a group of people decide to make that space special
> and valuable to them is what's special and valuable.

Dolores, you go on to say:
>*It* Then I decided..is a yearning to love another, perhaps to be loved as
>equally, but more importantly, its the yearning to find somebody who can
>truly understand me, and through them, through loving them, learning to
>love myself.

Such a yearning! ... worth having if you ask me, and even better
to get through it and find that person. I know it is wise to
think you may need to love yourself first etc. however that may
just not be your destiny.  I don't think it is mine either.

All the best with your searchings Dolores,


Walter

___________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 2 May 1998 06:10:57 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
In-Reply-To:  <v03110700b16e3706aa7f@[195.200.13.145]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Simon

> Listening to oneself is
> part of self-respect, isn't it? Listening to what you heart tells you,
>listening to what your commonsense tells you, listening to what your body
>tells you (Judith, I imagine you nodding and smiling at this), gathering a
>sense of what feels right...

Yes. I am sure it is also a respect for others when you do this
... it leads to that.  Well put.


Containment:
> I understand the importance of having a physical
> space designated as a stage, and the function of containment
> that it provides. But there is nothing special or
> valuable about that space in itself, is there? Rather
> the fact that a group of people decide to make that space
> special and valuable to them is what's special and valuable.
> That's the core, isn't it? And isn't it a decision
> about honesty? Does the space create the honesty, or
> does the honesty create the space?

I think it is the nature of the space!  I think it has a history
that goes back to our origins ... where we create a ritual space
to enact life's transitions.  The tribal dance moves into the
alter and into the theatre as society evolves.  It does take
people to honour it, but it is something that is *there* as the
result of millions of years of tradition and layers of effort.
In war when invaders violate such places it is particularly
painful.

I don't think we can expect to see easy containment of the psyche
here easily by *individual* effort alone, or without designing
the spaces that enhance that.  We do OK here yet what are the
next steps?  How to go on?

> This seems important! Containment without a stage?
> Or maybe you're just not seeing the stage.

Well I can't see it.  Perhaps it can be there simply through the
responses of others.  Imagine someone catharts, they say "You are
all fucked!"  and a whole lot more attacking individuals etc, and
*somehow* the people create a "space" where the catharsis is
gently, creatively empathised, mirrored back.  We have a fire but
not a bush fire, not a flame war.  Can we do that?  Would it be
desirable?

~~~

On drifting:
>Why did you think you were drifting? Actually, I liked that you put that
>in, I'm not sure why. It was like a small 'anchoring' pause...

Thanks!  I thought I was drifting because I went onto the nature
of "supervision" in psychotherapy ... I can see how it is related
now though ... a stage provides an over view of life as does
supervision.

~~~



Working with Shadow:
>Um, yes, adeptly seems better...! Maybe I just have something against that
>word 'smooth' and its various derivatives... I'm thinking now of a smooth
>surface hiding churning depths... and of throwing a pebble into a lake to
>watch the ripples expand... Which, of course, was where I came in all those
>months ago!

Yes!

I simply have no wish to have the Shadow erupt without ... some
collaborative "supervision" of that.  On the Internet it can run
amok in many places as much as it likes.  It is actually a high
level sophisticated thing that is at the root of Psyber-L, to
allow the psyche to be here ... which includes:  ego, shadow,
among the archetypes.  In many successful "community" based
discourse it is simply not allowed, which is fair enough!  What a
difficult task I have set here in the ethos of this discussion
space!

>Finally, I can't resist 'throwing in' this provocative quote, chanced upon
>on another list:
>
>
> "The human being of the West has abandoned being human and has
>     turned himself into an individual... community has died in them."
>        -- Nicolas Aguilar Sayritupac, Aymara Indian, Lake Titicaca,
>                                   Bolivia


I like the quote but also want to bring in something else, ... Is
community gone?  It is not tribal but there is amazing
cooperation going on in the midst of our "competitive" society
... but always with "goals" with outcomes in mind.  I think it is
an honouring of the psyche in both individuals and the community
that is gone.  We don't do the individual or the collective with
a respect for the depth the churning under the surface.

Enjoying the discussion ... hmmm do I need to go back to our
"unfinished" stuff from a week or so ago?


Walter

___________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 2 May 1998 16:30:14 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
In-Reply-To:  <354faf07.69703441@smtp.ihug.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Walter,

>> That's the core, isn't it? And isn't it a decision
>> about honesty?
>
>I think it is the nature of the space!  I think it has a history
>that goes back to our origins ... where we create a ritual space
>to enact life's transitions.  The tribal dance moves into the
>alter and into the theatre as society evolves.  It does take
>people to honour it, but it is something that is *there* as the
>result of millions of years of tradition and layers of effort.
>In war when invaders violate such places it is particularly
>painful.

There is something interesting about the nature of *the space itself*, and
of course there are beliefs about energy flows within physical spaces... I
think of the Chinese practice of feng shui. There are certainly some spaces
that feel better than others, and how the space is 'arranged' may be a part
of that.

But isn't it still about what we invest in those spaces? Emotionally,
spiritually, whatever... The ritual space, the space of the tribal dance,
the space of the 'theatre of battle', these are all spaces that we create
and invest in, in some way...

I like your notion of honouring a space. Is that what we do here, honour
the listspace of psyber-l? I think so. Honour its intention, anyway, or
your intention in creating it originally. I think Dolores honours it very
much by posting with such burning honesty here.

To reiterate my question(s):
>> That's the core, isn't it? And isn't it a decision
>> about honesty? Does the space create the honesty, or
>> does the honesty create the space?

And to answer my own question: I think it's both, in a process of
feedback... Perhaps, the people are (in) the space! Or become the space...

To echo Tetahiarohanui Mekahanuimemananui down through the list: 'If you
should ask me, what is the most important thing in this world, I would
answer, it is people, it is people, it is people.'

>I don't think we can expect to see easy containment of the psyche
>here easily by *individual* effort alone, or without designing
>the spaces that enhance that.  We do OK here yet what are the
>next steps?  How to go on?

Back to the individual and community again.

I had the image earlier today, perhaps a parody of civility, of a group of
people sitting in a room talking about personal issues, but instead of
getting angry, or crying, or laughing even, they simply said 'Now I feel
angry.', 'Now I feel sad', 'Now I feel amused'. But expression is part of
the deal. Again, it's about feedback - though, I would say, within a
framework of understanding about the processes that go on, or at least a
willingness to learn as you go...

All of which is beginning to sound a bit like rules, which I'm not really
into. Ground rules, maybe...

I quoted you previously saying:
>I had a glimpse then of the list being able to contain, without a stage, the
>eruption of the Shadow.  Holding it as it were.  Holding each other really.
>I cant quite grasp it ... (there it is again Dolores ... just out of reach).

and then I said:

>> This seems important! Containment without a stage?
>> Or maybe you're just not seeing the stage.

I was being too concrete, I think. It was what you couldn't quite grasp
that I was meaning to prod you about... something about holding... Maybe
the 'stage' (which after all is just a construct) is to be found there... I
also think it's about honesty *and* honouring honesty!

re 'the stage', you say:
>Well I can't see it.  Perhaps it can be there simply through the
>responses of others.  Imagine someone catharts, they say "You are
>all fucked!"  and a whole lot more attacking individuals etc, and
>*somehow* the people create a "space" where the catharsis is
>gently, creatively empathised, mirrored back.  We have a fire but
>not a bush fire, not a flame war.  Can we do that?  Would it be
>desirable?

Yes. And I think you do see it.

Didn't that fire-not-flame-war kind of happen with Void? I don't recall any
particular eruption of flaming back...

But what can you do if someone isn't even trying to be honest (with
themselves as much as with anyone else)? In the end you have to let go of
them, or be dragged down yourself...


>On drifting:
>>Why did you think you were drifting? Actually, I liked that you put that
>>in, I'm not sure why. It was like a small 'anchoring' pause...
>
>Thanks!  I thought I was drifting because I went onto the nature
>of "supervision" in psychotherapy ... I can see how it is related
>now though ... a stage provides an over view of life as does
>supervision.

Re drifting: yes, I can see that now. Very attuned of you, Walter!
Actually, reading back over what you wrote, I am reminded that supervision
(or perhaps, how to create an appropriate model of supervision) is a
crucial issue for you in this space.

>a stage provides an over view of life as does supervision.

This intrigues me. For a start, because I don't quite understand it! Also,
because our definition of 'stage'  in this space seems to be shifting...


>I simply have no wish to have the Shadow erupt without ... some
>collaborative "supervision" of that.

Collaborative supervision, yes. This has something to do with the 'new
model' I mentioned earlier, and the shifting definition of 'stage'... Or
maybe it's not a new model; I don't really have the background to assess
that...

At this moment I'm thinking of groupware, and recalling that one
university-based groupware developer introduced anonymous conferencing into
its package. The idea was to break down the formal and informal hierarchies
within company meetings, to encourage a more dynamic interchange of ideas
between the 'lower downs' and the 'higher ups'. I don't know if it worked,
I just remember being fascinated that the idea of anonymity having value -
something I associated with the 'underground' world of remailers and MOO
social spaces - should be feeding into the corporate world.

Not sure why I brought that up! Oh well, I'll let it float...

Talking of identity issues, I'm reminded of when Wilbur's wife joined the
list and spoke about taking on a male persona in AOL chat rooms. As I
recall, that didn't make her very popular with some of the female list
members here! Sometimes I wonder if that fed into Wilbur's subsequent
cataclysm on the list...


>On the Internet it can run
>amok in many places as much as it likes.  It is actually a high
>level sophisticated thing that is at the root of Psyber-L, to
>allow the psyche to be here ... which includes:  ego, shadow,
>among the archetypes.  In many successful "community" based
>discourse it is simply not allowed, which is fair enough!  What a
>difficult task I have set here in the ethos of this discussion
>space!

Yes, Walter. And I appreciate that you have stuck with this. You could have
said 'Sod this, I'm not going to make any money here, time to close up
shop', you could have turned your attention to paid one-on-one mail
sessions, you could have decided to run a 'clinical' list instead. But you
had some insights about psyberspace, and you've stuck with them through all
the difficulties.

re the individual/community quote I forwarded:
>I like the quote but also want to bring in something else, ... Is
>community gone?  It is not tribal but there is amazing
>cooperation going on in the midst of our "competitive" society
>... but always with "goals" with outcomes in mind.  I think it is
>an honouring of the psyche in both individuals and the community
>that is gone.

Another phrase to think on and value here: "an honouring of the psyche in
both individuals and the community"

I agree with you about the goal orientation. But that orientation is
because there's so much to struggle over in society, so many goals that
need to be reached, so much injustice to be overcome. And I think those
struggles are part of a process which is moving, albeit slowly, towards the
honouring that you talk about.

>Enjoying the discussion ... hmmm do I need to go back to our
>"unfinished" stuff from a week or so ago?
>
>
>Walter

I like the way you phrase this, Walter! It seems like you're asking me and
asking yourself at the same time!

Is it unfinished? I feel so. There are some things in there that are not
done with, it seems to me. They're part of the emerging discussion here,
but they haven't properly emerged! What do you feel?

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 2 May 1998 04:35:16 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Nancy S. Smith" <mossy7@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: PSYBER-L Digest - 30 Apr 1998 to 1 May 1998 (#1998-79)

Hello everyone.  I'm new.

To Judith: Boy!  Have I been there (where you are now).  I guess the
straw I clung to was: That which does not kill one, makes one stronger.
But can one person's straw help another?  Not always, but sometime, or
straws would not become bromides.
To Simon: I liked what you said about dick heads/opponents.  I believe
that to be true.  Sun and Moon both shine on the one lucky enough to have
found a real-time opponent engaged and brave enough to stay the field.
Yet I have a serious quibble within Judith's context.  A worthy opponent
must stay the field so that both may strengthen their skills and burnish
their metal.  When a real-time relationship ends, the opponent usually
skips, slinks or otherwise gets hence.  Then one is left with only one's
perceptions of that erstwhile opponent with whom to struggle.  Too often
that means that one is back, before love's brilliance, struggling with
one's own shadow.  what a letdown~  What a betrayal of one's hopes and
expectations~  What a lose of faith in one's own 'real-time' perceptions.
 And the knowing that the suffering will not end in the foreseeable
future (for in the lonely abyss we all become nearsighted.)
To Judith again: My heart does out to you.
        Hugs, Nancy
        Off to investigate Dusty Miller before planting
On Sat, 2 May 1998 00:22:22 -0400 Automatic digest processor
<LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM> writes:
>There are 5 messages totaling 294 lines in this issue.
>
>Topics of the day:
>
>  1. does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych (3)
>  2. *IT* -replies/Judith (2)
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date:    Fri, 1 May 1998 14:20:02 +0100
>From:    "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
>Subject: Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
>
>>Simon I related to this given that I am reading The Gethsemani
>Encounter,
>>an interfaith dialogue with Buddahists and Catholics
>
>That must be interesting. Personally I don't feel well disposed
>towards the
>Catholic religion; it begets too many psychic horrors. Not that it's
>alone
>in doing so... Are you finding the book valuable?
>
>>tho admittedly this is delicate
>
>Judith, I must confess I don't understand what you're saying here. And
>usually when I don't understand something it means I *need* to
>understand
>it!!
>
>>I am moved to Thomas Merton's description
>>of a conference in Calcutta in 1968...
>
>Moved how, where, why?
>
>Maybe I'm just feeling contrary today, but I'm having a job making
>(the)
>connections...
>
>
>>*The deepest level of communication is not communication, but
>communion. It
>>is wordless. It is beyond words, and it is beyond speech, and it is
>beyond
>>concept...not that we discover a new unity. We discover an older
>unity. My
>>dear brothers, we are already one. But we imagine that we are not.
>And what
>>we have to recover is our original unity. What we have to be is what
>we
>>are.*
>
>But that wonderful time when it's possible to share a silent communion
>with
>someone else, to have that deep feeling of connection without words,
>comes
>*after* the words; the words have made it possible. More specifically,
>dialogue has made it possible. There again, there's also the silent
>dialogue of  the eyes...
>
>Re unity: I have been thinking that maybe the conundrum at the heart
>of
>Dolores' situation (and really, at the heart of all our situations) is
>how
>to reconcile the individual and the 'community' (for want of a better
>word). And maybe behind that is the question of how to avoid power
>structures and overcome the deep metaphor of original sin, with its
>duality
>of humiliater/humiliated (and thereby hangs one reason for my dislike
>of
>Catholicism).
>
>There is a book by Alexander Durig called 'Autism and the Crisis of
>Meaning' which goes into this somewhat. It's a pretty deep book, and I
>wouldn't claim to understand it all by any means, but I can recommend
>it to
>all deep enquirers - as long as you don't mind getting your brain
>spin-rinsed!
>
>>
>>Blessings to all,
>>Judith in reverence
>>
>
>Judith, it was a pleasure to read your response.
>
>Simon
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Fri, 1 May 1998 14:25:17 +0100
>From:    "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
>Subject: Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
>
>>Judith, I must confess I don't understand what you're saying here.
>And
>>usually when I don't understand something it means I *need* to
>understand
>>it!!
>
>I just realised, I'm talking about the Catholic religion and then I
>say 'I
>must confess'! Perhaps there is something good about Catholicism after
>all... There again, I don't think I was sinning.
>
>Simon
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Fri, 1 May 1998 17:29:53 +0100
>From:    Dolores <azure@EASYNET.CO.UK>
>Subject: Re: *IT* -replies/Judith
>
>Thanks to everybody..but it was this, this bit hidden in all the
>replies
>that struck a chord deepest in me from Judith..
>Because it lead to my thinking of so many other things, and how right
>she
>was..
>
>when I was grappling
>with yearning for someone no longer in my life, I was directed to take
>that
>yearning for another and project it onto myself...sort of as a
>fulfillment...subtle shifts occurred...when I looked again it wasn't
>the
>person I was missing, it was the opportunity to express my loving...
>
>*It* Then I decided..is a yearning to love another, perhaps to be
>loved as
>equally, but more importantly, its the yearning to find somebody who
>can
>truly understand me, and through them, through loving them, learning
>to
>love myself.
>However, *It* was stolen from me, and the thief who took it, might
>well
>have plunged a dagger into my heart and savagely twisted for all the
>damage
>that was done there.
>All the things I am, I could give, are all back inside of me, shielded
>from
>the robber of my trust, the vulnerability I gave when I loved
>completely.
>What a fool I was, he has killed all that is beautiful inside me, only
>the
>exterior remains and I am seeking to kill that off too by various and
>calorific means.
>Inside me it feels as though a shrivelled nugget of all the beautiful
>things that were me, all the beautiful things I had to give, still
>glow, It
>glows because its more than I am, and it wants to survive, ut its
>light is
>so weak, maybe  thats what I reach out to in the darkness, so I can
>blow on
>it, nurture it, and rekindle some spark again before it is
>extinguished
>completely.
>In such savage rejection after saying the three words that amount to
>the
>biggest lies in the universe for over a year, I feel so worthless, so
>plain
>just not good enough, so wormlike, so unworthy. I wasn't good enough.
>My
>love wasn't good enough, and Its killing me. And while I loved him, I
>felt
>so good, and I blossomed, and everything about me went and rose to
>sing
>hymns with angels and now I'm back in the bowels of hades, tormenting
>myself on my own pitchfork.
>
>I am lost in this intolerable solitude of being, and of having no way
>to
>express it because I can never let it happen again, and curse myself
>for
>letting it have happened in the first place.
>So wrong that it is better to have loved and lost than never have
>loved at
>all..it should be its better to been loved and lost than never to have
>loved at all, that I could agree with..but nothing is as bad as to
>have
>loved and lost. Thats a real crappy thing to have happen to a body
>with a
>poetic soul with a great capacity to love.
>I am so lonely, and theres nothing heals the ache longer than a  band
>aid
>would, not music, nothing. Maybe I do need that rice bowl and
>mountain.
>Course, he was a dickhead, my ex husband said he was a dickhead,
>everybody
>said he was a dickhead, but I could love that dickhead and thats all
>that
>mattered to me. It just never mattered to him.
>
>More fool me.
>
>Help me Judith?
>
>Love
>
>Dolores.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Fri, 1 May 1998 17:36:59 -0400
>From:    Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
>Subject: Re: *IT* -replies/Judith
>
>Delores...yes I sensed what was going on...
>>Help me Judith?
>and of course whereif I can...first I would suggest to be gentle with
>yourself...and second, I say gently, don't give your power away no
>matter
>how sh.... you feel in this moment...
>
>This may not be the time to contemplate this thought, however, in my
>belief
>structure, I see life as learning and sometimes I'm singing in the
>choir
>and sometimes I'm in math hell...in my experience those who have come
>into
>my life fall into categories and one can surely be dickhead :-) and
>another
>might be a worthy opponent...lessons to be learned often come raining
>down
>like cosmic bricks, yet I suspect under all the normal emotions of the
>experience is learning...sometime later you might want to look at what
>your
>soul is growing from this...
>
>None of this is going to take the pain away, yet another path through
>the
>darkness (meaning other than giving another the flashlight) is to
>shine
>your own light...I have never seen anything constructive come out of
>giving
>someone else the power over, unless it is learning this isn't the most
>constructive learning path...sounds to me that you gave it away which
>means
>you can take *it* back...
>
>Judith in blessings
>
>>_______________________________________________________________
>>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L
>>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Fri, 1 May 1998 18:11:40 -0400
>From:    Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
>Subject: Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
>
>>>Simon I related to this given that I am reading The Gethsemani
>Encounter,
>>>an interfaith dialogue with Buddahists and Catholics
>>
>>That must be interesting. Personally I don't feel well disposed
>towards the
>>Catholic religion; it begets too many psychic horrors. Not that it's
>alone
>>in doing so... Are you finding the book valuable?
>
>There are alot of words... and ideas in Christianity which I am
>finding
>illuminating, however as the song goes *my heart beongs to Buddah* :-)
>The value is the experience of reading about two seemingly incongruent
>belief structures and the dialogue which insued...it is also serving
>to
>give me a deeper understanding of my own resonnance with Buddahism and
>opening up a bit of breathing room in Christianity...then from a less
>personal place, I see this dialogue process as a powerful means to
>explore
>diversity of beliefs...
>>
>>>tho admittedly this is delicate
>
>merely venturing into one of those areas which may be off limits to
>some
>>
>>Judith, I must confess I don't understand what you're saying here.
>And
>>usually when I don't understand something it means I *need* to
>understand
>>it!!
>>
>Simon, it might have to do with *civility* :-), seriously, I thought
>long
>about how to respond, however, I am always coming from what is
>fascinating
>me at the moment and what *cutting edge* I am exploring, so I shared
>what
>was up for me...
>ever so delicately lest I inadvertantly violate the space here...
>>>I am moved to Thomas Merton's description
>>>of a conference in Calcutta in 1968...
>>
>>Moved how, where, why?
>
>Communication leading to communion...I think this is relevant in the
>cyberspace experience...generally we experience these in f2f, meaning
>in
>the same space...between two people quietly sitting by the lake, or in
>conversation at lunch or in a group working on a project,
>communication
>between people over time which opens a space of communion...there are
>certain assumptions about these I think and I am playing with what
>this
>means here...taking your lead about how you had experience this past
>week
>or so among us...and I am feeling something in the silences where I
>continue  to feel connected
>>
>>Maybe I'm just feeling contrary today, but I'm having a job making
>(the)
>>connections...
>
>I'm not receiving your inquiry as contrary... and I've not completely
>made
>the connections which is the explorer in me...commenting on the
>journey...
>>
>>
>>>*The deepest level of communication is not communication, but
>communion. It
>>>is wordless. It is beyond words, and it is beyond speech, and it is
>beyond
>>>concept...not that we discover a new unity. We discover an older
>unity. My
>>>dear brothers, we are already one. But we imagine that we are not.
>And what
>>>we have to recover is our original unity. What we have to be is what
>we
>>>are.*
>>
>>But that wonderful time when it's possible to share a silent
>communion with
>>someone else, to have that deep feeling of connection without words,
>comes
>>*after* the words; the words have made it possible. More
>specifically,
>>dialogue has made it possible. There again, there's also the silent
>>dialogue of  the eyes...
>
>ah, yes, the windows of the soul, eh?
>>
>>Re unity: I have been thinking that maybe the conundrum at the heart
>of
>>Dolores' situation (and really, at the heart of all our situations)
>is how
>>to reconcile the individual and the 'community' (for want of a better
>>word). And maybe behind that is the question of how to avoid power
>>structures and overcome the deep metaphor of original sin, with its
>duality
>>of humiliater/humiliated (and thereby hangs one reason for my dislike
>of
>>Catholicism).
>
>my turn to inquire...I don't have a way in to humiliater/humiliated...
>>
>>There is a book by Alexander Durig called 'Autism and the Crisis of
>>Meaning' which goes into this somewhat. It's a pretty deep book, and
>I
>>wouldn't claim to understand it all by any means, but I can recommend
>it to
>>all deep enquirers - as long as you don't mind getting your brain
>>spin-rinsed!
>>
>>>
>>>Blessings to all,
>>>Judith in reverence
>>>
>>
>>Judith, it was a pleasure to read your response.
>>
>>Simon
>
>And so yours, Simon
>Judith heading out of her head into her paper studio
>>
>>_______________________________________________________________
>>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of PSYBER-L Digest - 30 Apr 1998 to 1 May 1998 (#1998-79)
>*************************************************************
>

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 2 May 1998 12:31:31 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: *IT*
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Dear all,

I have been, for a long time, disconnected from this place and wondering
why, waiting for a call to write, feeling no presence here, as if everyone
was away, nobody was home, psyche and soul had fled.  I am learning that
part of this is me, that I hold back and wait, and watch and listen, and
resonate in silence until the words within me demand to be written -- part
of it is the stronger call of rl, chaotic and in flux and filled with good
and bad places to be -- and part of it comes from the shifting flow of the
interactions here and my confusion about what this place is meant to be,
and what I want it to be, and why I stay.  The collision with void
disturbed me more than I knew at the time, and the unresolved conflict that
resulted in Wilbur's departure, and that of Dolores and Is'e.  I felt
uneasy about your announced shift from facilitator to participant and
listowner, Walter, in light of the volatility of that process and the
paraylsis that seemed to come over the list in the aftermath.  I hoped for
serious dialogue about the issues Susan brought here concerning abusive
styles of interaction, and yet I myself did not contribute my thoughts or
my feelings, struggling to understand how much of my discomfort came from
my own fear of anger and how much was a choice to stay apart from a process
that spilled so much toxic energy.  Then I felt a loss of all energy here,
lost any sense of collective identity, and I withdrew emotionally, waiting,
mourning a little what seemed to be the death of a potential never fully
realized ...

Now comes a shift in the process yet again, and I respond, still not
knowing what it is I want from this place and this process ...

I never expressed the pleasure I felt at the return of Jim, and Dolores,
and Judith -- and Simon, who had been silent for so long.  I hope it is not
too late to do so now.  I have wished you well, Charles, as you crossed an
ocean and returned, and felt with you the loss of your godfather/mentor.  I
have wished for you, Robert, a journey from despair into hope and healing.
I was thrilled to hear of your marriage-to-be, Walter.  I hoped for posts
from Anita, and Susan.  I seek points of connection with those I do not
know, who do not know me.  I read all the words written here, and respond
within, but usually keep myself invisible, and it is not what I want for
myself.  A disconnected, distant presence gives me little but vicarious
experience of here, an illusion of involvement.  Little risk, yes (altho I
would find it difficult to define what risk it is I feel when I participate
here), but also little insight or growth  -- much like looking in the
window of a hothouse, smiling at the glorious profusion of blossoms and
being saddened by the empty patches of earth and the cluttered clumps of
weeds -- rather than walking in the fields, feeling the sunlight and rain
on my face, smelling the fruits and flowers, hearing the melodic call of
birds, singing back to them in their flight and their resting, sensing the
pulse of life as it ebbs and flows (vibrant and alive, even in the patches
of arid dirt and the tangled gordian knots of weeds).

I love the cerebral posts, the stretch of intellect, the sharing of
knowledge, the seeking for understanding and insight -- and I love the
emotional posts, the color and texture and poetry of inner life captured in
words on my screen that echo in my soul.

Right now, the words that speak to me most intimately are these:

DOLORES
>In such savage rejection after saying the three words that amount to the
>biggest lies in the universe for over a year, I feel so worthless, so plain
>just not good enough, so wormlike, so unworthy. I wasn't good enough. My
>love wasn't good enough, and Its killing me. And while I loved him, I felt
>so good, and I blossomed, and everything about me went and rose to sing
>hymns with angels and now I'm back in the bowels of hades, tormenting
>myself on my own pitchfork.

JUDITH
>sometime later you might want to look at what your
>soul is growing from this...

I want to say to you, Dolores, that I feel the pain in your words vibrate
in my bones, I have felt like that and it is a pain deeper than any other
(kin to the loss of a loved one to death, which is more final, but which
does not hold the personal sense of failure and deficiency).  The loss of a
love and a space to express loving -- like you, such a loss leaves me
feeling not only abandonned but rejected as unworthy, as unlovable.  I
challenge this in myself, but feel it still; it is a primal story that
lives in me, a raw wound that refuses to heal.  I know only that for my
soul to grow from such encounters with pain, I MUST NOT SHUT DOWN.  I must
feel it, sing it, scream it, weep it, stay with it, until the intensity
fades and I can look for meaning and try to learn yet again from the
lessons life and love have set before me.  The answer is within, I know --
nobody else has the power to define who I am or to make me whole -- and yet
the answer is not to live in empty isolation either, needing nothing,
trusting nobody, protecting myself from hurt by refusing to share myself
with others.  There is a balance here that I seek and find elusive, and it
helps to know that I am not alone in this.

It helps to know that I am not alone.

bright blessings to all,

Marie

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 2 May 1998 12:32:06 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Nancy's Engagement
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Nancy,

>Hello everyone.  I'm new.
>
>To Judith: Boy!  Have I been there (where you are now).  I guess the
>straw I clung to was: That which does not kill one, makes one stronger.
>But can one person's straw help another?  Not always, but sometime, or
>straws would not become bromides.>

Just to clear a bit of the fog up...ARe you thinking of my health
crisistumor experience or Delores' breakoff of a relationship...my
responses re: worthy opponent are in response to Delores asking for
assistance...


>To Simon: I liked what you said about dick heads/opponents.  I believe
>that to be true.  Sun and Moon both shine on the one lucky enough to have
>found a real-time opponent engaged and brave enough to stay the field.
>Yet I have a serious quibble within Judith's context.  A worthy opponent
>must stay the field so that both may strengthen their skills and burnish
>their metal.  When a real-time relationship ends, the opponent usually
>skips, slinks or otherwise gets hence.  Then one is left with only one's
>perceptions of that erstwhile opponent with whom to struggle.  Too often
>that means that one is back, before love's brilliance, struggling with
>one's own shadow.  what a letdown~  What a betrayal of one's hopes and
>expectations~  What a lose of faith in one's own 'real-time' perceptions.
> And the knowing that the suffering will not end in the foreseeable
>future (for in the lonely abyss we all become nearsighted.)

Just to clarify I have a different process, Nancy... in my process, I see
the worthy opponent as continuing in the luminosity of the aftermath...in
fact, tho Delores is having the immediate experience in relationship, I
have gotten a huge piece of soul growth holding the critical tension which
continued to feed my experience long after the person left my physical
space...his participation was part of a soul pattern (this life and before
it turned out) which when finally drawn out through a powerful metaphor,
brought the transformative shift...Though I have felt the intensity of the
pain, I live my life with the superordinate of learning which asks
questions about the experience and what we are bringing to each other to
assist our soul growth...and I continue to breath the pain in and out to
see what emerges...now this is because I see reality as a feedback into my
inner life where I have my stake planted...well, better quit here given my
intention to clarify ;-)

>To Judith again: My heart does out to you.
>        Hugs, Nancy
Tks, we can pass this along to Delores
Judith hoping to lift the fog ;_)
______________________________________________________
>>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 2 May 1998 23:17:33 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
In-Reply-To:  <354faf07.69703441@smtp.ihug.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>, on Sat, 2 May 1998 06:10:57
GMT you wrote:

>I don't think we can expect to see easy containment of the psyche
>here easily by *individual* effort alone, or without designing
>the spaces that enhance that.  We do OK here yet what are the
>next steps?  How to go on?
>
>> This seems important! Containment without a stage?
>> Or maybe you're just not seeing the stage.
>
>Well I can't see it.  Perhaps it can be there simply through the
>responses of others.  Imagine someone catharts, they say "You are
>all fucked!"  and a whole lot more attacking individuals etc, and
>*somehow* the people create a "space" where the catharsis is
>gently, creatively empathised, mirrored back.  We have a fire but
>not a bush fire, not a flame war.  Can we do that?  Would it be
>desirable?

Much of the discussion/yelling/whatever I was in before was essentially
ended by people telling me to shut up because what I said was painful to
them, and they didn't come here for that.  I don't mean this happens only
to me.  When someone else makes accusations, shows anger, or is "impolite"
they are similarly told to shut up.

So I don't think there is much interest in dealing with that side of
things.  It's not wanted here, and the list members find different ways of
discouraging it.  Some people complain, some people play victim and leap to
identify with and stand in for the bananabean so they can take everything
personally, some people play psychiatrist and diagnostician.

Some people just ignore it, Walter, as you well know.  What made you decide
to look at that aspect of this list now?

-JoAnne the unpopular

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 02:03:31 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
In-Reply-To:  <354c6f46.1810163@mail.qis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

JoAnne,

>So I don't think there is much interest in dealing with that side of
>things.

I know!  I know ... it is because "The shadow is that which we
don't want to be, don't want to know."  (paraphrased from
somewhere) That is its nature ... Let me quote a bit of Jung:

"The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole
ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow
without considerable moral effort. [wl note: he uses this word
*moral* in a jungian way, perhaps someone can say more?] To
become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of
the personality as present and real. This act is the essential
condition for self-knowledge, and it therefore, as a rule, meets
with considerable resistance.  Indeed, self-knowledge requires
much painstaking work extending over long periods."

From AION CW 9 II par. 14.


>It's not wanted here, and the list members find different ways of
>discouraging it.  Some people complain, some people play victim and leap to
>identify with and stand in for the bananabean so they can take everything
>personally, some people play psychiatrist and diagnostician.

Yes. I plead guilty to all! How to do it differently is what i
think Psyber-L is about.  Doing it differently.  I suggest if we
see a glimpse of it being done well then we name acknowledge and
thank whoever does it.  That we build up out common stock of
knowledge on these things ... in Psyber-L description it is
called "voice our learning".

>Some people just ignore it, Walter, as you well know.  What made you decide
>to look at that aspect of this list now?

Winston Churchill said of the US ... they usually get it right
after exhausting every other possibility.

I have never stopped looking at this aspect ... just have not
found a way to articulate it easily ... I think the current
discussion about moderation and how to create 'spaces" has opened
up a way of discussing it here that is a little removed from the
old hurts, perhaps a stepping stone?


Walter


___________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 02:03:35 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: PSYBER-L Digest - 30 Apr 1998 to 1 May 1998 (#1998-79)
In-Reply-To:  <19980502.043516.10350.0.mossy7@juno.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Nancy,

>Hello everyone.  I'm new.

Welcome and good on you for jumping right in.

> Sun and Moon both shine on the one lucky enough to have
> found a real-time opponent engaged and brave enough to stay the field.

This is pertinent to many threads here ... is there a time to
leave, withdraw?  When is enough enough.  When is the conflict
over, is there honour in retreat ... I recall giving up on my
(first <g>) marriage at a moment when someone asked:  Just how
much pain are you willing to feel?  I knew I'd had enough.

~~~

>        Off to investigate Dusty Miller before planting

???

~~~

>On Sat, 2 May 1998 00:22:22 -0400 Automatic digest processor
><LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM> writes:
>>There are 5 messages totaling 294 lines in this issue.


Nancy ... you get this list in "Digest" mode so when replying you
may need to cut and paste the Subject: line from a particular
post into the place where it says: Re: PSYBER-L Digest - 30 Apr
1998 to 1 May 1998 (#1998-79)at the top of your screen.

It is useful to use the *exact* subject line because then it
*threads* and people can view the discussion by thread.  I think
it is worth doing.  In the archives particularly, I find it
useful to print out a whole thread to read at times.
Unfortunately it sometimes misses posts by people who changed the
subject but not the intent of posting in that thread.

Good to have you on board and i hope this little bit of coaching
is OK!  It is not aimed at you exclusively many of us are still
learning the ropes!


Walter
___________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 02:03:37 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      People and Places  [Re: does the shadow have a silly season;
              events on jung-psych]
In-Reply-To:  <v03110704b170c190f1b9@[195.200.13.233]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Simon,

Aside:
I have changed the subject line to People and Places, was Re:
does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych. Notice
i have put People first! I have left the old title in brackets so
that those looking at this in times to come can make sense of it,
when someone replies just remove the brackets and we have a new
*thread*.

I am pleased you are continuing this discussion! It is very
relevant to me.

>But isn't it still about what we invest in those spaces? Emotionally,
>spiritually, whatever... The ritual space, the space of the tribal dance,
>the space of the 'theatre of battle', these are all spaces that we create
>and invest in, in some way...

As you say it is both.  I think i wanted to emphasise the *space
place* aspect because it is a little unfashionable ... in the
preparation for our marriage I keep hearing people say "You can
have exactly the sort of wedding you want." Some have suggested
we can leave out the legal bit. I think differently ... from
experience! I had no idea the first time around that so much
social constrict would come flying at me once married. Legal,
spiritual, social, personal ... I had a notion: "It is just a
piece of paper!" Now I want to manage these traditions as best i
can, use them, appreciate them, include experts who can ride the
waves with ease!  Hmmm the surfing analogy holds ... you cant
ride a wave any way you like ... there is one critical moment in
time/space where you can catch it.

>I like your notion of honouring a space. Is that what we do here, honour
>the listspace of psyber-l? I think so. Honour its intention, anyway, or
>your intention in creating it originally. I think Dolores honours it very
>much by posting with such burning honesty here.

Yes.

>And to answer my own question: I think it's both, in a process of
>feedback... Perhaps, the people are (in) the space! Or become the space...
>
>To echo Tetahiarohanui Mekahanuimemananui down through the list: 'If you
>should ask me, what is the most important thing in this world, I would
>answer, it is people, it is people, it is people.'

Yes.  The Maori people honour their ancestors ... whakapapa. They
also know a lot about place and space ... they have a spiritual
connection to the land and the traditions of the marae (meeting
house) are very important.  Hmmm I am not sure but I don't think
they have a separation between the audience and the stage. At
least not at the times i have been to a marae (rarely).  The form
of discussion is tightly structured and within that there is a
real free for all!

Tetahiarohanui ... please say more or correct me if I am wrong
here.

>>I don't think we can expect to see easy containment of the psyche
>>here easily by *individual* effort alone, or without designing
>>the spaces that enhance that.  We do OK here yet what are the
>>next steps?  How to go on?
>
>Back to the individual and community again.
>
>I had the image earlier today, perhaps a parody of civility, of a group of
>people sitting in a room talking about personal issues, but instead of
>getting angry, or crying, or laughing even, they simply said 'Now I feel
>angry.', 'Now I feel sad', 'Now I feel amused'.

Hee!

~~~

The Invisible Stage.
>re 'the stage', you say:
>>Well I can't see it.  Perhaps it can be there simply through the
>>responses of others.  Imagine someone catharts, they say "You are
>>all fucked!"  and a whole lot more attacking individuals etc, and
>>*somehow* the people create a "space" where the catharsis is
>>gently, creatively empathised, mirrored back.  We have a fire but
>>not a bush fire, not a flame war.  Can we do that?  Would it be
>>desirable?
>
>Yes. And I think you do see it.
>
>Didn't that fire-not-flame-war kind of happen with Void? I don't recall any
>particular eruption of flaming back...

In large part it did happen ... yet!  synchronistically marie
posts today how it hurt her more than she knew.  Now i am not
into smoothing it out, but it was no good really the way it went.
Perhaps the problem was that he could even get in here so easily?
That is a "space" way of looking at it ... though not quite
actually.  An option would be that potential subscribers go via
the List Owner and are asked to use real names, and express
something of their interest in being here ... and that i
introduce them after that.  That will not prevent anything but it
seems to fit with my notion of surfing these contours with
dexterity!  Charles does this on his list all the time and it
works well. I'd be interested on feed back to that idea.

>But what can you do if someone isn't even trying to be honest (with
>themselves as much as with anyone else)? In the end you have to let go of
>them, or be dragged down yourself...

As i was just saying to Nancy ... in a different thread ...
amazing really how we muse around an archetypal area.


>Actually, reading back over what you wrote, I am reminded that supervision
>(or perhaps, how to create an appropriate model of supervision) is a
>crucial issue for you in this space.

Yes.  I am doing more thinking about Psyber-L in other places ...
which is good for me.  A form of supervision.  We have a small
F2F group in Christchurch each with our own different interests
... that is good.

>>a stage provides an over view of life as does supervision.
>
>This intrigues me. For a start, because I don't quite understand it! Also,
>because our definition of 'stage'  in this space seems to be shifting...

Stepping back one pace from life ... having a meta look.

~~~

>>I simply have no wish to have the Shadow erupt without ... some
>>collaborative "supervision" of that.
>
>Collaborative supervision, yes. This has something to do with the 'new
>model' I mentioned earlier, and the shifting definition of 'stage'... Or
>maybe it's not a new model; I don't really have the background to assess
>that...
>
>At this moment I'm thinking of groupware, and recalling that one
>university-based groupware developer introduced anonymous conferencing into
>its package. The idea was to break down the formal and informal hierarchies
>within company meetings, to encourage a more dynamic interchange of ideas
>between the 'lower downs' and the 'higher ups'. I don't know if it worked,
>I just remember being fascinated that the idea of anonymity having value -
>something I associated with the 'underground' world of remailers and MOO
>social spaces - should be feeding into the corporate world.
>
>Not sure why I brought that up! Oh well, I'll let it float...

But it is interesting that i bought up the question of real names
before i read this!  I like real names in a forum like this but
there is no rule about it as I thought it would be unenforceable.
Now i think it would be easily enforceable!  I'm learning a lot.
Changes will happen ... they must.  The internet and the culture
are moving fast.

>Talking of identity issues, I'm reminded of when Wilbur's wife joined the
>list and spoke about taking on a male persona in AOL chat rooms. As I
>recall, that didn't make her very popular with some of the female list
>members here! Sometimes I wonder if that fed into Wilbur's subsequent
>cataclysm on the list...

Hmmm ... what was your sense of that?  I recently had a some
learning which i summed up as:

| It is worth being conscious that ideas mature to the
| point where they are in the public domain, but at
| some point they may be fused with a person. When we
| attack an idea, a person might feel attacked. The
| degree of attachment to an idea is worthy of
| discussion in its own right.

Even if there were no personal attacks someone can feel hurt!

~~~

>>On the Internet it can run
>>amok in many places as much as it likes.  It is actually a high
>>level sophisticated thing that is at the root of Psyber-L, to
>>allow the psyche to be here ... which includes:  ego, shadow,
>>among the archetypes.  In many successful "community" based
>>discourse it is simply not allowed, which is fair enough!  What a
>>difficult task I have set here in the ethos of this discussion
>>space!
>
>Yes, Walter. And I appreciate that you have stuck with this. You could have
>said 'Sod this, I'm not going to make any money here, time to close up
>shop', you could have turned your attention to paid one-on-one mail
>sessions, you could have decided to run a 'clinical' list instead. But you
>had some insights about psyberspace, and you've stuck with them through all
>the difficulties.

Thank you so much for that!  About the hardest thing I have ever
done! And the thanks goes both ways *you* and many others are
still here through thick and thin as well!

>>Enjoying the discussion ... hmmm do I need to go back to our
>>"unfinished" stuff from a week or so ago?

>I like the way you phrase this, Walter! It seems like you're asking me and
>asking yourself at the same time!
>
>Is it unfinished? I feel so. There are some things in there that are not
>done with, it seems to me. They're part of the emerging discussion here,
>but they haven't properly emerged! What do you feel?

In that conversation I think the ball is in my court and i will
get back to it.  Darn!  The weekend is almost over ...


Walter

___________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 02:03:41 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: *IT*
In-Reply-To:  <3.0.1.32.19980502123131.008ec86c@qed.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Marie,

Good to see you here so fully ... more later.

Walter

___________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 22:00:26 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Kennedy Levy <kennedy.levy@XTRA.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: *IT* -replies
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Delores

> . . . nothing ever came to me,
> that I didn't have to go looking for first. Nobody ever gave me anything,
I
> didn't first have to grab for with my own two hands.

> the more I learn the more questions I have, for I have
> given up being a fool by not asking, by not questioning, for risking to
> appear foolish, that is the ultimate foolishness. Its a fool that remains
> quiet, its never a foolish thing to ask about what you don't understand.
> Maybe if I hadn't kept quiet at school, I might have understood more
about
> maths now. That was foolishness.

> I am still foolish, but slightly wiser.

I think the *it* is inside us, though it may take outside people, places,
experiences to help us see.  And pleasure.  And pain.  Your words, to me,
show strength and determination and vulnerability that tells me you have
*it*.  Or a generous measure of *it*, anyway.

Just an observation.  And some best wishes.


Barry

____________________________________
Barry Kennedy<kennedy.levy@xtra.co.nz>

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 09:34:24 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: People and Places  [Re: does the shadow have a silly season;
              events on jung-psych]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Walter,

>Simon,
>
>Aside:
>I have changed the subject line to People and Places, was Re:
>does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych. Notice
>i have put People first! I have left the old title in brackets so
>that those looking at this in times to come can make sense of it,
>when someone replies just remove the brackets and we have a new
>*thread*.

Interesting how your shifting the subject line shifted my ability to
engage...as if the *space* opened and I entered...by your *naming* the
subject I am able to *claim*...hummmm...

Entering...Simon and your conversation
>
W>I am pleased you are continuing this discussion! It is very
>relevant to me.
>
S>>But isn't it still about what we invest in those spaces? Emotionally,
>>spiritually, whatever... The ritual space, the space of the tribal dance,
>>the space of the 'theatre of battle', these are all spaces that we create
>>and invest in, in some way...
>
W>As you say it is both.  I think i wanted to emphasise the *space
>place* aspect because it is a little unfashionable ... in the
>preparation for our marriage I keep hearing people say "You can
>have exactly the sort of wedding you want." Some have suggested
>we can leave out the legal bit. I think differently ... from
>experience! I had no idea the first time around that so much
>social constrict would come flying at me once married. Legal,
>spiritual, social, personal ... I had a notion: "It is just a
>piece of paper!" Now I want to manage these traditions as best i
>can, use them, appreciate them, include experts who can ride the
>waves with ease!  Hmmm the surfing analogy holds ... you cant
>ride a wave any way you like ... there is one critical moment in
>time/space where you can catch it.
>
S>>I like your notion of honouring a space. Is that what we do here, honour
>>the listspace of psyber-l? I think so. Honour its intention, anyway, or
>>your intention in creating it originally. I think Dolores honours it very
>>much by posting with such burning honesty here.
W>Yes.

I very much agree...it feels as if the *space* is continually asking
something of us here...I feel it as committment...Walter, as you speak of
the social constrict and your coming marriage, I can relate to this from
the aspect of what is being asked of me by those constructs which I have in
my life...currently I am engaged in learning about ritual and what that has
to do with my life...as it turns out *plenty*...in my view there are fields
of energy which surround these life engagements ie: marriage, the strange
attractor at work, and through one's engagement with the field there is a
resonance which attracts one's issues to look at as well as the depth of
committment...it is about the unseen and how this works IMO, and that
relates to here and the space you began and which has evolved...

I have felt a greater sense of connection to this space since returning
(and BTW I was taken out of the space by my mother board blowing up) and a
greater reverence to honoring you all here as well...as I am gleening from
bits of the conversation there was some rough waters...using your surfing
metaphor...I am unaware of these, however, it resonates in the space
through the people here...

>
>>And to answer my own question: I think it's both, in a process of
>>feedback... Perhaps, the people are (in) the space! Or become the space...
>>
>>To echo Tetahiarohanui Mekahanuimemananui down through the list: 'If you
>>should ask me, what is the most important thing in this world, I would
>>answer, it is people, it is people, it is people.'
>
>Yes.  The Maori people honour their ancestors ... whakapapa. They
>also know a lot about place and space ... they have a spiritual
>connection to the land and the traditions of the marae (meeting
>house) are very important.  Hmmm I am not sure but I don't think
>they have a separation between the audience and the stage. At
>least not at the times i have been to a marae (rarely).  The form
>of discussion is tightly structured and within that there is a
>real free for all!
>
>Tetahiarohanui ... please say more or correct me if I am wrong
>here.

Interesting for me that New Zealand is where this space was born...I have a
deep connection which plays out in fun ways...speaking of *people*...I will
be studying with Mark Lander a NZ papermaker in Wisconsin in June...he
makes giant pieces in his swimming pool!
>
>>>I don't think we can expect to see easy containment of the psyche
>>>here easily by *individual* effort alone, or without designing
>>>the spaces that enhance that.  We do OK here yet what are the
>>>next steps?  How to go on?
>>
>>Back to the individual and community again.
>>
>>I had the image earlier today, perhaps a parody of civility, of a group of
>>people sitting in a room talking about personal issues, but instead of
>>getting angry, or crying, or laughing even, they simply said 'Now I feel
>>angry.', 'Now I feel sad', 'Now I feel amused'.
>
>Hee!
>

Yes, I think this is very relenant...as you relate the Maori communities
social contruct, there is an agreed to form which I think is what we're
getting at here...that there is an evolving form here in cyberspace...when
exploring this space I see having to examine all the second attention
assumptions, bringing them into first attention to become aware of how
these now apply in this new space...Walter, I sense this is continually one
level of your engagement...and necessary it seems to me...I know one of the
assumptions that is always there for me is that this space is inhabited by
people from around the world, so I am careful to only make assumptions thru
my US eyes...

>The Invisible Stage.
>>re 'the stage', you say:
>>>Well I can't see it.  Perhaps it can be there simply through the
>>>responses of others.  Imagine someone catharts, they say "You are
>>>all fucked!"  and a whole lot more attacking individuals etc, and
>>>*somehow* the people create a "space" where the catharsis is
>>>gently, creatively empathised, mirrored back.  We have a fire but
>>>not a bush fire, not a flame war.  Can we do that?  Would it be
>>>desirable?
>>
>>Yes. And I think you do see it.
>>
>>Didn't that fire-not-flame-war kind of happen with Void? I don't recall any
>>particular eruption of flaming back...
>
>In large part it did happen ... yet!  synchronistically marie
>posts today how it hurt her more than she knew.  Now i am not
>into smoothing it out, but it was no good really the way it went.
>Perhaps the problem was that he could even get in here so easily?
>That is a "space" way of looking at it ... though not quite
>actually.  An option would be that potential subscribers go via
>the List Owner and are asked to use real names, and express
>something of their interest in being here ... and that i
>introduce them after that.  That will not prevent anything but it
>seems to fit with my notion of surfing these contours with
>dexterity!  Charles does this on his list all the time and it
>works well. I'd be interested on feed back to that idea.

Again, I was not present during this period...I am reminded of the early
years of my son's education in Montessori...each child had a rug and that
was their space and no other child was allowed to enter that space without
asking or being invited...this of course creates a respect for self and
boundaries...tho my experience here in cyberspace is this list and the
Strawbale list only, I come to each with a respect for what is here...seems
to me that is occuring here...
>
>>But what can you do if someone isn't even trying to be honest (with
>>themselves as much as with anyone else)? In the end you have to let go of
>>them, or be dragged down yourself...

I agree...and isn't that a proper application of individual boundaries
applied to the community?

>
>As i was just saying to Nancy ... in a different thread ...
>amazing really how we muse around an archetypal area.
>
>
>>Actually, reading back over what you wrote, I am reminded that supervision
>>(or perhaps, how to create an appropriate model of supervision) is a
>>crucial issue for you in this space.
>
>Yes.  I am doing more thinking about Psyber-L in other places ...
>which is good for me.  A form of supervision.  We have a small
>F2F group in Christchurch each with our own different interests
>... that is good.
>
>>>a stage provides an over view of life as does supervision.

>>
>>This intrigues me. For a start, because I don't quite understand it! Also,
>>because our definition of 'stage'  in this space seems to be shifting...
>
>Stepping back one pace from life ... having a meta look.
>
>~~~
>
>>>I simply have no wish to have the Shadow erupt without ... some
>>>collaborative "supervision" of that.
>>
>>Collaborative supervision, yes. This has something to do with the 'new
>>model' I mentioned earlier, and the shifting definition of 'stage'... Or
>>maybe it's not a new model; I don't really have the background to assess
>>that...
>>
>>At this moment I'm thinking of groupware, and recalling that one
>>university-based groupware developer introduced anonymous conferencing into
>>its package. The idea was to break down the formal and informal hierarchies
>>within company meetings, to encourage a more dynamic interchange of ideas
>>between the 'lower downs' and the 'higher ups'. I don't know if it worked,
>>I just remember being fascinated that the idea of anonymity having value -
>>something I associated with the 'underground' world of remailers and MOO
>>social spaces - should be feeding into the corporate world.
>>
>>Not sure why I brought that up! Oh well, I'll let it float...
>
>But it is interesting that i bought up the question of real names
>before i read this!  I like real names in a forum like this but
>there is no rule about it as I thought it would be unenforceable.
>Now i think it would be easily enforceable!  I'm learning a lot.
>Changes will happen ... they must.  The internet and the culture
>are moving fast.
>
>>Talking of identity issues, I'm reminded of when Wilbur's wife joined the
>>list and spoke about taking on a male persona in AOL chat rooms. As I
>>recall, that didn't make her very popular with some of the female list
>>members here! Sometimes I wonder if that fed into Wilbur's subsequent
>>cataclysm on the list...
>
>Hmmm ... what was your sense of that?  I recently had a some
>learning which i summed up as:
>
>| It is worth being conscious that ideas mature to the
>| point where they are in the public domain, but at
>| some point they may be fused with a person. When we
>| attack an idea, a person might feel attacked. The
>| degree of attachment to an idea is worthy of
>| discussion in its own right.
>
>Even if there were no personal attacks someone can feel hurt!
>
>~~~
>
>>>On the Internet it can run
>>>amok in many places as much as it likes.  It is actually a high
>>>level sophisticated thing that is at the root of Psyber-L, to
>>>allow the psyche to be here ... which includes:  ego, shadow,
>>>among the archetypes.  In many successful "community" based
>>>discourse it is simply not allowed, which is fair enough!  What a
>>>difficult task I have set here in the ethos of this discussion
>>>space!

Yes, Walter I am beginning to experience how you hold your task...and I'm
curious about an expectation of *allowing the psyche* to be here...isn't it
here always...are we in an iteration of bringing the whole self to
community, tho I guess my bias is that we bring it whether we acknowledge
it or not and then there are exercises in communication around *hidden
agendas*...in US business and academia there has been a norm around the
intellectual process and women here began bringing the sense of
relationship to the fore which churned the waters...maybe I am not
understanding...yes, it is difficult, but for me it is *real* and where
there is recognition of behaviors and a calling to accountability, the
shadow can't hide or at least gets out of the light...I am of the view that
it is a matter of shining the light on those who cannot see...which means I
invite the light to shine on those blind spots when I am not...
>>
>>Yes, Walter. And I appreciate that you have stuck with this. You could have
>>said 'Sod this, I'm not going to make any money here, time to close up
>>shop', you could have turned your attention to paid one-on-one mail
>>sessions, you could have decided to run a 'clinical' list instead. But you
>>had some insights about psyberspace, and you've stuck with them through all
>>the difficulties.
>
>Thank you so much for that!  About the hardest thing I have ever
>done! And the thanks goes both ways *you* and many others are
>still here through thick and thin as well!

Walter, And I am sensing stronger as a result of your and the others
committment...and I find it both easier and more difficult to be here on
reentry, easier because of the sense of community I recognize and harder
because you all have been thru the fire and I was not here...

Blessings,
Judith with best wishes for your marriage Walter

>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 09:52:18 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: *IT*
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Marie,
So much here for me to engage with you...always cutting to the chase as I
have experienced your interactions in the past...for me it is a sense of
integrity and I feel it in you as I read this and in this space with
others, it seems to be growing...evidentally less tolerant of
unmindfulness...and a sense of authenticity...I value these and continually
check to see where I may  be out of alignment within myself...

What is so powerful for me about what you have brought here is your sense
of reflection...however, in my work coaching people in transformation I am
struck by a lack of awareness of this as a process...here I experience a
great capacity for self reflection  modeled by Walter, and a comfortable
place for others as well...I am more and more aware of the impact when
individuals' life processes are unalighned...

Blessings,
Judith in gratefulness for the poetry each brings to this space
>Dear all,
>
>I have been, for a long time, disconnected from this place and wondering
>why, waiting for a call to write, feeling no presence here, as if everyone
>was away, nobody was home, psyche and soul had fled.  I am learning that
>part of this is me, that I hold back and wait, and watch and listen, and
>resonate in silence until the words within me demand to be written -- part
>of it is the stronger call of rl, chaotic and in flux and filled with good
>and bad places to be -- and part of it comes from the shifting flow of the
>interactions here and my confusion about what this place is meant to be,
>and what I want it to be, and why I stay.  The collision with void
>disturbed me more than I knew at the time, and the unresolved conflict that
>resulted in Wilbur's departure, and that of Dolores and Is'e.  I felt
>uneasy about your announced shift from facilitator to participant and
>listowner, Walter, in light of the volatility of that process and the
>paraylsis that seemed to come over the list in the aftermath.  I hoped for
>serious dialogue about the issues Susan brought here concerning abusive
>styles of interaction, and yet I myself did not contribute my thoughts or
>my feelings, struggling to understand how much of my discomfort came from
>my own fear of anger and how much was a choice to stay apart from a process
>that spilled so much toxic energy.  Then I felt a loss of all energy here,
>lost any sense of collective identity, and I withdrew emotionally, waiting,
>mourning a little what seemed to be the death of a potential never fully
>realized ...
>
>Now comes a shift in the process yet again, and I respond, still not
>knowing what it is I want from this place and this process ...
>
>I never expressed the pleasure I felt at the return of Jim, and Dolores,
>and Judith -- and Simon, who had been silent for so long.  I hope it is not
>too late to do so now.  I have wished you well, Charles, as you crossed an
>ocean and returned, and felt with you the loss of your godfather/mentor.  I
>have wished for you, Robert, a journey from despair into hope and healing.
>I was thrilled to hear of your marriage-to-be, Walter.  I hoped for posts
>from Anita, and Susan.  I seek points of connection with those I do not
>know, who do not know me.  I read all the words written here, and respond
>within, but usually keep myself invisible, and it is not what I want for
>myself.  A disconnected, distant presence gives me little but vicarious
>experience of here, an illusion of involvement.  Little risk, yes (altho I
>would find it difficult to define what risk it is I feel when I participate
>here), but also little insight or growth  -- much like looking in the
>window of a hothouse, smiling at the glorious profusion of blossoms and
>being saddened by the empty patches of earth and the cluttered clumps of
>weeds -- rather than walking in the fields, feeling the sunlight and rain
>on my face, smelling the fruits and flowers, hearing the melodic call of
>birds, singing back to them in their flight and their resting, sensing the
>pulse of life as it ebbs and flows (vibrant and alive, even in the patches
>of arid dirt and the tangled gordian knots of weeds).
>
>I love the cerebral posts, the stretch of intellect, the sharing of
>knowledge, the seeking for understanding and insight -- and I love the
>emotional posts, the color and texture and poetry of inner life captured in
>words on my screen that echo in my soul.
>
>Right now, the words that speak to me most intimately are these:
>
>DOLORES
>>In such savage rejection after saying the three words that amount to the
>>biggest lies in the universe for over a year, I feel so worthless, so plain
>>just not good enough, so wormlike, so unworthy. I wasn't good enough. My
>>love wasn't good enough, and Its killing me. And while I loved him, I felt
>>so good, and I blossomed, and everything about me went and rose to sing
>>hymns with angels and now I'm back in the bowels of hades, tormenting
>>myself on my own pitchfork.
>
>JUDITH
>>sometime later you might want to look at what your
>>soul is growing from this...
>
>I want to say to you, Dolores, that I feel the pain in your words vibrate
>in my bones, I have felt like that and it is a pain deeper than any other
>(kin to the loss of a loved one to death, which is more final, but which
>does not hold the personal sense of failure and deficiency).  The loss of a
>love and a space to express loving -- like you, such a loss leaves me
>feeling not only abandonned but rejected as unworthy, as unlovable.  I
>challenge this in myself, but feel it still; it is a primal story that
>lives in me, a raw wound that refuses to heal.  I know only that for my
>soul to grow from such encounters with pain, I MUST NOT SHUT DOWN.  I must
>feel it, sing it, scream it, weep it, stay with it, until the intensity
>fades and I can look for meaning and try to learn yet again from the
>lessons life and love have set before me.  The answer is within, I know --
>nobody else has the power to define who I am or to make me whole -- and yet
>the answer is not to live in empty isolation either, needing nothing,
>trusting nobody, protecting myself from hurt by refusing to share myself
>with others.  There is a balance here that I seek and find elusive, and it
>helps to know that I am not alone in this.
>
>It helps to know that I am not alone.
>
>bright blessings to all,
>
>Marie
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 10:06:36 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

JoAnn,

Wow! I was off the list during whatever it was happened so I don't have the
proper context, certainly not the "facts" ;)
In any event I am really interested in how you view engagement with
people...I notice that I have a sense of aesthic around engagement...tho
I'm no shrinking violet, I'm not an inyourface, somewhere between those
extremes on the continum...

I have no sense of your sense of JoAnn the unpopular but I particularlly
relate to what you said to Walter here...
<Much of the discussion/yelling/whatever I was in before was essentially
>ended by people telling me to shut up because what I said was painful to
>them, and they didn't come here for that.  I don't mean this happens only
>to me.  When someone else makes accusations, shows anger, or is "impolite"
>they are similarly told to shut up.>

Resonates to my childhood dinner table and the *if you can't say something
nice, don't say anything* which only led to me feeling worse...I also grew
up with my father yelling every morning at my mother, so yellinganger use
to trigger me and I would wilt...I've learned and am growing out of this
and tho I don't experience much anger-my trauma trance is *poor me*-I do
notice my sense of aesthic getting rattled by some forms of
confrontation...but I am very aware that some people in my life love to mix
it up...I'm just not very good at it...so I'm wondering what works for
you...

Thanks,
Judith


>Hello Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>, on Sat, 2 May 1998 06:10:57
>GMT you wrote:
>
>>I don't think we can expect to see easy containment of the psyche
>>here easily by *individual* effort alone, or without designing
>>the spaces that enhance that.  We do OK here yet what are the
>>next steps?  How to go on?
>>
>>> This seems important! Containment without a stage?
>>> Or maybe you're just not seeing the stage.
>>
>>Well I can't see it.  Perhaps it can be there simply through the
>>responses of others.  Imagine someone catharts, they say "You are
>>all fucked!"  and a whole lot more attacking individuals etc, and
>>*somehow* the people create a "space" where the catharsis is
>>gently, creatively empathised, mirrored back.  We have a fire but
>>not a bush fire, not a flame war.  Can we do that?  Would it be
>>desirable?
>
>Much of the discussion/yelling/whatever I was in before was essentially
>ended by people telling me to shut up because what I said was painful to
>them, and they didn't come here for that.  I don't mean this happens only
>to me.  When someone else makes accusations, shows anger, or is "impolite"
>they are similarly told to shut up.
>
>So I don't think there is much interest in dealing with that side of
>things.  It's not wanted here, and the list members find different ways of
>discouraging it.  Some people complain, some people play victim and leap to
>identify with and stand in for the bananabean so they can take everything
>personally, some people play psychiatrist and diagnostician.
>
>Some people just ignore it, Walter, as you well know.  What made you decide
>to look at that aspect of this list now?
>
>-JoAnne the unpopular
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 02:19:23 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <v01550100b171dc805e46@[207.54.160.201]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Judith,

Interesting comments Judith, I 'll make a couple of responses.

> Yes, Walter I am beginning to experience how you hold your
task...and I'm
> curious about an expectation of *allowing the psyche* to be
here...isn't it
> here always...

Of course, but it is not always seen.  That is fine ... some places
have other purposes.  The very naming of the invisible forces is to
attend to the psyche, whatever it is really.  How else is it named
other than through metaphor.  The very naming changes it. Allowing the
psyche is not the same as allowing abuse, that is clear.  Do we ever
*allow* the psyche?  We do create the inclination to let it be seen
... even a word like "Psyber-L" moves us in a certain direction.

~~~

> Walter, And I am sensing stronger as a result of your and the others
> committment...and I find it both easier and more difficult to be
here on
> reentry, easier because of the sense of community I recognize and
harder
> because you all have been thru the fire and I was not here...

Sounds like you went through one of your own!  These things do make us
stronger & wiser ...


Walter

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 11:44:02 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <v01550100b171dc805e46@[207.54.160.201]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 09:34 AM 5/3/98 -0400, you wrote:

>>Aside:
>>I have changed the subject line to People and Places,

>Interesting how your shifting the subject line shifted my ability to
>engage...as if the *space* opened and I entered...by your *naming* the
>subject I am able to *claim*...hummmm...
>
>Entering...Simon and your conversation

Entering...with Simon and Walter and Judith

Interesting, yes -- I have been engaging in this conversation in my head
for hours, and finally came here to see if words came, and your words came,
and give me an entry into this thread!  It is relevant to me, and also a
place to direct my energy, away from the rl turmoil swirling uselessly
inside my head (a crisis involving my daughter, who is far from me, trying
desperately, heartbroken, to come home).

>I very much agree...it feels as if the *space* is continually asking
>something of us here...I feel it as committment...

Commitment, yes, that fits -- but to what?  Stay the course?  Feed the
process?  Reveal the depths of self?  Create community?  In order to
commit, there must be clarity about what it is to which the commitment is
made, yes?  Do we have that here?  Or is that the real purpose of this
thread, to articulate what the space is asking of us and define the
commitment that must be made in order to answer that asking?

in my view there are fields
>of energy which surround these life engagements ie: marriage, the strange
>attractor at work, and through one's engagement with the field there is a
>resonance which attracts one's issues to look at as well as the depth of
>committment...it is about the unseen and how this works IMO, and that
>relates to here and the space you began and which has evolved...

fields of energy -- strange attractors and resonance -- linked to our own
issues and to depth of commitment -- the unseen in this evolving space --
this is beginning to cohere for me, to name my experience (or at least my
yearning).  I am always aware of the "feel" of this space, the energy, and
of the threads which attract and those which repell as the inner depths are
touched and raw nerves jangle and invisible angels and demons drive us
relentlessly into response.  Or silence, which also speaks.

>I have felt a greater sense of connection to this space since returning
>(and BTW I was taken out of the space by my mother board blowing up) and a
>greater reverence to honoring you all here as well...as I am gleening from
>bits of the conversation there was some rough waters...using your surfing
>metaphor...I am unaware of these, however, it resonates in the space
>through the people here...

I have been here throughout the rough waters, was the focus of one stretch
(at least initially), and it is difficult to imagine how it feels to come
into the aftermath.  Do you know what it is that connects you more strongly
now?  Is it in you, or does it come in response to what is written?  What
is your sense of where this space has evolved to now, after a long time
away?  My perspective is colored by my presence here, and I would truly
like to know what your perception is.

I know that I feel more connected when I am actively writing ...

>>>>I don't think we can expect to see easy containment of the psyche
>>>>here easily by *individual* effort alone, or without designing
>>>>the spaces that enhance that.  We do OK here yet what are the
>>>>next steps?  How to go on?
>>>
>>>Back to the individual and community again.

The crux of the issue, yes?  Community IS individuals, joined together in
some way, for some purpose.  Here, as I understand it, the stated purpose
of this community is experential learning about depth psychology in
cyberspace, and that opens many questions for me.  How to invite experience
that opens the depths of psyche?  How to protect self and others as these
often fragile and vulnerable spaces within are revealed without?  How to
voice the learning without becoming disconnected from the experience?  A
matter of balance, of interplay, of flow from within to without?  The
design of spaces that enhance the containment of psyche (I don't believe
"easy" is attainable, at least not easily!) -- does this mandate what Simon
referred to as "ground rules?"  I do not like the image of a space
constricted by a list of laws and rules, some collection of "the ten
commandments" of proper deportment --  yet voluntary commitment to ground
rules for a collective purpose feels good, even necessary.

>>>I had the image earlier today, perhaps a parody of civility, of a group of
>>>people sitting in a room talking about personal issues, but instead of
>>>getting angry, or crying, or laughing even, they simply said 'Now I feel
>>>angry.', 'Now I feel sad', 'Now I feel amused'.
>>
>>Hee!

This is funny!  And an extreme that illuminates an issue.  There are many
ways to express emotion, with depth and color and full range of intensity
-- along a continuum from sole focus on self to sole focus on other -- I
suppose I am thinking of the difference between ownership and blame -- it
is not always easily discerned.  Interactions are -- interactive!  How to
express hurt or anger with another without it becoming a personal attack?
Honest expression of feeling, without assuming the intent of the other?
This only works, I think, when all involved are committed to looking at
their own part rather than reacting blindly and striking out in response.
Namecalling, labelling, diagnosing, attributing intent or character calls
forth defensiveness or provokes attack in return, IMO -- or shuts down
engagement entirely.

when
>exploring this space I see having to examine all the second attention
>assumptions, bringing them into first attention to become aware of how
>these now apply in this new space...Walter, I sense this is continually one
>level of your engagement...and necessary it seems to me...I know one of the
>assumptions that is always there for me is that this space is inhabited by
>people from around the world, so I am careful to only make assumptions thru
>my US eyes...

I like this; awareness of the assumptions we bring, the lens through which
we see, is vitally important.

>>>Didn't that fire-not-flame-war kind of happen with Void? I don't recall any
>>>particular eruption of flaming back...
>>
>>In large part it did happen ... yet!  synchronistically marie
>>posts today how it hurt her more than she knew.  Now i am not
>>into smoothing it out, but it was no good really the way it went.

I felt synchroistic myself, reading Simon's comment after writing my own.
Hurt does not quite fit, tho.  I felt repelled and inhibited by that
encounter, more than hurt.  The memory of some of his words makes me cringe
even now -- his accusation that we were involved in stroking each other to
satisfaction here -- his claim to have dragged me out the pit by my hair
when I wrote a post he liked  -- there was no good way to interact with
him, for me.  And I agree that "it was no good really the way it went" --
it stopped, but it was not resolved, and it left me feeling reluctant to
expose myself to that kind of "attack" again.  There are many places in my
life where I have to deal with people like that, where I have no choice,
and deal with it I do -- but here I have a choice, and that is not what I
come here for, and it is destructive to what I come here for.  The question
arises again -- what are we here for?  If we allow all possible process to
erupt as it may, we close off what else might be.  That is choice, with a
loss of possibility either way.

>>Perhaps the problem was that he could even get in here so easily?
>>That is a "space" way of looking at it ... though not quite
>>actually.  An option would be that potential subscribers go via
>>the List Owner and are asked to use real names, and express
>>something of their interest in being here ... and that i
>>introduce them after that.  That will not prevent anything but it
>>seems to fit with my notion of surfing these contours with
>>dexterity!  Charles does this on his list all the time and it
>>works well. I'd be interested on feed back to that idea.

Would preliminary dialogue really prevent that?  Only if the potential
subscriber was honest (which you acknowledge).  It could help clarify the
parameters of this process, and determine if the list is a good fit for a
potential subscriber -- if there is a clear set of parameters to convey!  I
think we are struggling toward that in this dialogue.

>Again, I was not present during this period...I am reminded of the early
>years of my son's education in Montessori...each child had a rug and that
>was their space and no other child was allowed to enter that space without
>asking or being invited...this of course creates a respect for self and
>boundaries...

I wanted to repeat this.  A respect for self and boundaries.

>>>But what can you do if someone isn't even trying to be honest (with
>>>themselves as much as with anyone else)? In the end you have to let go of
>>>them, or be dragged down yourself...
>
>I agree...and isn't that a proper application of individual boundaries
>applied to the community?

Yes -- and if those who commit to honesty (with self and others) keep
having to let go, to retreat, in order to avoid being dragged down, then
who is left?  And what purpose has been served?

>>>This intrigues me. For a start, because I don't quite understand it! Also,
>>>because our definition of 'stage'  in this space seems to be shifting...
>>
>>Stepping back one pace from life ... having a meta look.

The flow between experience and reflection/learning that I spoke of before.
 Hard to do!

>>>>I simply have no wish to have the Shadow erupt without ... some
>>>>collaborative "supervision" of that.

Collaborative supervision?  Again, doesn't this require collective
commitment to purpose and parameters?

>>| It is worth being conscious that ideas mature to the
>>| point where they are in the public domain, but at
>>| some point they may be fused with a person. When we
>>| attack an idea, a person might feel attacked. The
>>| degree of attachment to an idea is worthy of
>>| discussion in its own right.
>>
>>Even if there were no personal attacks someone can feel hurt!

Yes, but inadvertant hurt of this nature is less devastating than direct
personal denigration, I think, and it can be dealt with constructively if
there is mutual sensitivity to the personal feelings of all involved in
conversation about ideas.  An attitude of inquiry rather than advocacy
(comes from learning organization theory) -- seeking to understand the
perspective of another, and to clarify the perspective of self,
reciprocally, without judgment or condemnation.  This does not mean
abolishing disagreement or even imply a necessity to change perspective,
just to be open to other ways of sensemaking, and to respect them.

>>>>On the Internet it can run
>>>>amok in many places as much as it likes.  It is actually a high
>>>>level sophisticated thing that is at the root of Psyber-L, to
>>>>allow the psyche to be here ... which includes:  ego, shadow,
>>>>among the archetypes.  In many successful "community" based
>>>>discourse it is simply not allowed, which is fair enough!  What a
>>>>difficult task I have set here in the ethos of this discussion
>>>>space!
>
>Yes, Walter I am beginning to experience how you hold your task...and I'm
>curious about an expectation of *allowing the psyche* to be here...isn't it
>here always...are we in an iteration of bringing the whole self to
>community, tho I guess my bias is that we bring it whether we acknowledge
>it or not and then there are exercises in communication around *hidden
>agendas*...in US business and academia there has been a norm around the
>intellectual process and women here began bringing the sense of
>relationship to the fore which churned the waters...maybe I am not
>understanding...yes, it is difficult, but for me it is *real* and where
>there is recognition of behaviors and a calling to accountability, the
>shadow can't hide or at least gets out of the light...I am of the view that
>it is a matter of shining the light on those who cannot see...which means I
>invite the light to shine on those blind spots when I am not...

Difficult indeed.  I like the image of shining light into the dark spaces,
Judith, of illuminating blind spots.  Yet I am wary of being one who
decides that another has a blind spot, of assuming responsibility for
bringing light where I think it is needed -- personally, I am more
comfortable staying focused on my own experience, and sharing it, with the
hope that others find resonance and insight within their own search.

>>>Yes, Walter. And I appreciate that you have stuck with this. You could have
>>>said 'Sod this, I'm not going to make any money here, time to close up
>>>shop', you could have turned your attention to paid one-on-one mail
>>>sessions, you could have decided to run a 'clinical' list instead. But you
>>>had some insights about psyberspace, and you've stuck with them through all
>>>the difficulties.
>>
>>Thank you so much for that!  About the hardest thing I have ever
>>done! And the thanks goes both ways *you* and many others are
>>still here through thick and thin as well!
>
>Walter, And I am sensing stronger as a result of your and the others
>committment...and I find it both easier and more difficult to be here on
>reentry, easier because of the sense of community I recognize and harder
>because you all have been thru the fire and I was not here...

Staying the course, going through the fire, forging community -- and how to
include newcomers, or those who return, without a total disruption of process
-- or having an "inner circle" with a bemused group of outsiders trying to
find a way to belong -- core issues, I believe, and not easily resolved.
Hopefully, this process of naming the issues is a step in that direction.

Welcome back, Judith!  Thank you for inspiring me to jump in here -- and
thank you both, Walter and Simon, for birthing this thread.

Marie

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 16:10:18 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
In-Reply-To:  <v01550102b171ee6091a5@[207.54.160.50]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>, on Sun, 3 May 1998 10:06:36 -0400
you wrote:

>JoAnn,
>
>Wow! I was off the list during whatever it was happened so I don't have the
>proper context, certainly not the "facts" ;)

I don't know if anyone does!  But suffice it to say that there were some
differences of opinion on what the facts were and are.

>In any event I am really interested in how you view engagement with
>people...I notice that I have a sense of aesthic around engagement...tho
>I'm no shrinking violet, I'm not an inyourface, somewhere between those
>extremes on the continum...

I tend to look for inconsistencies, things that don't make sense, things
that don't fit the pattern, and when I want to know, I ask.  I sometimes
don't believe what people say, either; another impoliteness, but it seems
necessary.

It's not infallible, but it's worked enough times to make me use this
approach when there's something I want to know.  Usually I'm not
disappointed, though often enough it's not because someone gave me an
answer, it's because they refuse to, that gives me my answer.

When people seem consistent, when they respond to my questions openly and
honestly, I trust them.  When they don't I become suspicious.  Perhaps this
is shortchanging people who are naturally reticent, but those people at
least usually are consistent if not "wide-open."  I can be patient if
necessary, observant, if the person seems genuine but shy.  I am much less
patient with people who seem to me to be obviously lying or covering up
something.

>I have no sense of your sense of JoAnn the unpopular but I particularlly
>relate to what you said to Walter here...
><Much of the discussion/yelling/whatever I was in before was essentially
>>ended by people telling me to shut up because what I said was painful to
>>them, and they didn't come here for that.  I don't mean this happens only
>>to me.  When someone else makes accusations, shows anger, or is "impolite"
>>they are similarly told to shut up.>
>
>Resonates to my childhood dinner table and the *if you can't say something
>nice, don't say anything* which only led to me feeling worse...

Hiding the negative feelings doesn't make them go away.  I think this is my
reason for asking the questions if things smell fishy -- those questions
don't go away, and the smell sometimes gets stronger.

>I also grew
>up with my father yelling every morning at my mother, so yellinganger use
>to trigger me and I would wilt...I've learned and am growing out of this
>and tho I don't experience much anger-my trauma trance is *poor me*-I do
>notice my sense of aesthic getting rattled by some forms of
>confrontation...but I am very aware that some people in my life love to mix
>it up...I'm just not very good at it...so I'm wondering what works for
>you...

I didn't have that kind of family, there was a fair amount of questioning
and saying things allowed, though the niceness was supposed to be there
when company was present.  My companion/boyfriend/whatever had a mother
that yelled, though, and he seems to have that "trauma trance" too that you
describe.  Can you tell me more about "trauma trance," it's a phrase I'm
not familiar with?

>Thanks,

Thank you, Judith, for asking.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 16:10:21 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
In-Reply-To:  <3558b9bf.137994198@smtp.xtra.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>, on Sun, 3 May 1998 02:03:31
GMT you wrote:

>JoAnne,
>
>>So I don't think there is much interest in dealing with that side of
>>things.
>
>I know!  I know ... it is because "The shadow is that which we
>don't want to be, don't want to know."  (paraphrased from
>somewhere) That is its nature ... Let me quote a bit of Jung:
>
>"The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole
>ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow
>without considerable moral effort. [wl note: he uses this word
>*moral* in a jungian way, perhaps someone can say more?] To
>become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of
>the personality as present and real. This act is the essential
>condition for self-knowledge, and it therefore, as a rule, meets
>with considerable resistance.  Indeed, self-knowledge requires
>much painstaking work extending over long periods."
>
>>From AION CW 9 II par. 14.
>
>
>>It's not wanted here, and the list members find different ways of
>>discouraging it.  Some people complain, some people play victim and leap to
>>identify with and stand in for the bananabean so they can take everything
>>personally, some people play psychiatrist and diagnostician.
>
>Yes. I plead guilty to all!

I'm sure I've done the same things too.

>How to do it differently is what i
>think Psyber-L is about.  Doing it differently.  I suggest if we
>see a glimpse of it being done well then we name acknowledge and
>thank whoever does it.  That we build up out common stock of
>knowledge on these things ... in Psyber-L description it is
>called "voice our learning".

That sounds like a wonderful idea.  Praising the expression of the shadow
when it's done right sounds more useful than just trying to smash it under
a rock.  Perhaps some very basic operant conditioning(!!!) can get the
shadow out from under.

>>Some people just ignore it, Walter, as you well know.  What made you decide
>>to look at that aspect of this list now?
>
>Winston Churchill said of the US ... they usually get it right
>after exhausting every other possibility.

I think that's true of many of us, including me.

>I have never stopped looking at this aspect ... just have not
>found a way to articulate it easily ... I think the current
>discussion about moderation and how to create 'spaces" has opened
>up a way of discussing it here that is a little removed from the
>old hurts, perhaps a stepping stone?

I hope so.  Should we have a "test shadow"?  Sounds funny.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 20:37:17 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <355ac1eb.140086386@smtp.xtra.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Simon,
>
>Aside:
>I have changed the subject line to People and Places, was Re:
>does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych. Notice
>i have put People first! I have left the old title in brackets so
>that those looking at this in times to come can make sense of it,
>when someone replies just remove the brackets and we have a new
>*thread*.

Done! Yes, I like that touch of linking the threads. Not only the practical
aspect, but the act of acknowledgement embedded in that linking, the
respecting of origins. Jung-psych splits apart and look what happens here!

>I am pleased you are continuing this discussion! It is very
>relevant to me.

We are in a good 'place' then!

>As you say it is both.  I think i wanted to emphasise the *space
>place* aspect because it is a little unfashionable ... in the
>preparation for our marriage I keep hearing people say "You can
>have exactly the sort of wedding you want." Some have suggested
>we can leave out the legal bit. I think differently ... from
>experience! I had no idea the first time around that so much
>social constrict would come flying at me once married. Legal,
>spiritual, social, personal ... I had a notion: "It is just a
>piece of paper!" Now I want to manage these traditions as best i
>can, use them, appreciate them, include experts who can ride the
>waves with ease!

What I hear you saying is 'There are all these other things that come into
play and it's as well to know about them (beforehand).'

>Hmmm the surfing analogy holds ... you cant
>ride a wave any way you like ... there is one critical moment in
>time/space where you can catch it.

And if you're not ready you can just wait for the next wave... watch others
surfing, learn from them, think about how you might do it differently.
Preparation! And when the time feels right... jump on in and get yourself
wet! You still may crash and drown, of course. On the other hand, you may
have found a better way to catch - and stay with - the wave...

>Yes.  The Maori people honour their ancestors ... whakapapa. They
>also know a lot about place and space ... they have a spiritual
>connection to the land and the traditions of the marae (meeting
>house) are very important.  Hmmm I am not sure but I don't think
>they have a separation between the audience and the stage. At
>least not at the times i have been to a marae (rarely).  The form
>of discussion is tightly structured and within that there is a
>real free for all!
>
>Tetahiarohanui ... please say more or correct me if I am wrong
>here.

I would like to hear more about this, too.

>>Back to the individual and community again.
>>
>>I had the image earlier today, perhaps a parody of civility, of a group of
>>people sitting in a room talking about personal issues, but instead of
>>getting angry, or crying, or laughing even, they simply said 'Now I feel
>>angry.', 'Now I feel sad', 'Now I feel amused'.
>
>Hee!
>

Hee!? I'm not sure what place you're at with this...

>The Invisible Stage.

Yes, maybe.

>>Didn't that fire-not-flame-war kind of happen with Void? I don't recall any
>>particular eruption of flaming back...
>
>In large part it did happen ... yet!  synchronistically marie
>posts today how it hurt her more than she knew.

When I think of Void's rantings I think of Munch's 'Scream' painting...
also of a black hole, sucking in everything within its reach into darkness
and invisibility. I guess his name was well chosen. But how sad... And the
greatest sadness is when someone can't see their own situation, when
they're invisible to themselves.

Marie, I am glad you have posted here again. You speak with a quiet
honesty. How could that have prevailed against Void's scream? I don't
know... There must be a way. But...

>Now i am not
>into smoothing it out, but it was no good really the way it went.
>Perhaps the problem was that he could even get in here so easily?
>That is a "space" way of looking at it ... though not quite
>actually.

Perhaps the strength of this place is that people can get in so easily...

>An option would be that potential subscribers go via
>the List Owner and are asked to use real names, and express
>something of their interest in being here ... and that i
>introduce them after that.  That will not prevent anything but it
>seems to fit with my notion of surfing these contours with
>dexterity!  Charles does this on his list all the time and it
>works well. I'd be interested on feed back to that idea.

It seems better that people should be allowed to wander into the grounds,
feel their own way around ... No need for a security guard, or even a
gatekeeper. This isn't a walled-in enclave, I hope, more an open park
(another metaphor or two!). An 'entry approval' process in a space such as
this would change its nature, and not for the better, I think. Same goes
for the nature of your engagement with this space, Walter (and already
*that* is difficult enough, right?).

>>But what can you do if someone isn't even trying to be honest (with
>>themselves as much as with anyone else)? In the end you have to let go of
>>them, or be dragged down yourself...
>
>As i was just saying to Nancy ... in a different thread ...
>amazing really how we muse around an archetypal area.

Yes, it is very much 'in the air', and if I might quote from that post
(sorry if this plays havoc with your threading, Walter!):

(Nancy, then Walter:)
>> Sun and Moon both shine on the one lucky enough to have
>> found a real-time opponent engaged and brave enough to stay the field.
>
>This is pertinent to many threads here ... is there a time to
>leave, withdraw?  When is enough enough.  When is the conflict
>over, is there honour in retreat ... I recall giving up on my
>(first <g>) marriage at a moment when someone asked:  Just how
>much pain are you willing to feel?  I knew I'd had enough.

The right time is any time before it's too late.

>>>a stage provides an over view of life as does supervision.
>>
>>This intrigues me. For a start, because I don't quite understand it! Also,
>>because our definition of 'stage'  in this space seems to be shifting...
>
>Stepping back one pace from life ... having a meta look.

Just earlier today I was re-reading one of Robert's posts, where he talks
about the relationship of his Jung list to Psyber-l, and I was thinking
that Psyber-l is really a meta list. Now you bring up that word here!
Again, it's 'in the air', perhaps...

>But it is interesting that i bought up the question of real names
>before i read this!  I like real names in a forum like this but
>there is no rule about it as I thought it would be unenforceable.
>Now i think it would be easily enforceable!  I'm learning a lot.
>Changes will happen ... they must.  The internet and the culture
>are moving fast.

I don't believe that anonymity has to be equated with irresponsibility.

>>Talking of identity issues, I'm reminded of when Wilbur's wife joined the
>>list and spoke about taking on a male persona in AOL chat rooms. As I
>>recall, that didn't make her very popular with some of the female list
>>members here! Sometimes I wonder if that fed into Wilbur's subsequent
>>cataclysm on the list...
>
>Hmmm ... what was your sense of that?

My sense of it was that there was disapproval, an introduction of a kind of
'gender fundamentalism', and inferences, at least, of dishonesty. I felt
the list both narrowed and polarised as a result (a strange contortion, I
know!).

>I recently had a some
>learning which i summed up as:
>
>| It is worth being conscious that ideas mature to the
>| point where they are in the public domain, but at
>| some point they may be fused with a person. When we
>| attack an idea, a person might feel attacked. The
>| degree of attachment to an idea is worthy of
>| discussion in its own right.
>
>Even if there were no personal attacks someone can feel hurt!

This is a good point or two, Walter. But also the person can be attacked
instead of the idea, and perhaps under the guise of attacking the idea.
It's good to be alert to the nuances of expression here!

>In that conversation I think the ball is in my court and i will
>get back to it.  Darn!  The weekend is almost over ...
>
>
>Walter

The ball is in your court, Walter, but feel free to catch the wave whenever
you're ready!

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 17:19:21 EDT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JGerh50699 <JGerh50699@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Conundrums
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Some thoughts some recent posts have inspired.

Robert, on looking within:

Jesus said the Kingdom of Heaven is within.  Unfortunately, this truth has
been lost by most versions of Western Christianity, especially Protestantism,
which is why many Christian mystics study Buddhism and Jungian Psychology.

Judith, on unity:

The Lakotas (Sioux), a Native American tribe, have a saying: "MITAKUYE OYASIN"
which is translated as "We are all related."  In the We, the Lakota included
all of creation, people, animals, birds, fish, reptiles, plants, trees, rocks,
water, weather, etc.

Simon, on sinning:

The Greek word in the Bible translated as "sin" came from archery.  It was
used when the archer missed the bullseye.  The meaning is to miss the mark.

To All on Blessing my Heart:

Everyone has been a blessing and stimulating, unfortunately I don't seem to
have time to keep up with the current volume and respond as much as I would
like (family and earning a living.)

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 10:41:59 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Psyber-L, Practical Aspects. [was RE: Conundrums]
In-Reply-To:  <a166629e.354cdf5b@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

JGerh,

> Everyone has been a blessing and stimulating, unfortunately I don't seem to
> have time to keep up with the current volume and respond as much as I would
> like (family and earning a living.)

Lovely post and I hope you are not announcing departure!  I cant keep up as
much as I would like, however I do make a point of reading all of it at some
point.  Not evryone needs to do that!  I think it would be great if you just
read some posts occasionally and respond like you do!  Family and earning a
living are #1! It must be that way.

Walter

PS If the flow of mail is a problem you could go NOMAIL and do it all from
the web interface to the list, when time permits.  You can also search out
just one thread there to respond to.

I have named this thread anew as well so that we can have ongoing discussion
about Psyber-L, Practical Aspects.  There might be questions about quoting,
threading,  and filtering mail etc. that must be addressed for ease of
participation.

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 21:18:49 EDT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JGerh50699 <JGerh50699@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Illnesses
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Judith

I wanted to thank you for sharing how you treated your illness
psychologically.  I wanted to respond earlier, but sometimes the subject that
affects you most personally is the hardest to comment on...as someone who has
a chronic, currently incurable disease, multiple sclerosis, your sharing meant
alot to me.

When I had my first attack over 20 years ago (the disease wasn't diagnosed
until 8 years later) I decided I wasn't going to let this thing beat me.  (Is
this a masculine approach, fighting and trying to overcome?  I never
considered myself macho.)  Being resilient helped alot.  When I was diagnosed
8 years later, I was relieved instead of devastated.  Relieved because now I
knew what I was fighting.  MS and I have reached an understanding of sorts, it
won't knock me down unless I try to claim victory!  (Why?)

Perhaps my strength is made stronger in weakness, in realizing I can't always
rely on my own strength, by relying on others sometimes, on God always.

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 14:14:31 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <v03110700b172119e16eb@[195.200.13.197]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Simon,

> Hee!? I'm not sure what place you're at with this...

Heheheheh

Hahahahah

I was trying to laugh!   LOL!



Walter

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 14:14:27 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Subject:      ... a shift in the process [was Re: *IT*]
In-Reply-To:  <3.0.1.32.19980502123131.008ec86c@qed.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Marie,

I have changed the name using your words that I capture the aspect of your
post I am responding to.

> The collision with void
> disturbed me more than I knew at the time, and the unresolved conflict that
> resulted in Wilbur's departure, and that of Dolores and Is'e.

They were disturbing times and events and I am glad you mention them here.  I
think that returning to things that "disturbed us more than we knew" and
continuing with them can allow us to see the patterns that enable us to make
sense of it all.  I am all for letting the past remain in the past *once* it
is past but while you feel these feelings now and have new awareness I think
it is great that you bring them in.  I have not finished with the processing
by a long shot. What do you think we can or have learnt from all of that?
Where to with this?

> I felt
> uneasy about your announced shift from facilitator to participant and
> listowner, Walter, in light of the volatility of that process and the
> paraylsis that seemed to come over the list in the aftermath.

I can see it was uncomfortable for you ... I felt quite isolated going
through it, and the work on the shaping of the *space place* is still on my
agenda ...

I am glad that I do not have the word "facilitator" as part of my job
description.  I think it was utterly wrong.  What is it?  It made me feel as
if I *had* to do something all the time ... make things "easy" for people ...
(the root of the word does mean easy?  even if it doesn't that was my take on
it.  Interesting that you felt "uneasy"! Etymologically I mean, I am aware it
was unpleasant for you.) List Owner suits me better ... I own and create this
place as I see fit ... with heaps of help of course.  The list owner roles
might include some facilitation but that can also be done by anyone ... I
hope that by vacating the official post it is now open for us all.  Hosting,
welcoming and so on can be done by all as well ... coaching again we can all
assist new people ...  I certainly intend to keep it up ... and improve my
skills at it.  Claiming the list owner role more fully means am more
conscious of all those things that others *can't* do like unsub someone,
change the set-up of the list etc., close it even! (I mention that in the
light of the Jung-psy list, & it highlights the nature of the role.)

I am pleased you mention "the announced shift from facilitator to participant
and
list owner"

> I hoped for
> serious dialogue about the issues Susan brought here concerning abusive
> styles of interaction, and yet I myself did not contribute my thoughts or
> my feelings, struggling to understand how much of my discomfort came from
> my own fear of anger and how much was a choice to stay apart from a process
> that spilled so much toxic energy.  Then I felt a loss of all energy here,
> lost any sense of collective identity, and I withdrew emotionally, waiting,
> mourning a little what seemed to be the death of a potential never fully
> realized ...

I think my contribution might have been to go into an *action* mode rather
than a grief mode. I had to get out of that sense that I *facilitated* that
process, I felt bad about that.  I crave that in depth discussion about the
impact of a word change here or there ... I changed a lot of them in the
Welcome file addressing the concerns re abuse etc.  and the discussion is not
over ... it is a *meta* list ... I'll need to say more ...

> Now comes a shift in the process yet again, and I respond, still not
> knowing what it is I want from this place and this process ...

Great that you are here noticing your shifts ... the mood and shifts here and
contributing to what might be a leap and a bound!


I have to go ... there is so much more in the rest of your post ...



Walter

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 14:29:45 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Simon,

> Just earlier today I was re-reading one of Robert's posts, where he talks
> about the relationship of his Jung list to Psyber-l, and I was thinking
> that Psyber-l is really a meta list. Now you bring up that word here!
> Again, it's 'in the air', perhaps...

Yes but ALSO a non-meta list ... we voice the learning we do here as we
explore the psyche in cyberspace.  We could process what other lists do ...
and that might be OK, but it is right on the button when we do an indepth
reflection on the psyche-life-process-patterns here.  Which we do I think.
It is quite an art to integrate the two, almost fuse them.

In the meta moments we might repeat in essence the very thing we are talking
about.  That is to tune into the psyche ... who mentioned fractals ...
strange attractors?  I must re look at that.  As we keep noticing the patters
then we see them more and more ... until they just pop out at us! It is the
sort of research where you have to be there to know it!  No better way.

People and places?  We step in and out?  Forward and back, fits better?  It
is certainly a list that should not apologise for being self reflective!
Hopefully with wind and rain in our face and not as in a hot house.


Walter

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 3 May 1998 23:47:17 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

JoAnn,
I want to attend to your response, but I'm in a time constraint so don't
misconstrue the shortness of my reply...just don't want to let time pass
between messages...I get lost :-)

>Hello Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>, on Sun, 3 May 1998 10:06:36 -0400
>you wrote:
>
>>JoAnn,
>>
>>Wow! I was off the list during whatever it was happened so I don't have the
>>proper context, certainly not the "facts" ;)
>
>I don't know if anyone does!  But suffice it to say that there were some
>differences of opinion on what the facts were and are.
>
>>In any event I am really interested in how you view engagement with
>>people...I notice that I have a sense of aesthic around engagement...tho
>>I'm no shrinking violet, I'm not an inyourface, somewhere between those
>>extremes on the continum...
>
>I tend to look for inconsistencies, things that don't make sense, things
>that don't fit the pattern, and when I want to know, I ask.  I sometimes
>don't believe what people say, either; another impoliteness, but it seems
>necessary.

Interesting...a good friend of mine has said the same thing recently, that
she didn't believe some of the women we were with in a workshop...I found
it fascinating because it never occurred to me to consider they weren't
telling the truth...I'm still rolling this around and here you brought it
up so it must be something for me to be aware of...
>
>It's not infallible, but it's worked enough times to make me use this
>approach when there's something I want to know.  Usually I'm not
>disappointed, though often enough it's not because someone gave me an
>answer, it's because they refuse to, that gives me my answer.
>
>When people seem consistent, when they respond to my questions openly and
>honestly, I trust them.  When they don't I become suspicious.  Perhaps this
>is shortchanging people who are naturally reticent, but those people at
>least usually are consistent if not "wide-open."  I can be patient if
>necessary, observant, if the person seems genuine but shy.  I am much less
>patient with people who seem to me to be obviously lying or covering up
>something.
>
>>I have no sense of your sense of JoAnn the unpopular but I particularlly
>>relate to what you said to Walter here...
>><Much of the discussion/yelling/whatever I was in before was essentially
>>>ended by people telling me to shut up because what I said was painful to
>>>them, and they didn't come here for that.  I don't mean this happens only
>>>to me.  When someone else makes accusations, shows anger, or is "impolite"
>>>they are similarly told to shut up.>
>>
>>Resonates to my childhood dinner table and the *if you can't say something
>>nice, don't say anything* which only led to me feeling worse...
>
>Hiding the negative feelings doesn't make them go away.  I think this is my
>reason for asking the questions if things smell fishy -- those questions
>don't go away, and the smell sometimes gets stronger.

I respect this...I tend to let others be and just tend to myself and my
responses...something about making a decision, which may be faulty, about
investing my time...then I am fairly ruthless about who I allow into my
space...
>
>>I also grew
>>up with my father yelling every morning at my mother, so yellinganger use
>>to trigger me and I would wilt...I've learned and am growing out of this
>>and tho I don't experience much anger-my trauma trance is *poor me*-I do
>>notice my sense of aesthic getting rattled by some forms of
>>confrontation...but I am very aware that some people in my life love to mix
>>it up...I'm just not very good at it...so I'm wondering what works for
>>you...
>
>I didn't have that kind of family, there was a fair amount of questioning
>and saying things allowed, though the niceness was supposed to be there
>when company was present.  My companion/boyfriend/whatever had a mother
>that yelled, though, and he seems to have that "trauma trance" too that you
>describe.  Can you tell me more about "trauma trance," it's a phrase I'm
>not familiar with?

Trauma trance...I'll try to get to this...First some assumptions...I live
my life from a spiritual focus, I don't mean to be pretentious...it is just
that the story I live is that All That Is experiences itself through my
experiences and so I seek to be mindful on a moment to moment basis...when
I am NOT mindful I can find myself in a place which is out of integrity,
disconnected from spirit...happends particularly when I'm in
undifferenciated fear, meaning I am reacting to fear but cannot determine
the cause...experienced this in spades the first year of my health crisis
when I was doing everything "right" and I was deteriorating...as I lost
more and more energy which also translated into not being able to think
very clearly, I fell into "poor me" which is about losing my connection to
what is going on...I was aware that I was in an intense dark night of the
soul, but I couldn't figure out what I was to be doing...enduring was the
answer...however, there were a lot of tears shed for poor me by me..luckily
I have good friends who recognize when I'm in my trauma trance and get me
back into my process...recently at an art opening there was a lovely
picture of a garden and the closer I got to it way down at the bottom there
was a figure on her face...Falling on my face in the garden was the
title...really gave me a good laugh...that's how I picture myself when I'm
in my trance...wish I'd bought the painting.

Sorry, if this is quick and dirty and off the mark...let me know if you want...
Blessings,
Judith
>
>>Thanks,
>
>Thank you, Judith, for asking.
>
>-JoAnne
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 00:00:39 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: Illnesses
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

JGerh,

Hummm...interesting I sensed it was to be shared...not my usual comfort
zone to quote from my journal...

>Judith
>
>I wanted to thank you for sharing how you treated your illness
>psychologically.  I wanted to respond earlier, but sometimes the subject that
>affects you most personally is the hardest to comment on...as someone who has
>a chronic, currently incurable disease, multiple sclerosis, your sharing meant
>alot to me.
>
>When I had my first attack over 20 years ago (the disease wasn't diagnosed
>until 8 years later) I decided I wasn't going to let this thing beat me.  (Is
>this a masculine approach, fighting and trying to overcome?  I never
>considered myself macho.)  Being resilient helped alot.  When I was diagnosed
>8 years later, I was relieved instead of devastated.  Relieved because now I
>knew what I was fighting.  MS and I have reached an understanding of sorts, it
>won't knock me down unless I try to claim victory!  (Why?)
>
>Perhaps my strength is made stronger in weakness, in realizing I can't always
>rely on my own strength, by relying on others sometimes, on God always.

Yes, I wouldn't have gotten through without those who came to participate
in my journey, seen and unseen...

Blessings,
Judith
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 10:05:44 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <001d01bd7702$5f73b3a0$05804dd1@walterl.es.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Simon,
>
>> Hee!? I'm not sure what place you're at with this...
>
>Heheheheh
>
>Hahahahah
>
>I was trying to laugh!   LOL!
>
>
>
>Walter

Well, let that laughter flow! I thought maybe you were choking on something...

The image was sort of meant to be funny and sad at the same time. More sad
than funny though...

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 13:14:43 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <v03110700b172119e16eb@[195.200.13.197]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Done! Yes, I like that touch of linking the threads. Not only the practical
>aspect, but the act of acknowledgement embedded in that linking, the
>respecting of origins. Jung-psych splits apart and look what happens here!

Oh dear! How ironic... I talk about respecting origins and then get the
name wrong! Jung-psy, of course...

Ch-ch-ch-changes...

Simon

PS. I suppose the phrase 'split apart' might be up for debate, as well!

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 13:38:55 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <001e01bd7704$8036ee20$05804dd1@walterl.es.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Simon,
>
>> Just earlier today I was re-reading one of Robert's posts, where he talks
>> about the relationship of his Jung list to Psyber-l, and I was thinking
>> that Psyber-l is really a meta list. Now you bring up that word here!
>> Again, it's 'in the air', perhaps...
>
>Yes but ALSO a non-meta list ... we voice the learning we do here as we
>explore the psyche in cyberspace.  We could process what other lists do ...
>and that might be OK, but it is right on the button when we do an indepth
>reflection on the psyche-life-process-patterns here.  Which we do I think.
>It is quite an art to integrate the two, almost fuse them.
>
>In the meta moments we might repeat in essence the very thing we are talking
>about.  That is to tune into the psyche ... who mentioned fractals ...
>strange attractors?  I must re look at that.  As we keep noticing the patters
>then we see them more and more ... until they just pop out at us! It is the
>sort of research where you have to be there to know it!  No better way.
>
>People and places?  We step in and out?  Forward and back, fits better?  It
>is certainly a list that should not apologise for being self reflective!
>Hopefully with wind and rain in our face and not as in a hot house.
>
>
>Walter

Walter,

Somehow this feels like a lecture, to me (and a lecture to me).

I think you're (wilfully?) misreading what I was saying. And there are some
ironies in what you write, too. It was me who reacted against the
incursions of 'other list processing' here (though now I've integrated
that; I feel okay about it - thanks in part to Robert's post), and it was
me who took you to task for, as I saw it, focussing on abstract structural
issues - there were other issues that weren't being attended to, that were
being avoided (stifled?), consciously or otherwise. As I said then, I was
reacting out of a sense of imbalance in the list. I think it's the very
'experiential' aspect, and the fact that Psyber-l is "certainly a list that
should not apologise for being self reflective!", as you put it, that make
it a meta list. To me, 'meta' means 'incorporating everything', and that is
what happens here. I think that the experiential remit of the list allows
us to be self-reflective but also the list to be self-reflective through
our reflections on self and list, on this space which is also us! This
reminds me of the (very) occasional discussion there has been here about
the list as a self-aware entity in its own right (hi, Dan!). Seems like
there's some kind of psychic feedback going on that creates and maintains
this space and somehow gives it a life of its own at the same time as it
gives (re)birth to us! Or, er, something like that... :) The notions of
fractals and strange attractors that have come up here are a part of all
this, I feel. Also, since I was a kid I've always been fascinated by the
concepts of sets, subsets, supersets and intersecting sets - not from the
mathematical perspective so much, it's really the simplicity, immediacy and
profundity of the graphical presentation that has always grabbed me. Also,
I've always felt that sets offer a non-hierarchical way of seeing. They
contain or are contained, and somehow this doesn't have to mean 'above' or
'below', 'superior' or 'inferior'. Superset = meta, and the ultimate meta
is the set of sets!

Reading the Jung lists, I see how their focus is so much narrower than
here. They are, really, 'one-subject' lists which don't include reflection
on their own nature. That's my *impression*, anyway. Robert, maybe you see
this otherwise?

Walter, Robert said a number of interesting things in the post I referred
to. That Psyber-l, not Jung-Psy, was the parent of his Jung list. That the
"other list dialogue" felt right on this list rather than on his Jung list.
That although a number of people from this list had subscribed to Jung, it
was still this list ("this place", to use Robert's words) that felt like
cyber-home.

Robert, Walter,

I'd like to pick out a couple of quotes from your post, Robert. I'd been
working towards responding to you in another post, but it seems to have
come out here, in this mixed-up post!

"For me, PSYBER-L is the safest place to speak ... strange, as this is a
place filled with shadows and silences."

After all you've gone through here, Robert (and you've been given a rough
ride at times!), this quote speaks volumes - about you, about the list. I'd
like to know what your words are from those volumes!

"For me it's like a number of us have gone to a social event in the larger
community and returned home to talk about the social event."

This really brings it all home, for me (so to speak!). I don't think this
list *is* home, or *is* family, so much as it recreates these things for
us. A kind of multidimensional intersecting holodeck! And a place where we
can do it differently, perhaps...  The "doing it differently" (changing the
patterns, yes?) is the key to whether or not this space 'works'.


Walter, you said:

>It is the sort of research where you have to be there to know it!  No
>better way.

This throws up for me issues of being silent or speaking, being a
reader/receiver or a poster/contributor on this list, being passive or
being active in the list-world. Not that this was what you were getting at
- or was there a hint of it there for you? If I read you right, by "be
there" you mean "tuned into the psyche", and I'd say this can apply very
well even if you're 'only' reading the list.

Notice that I'm avoiding using the dreaded 'L' word! To me, that word is
demeaning and diminishing in this context, and disrespectful of the people
who have been subscribed to this list for so long and yet remained silent,
or only spoken occasionally - like me, till now! It does, I think, speak to
an aspect of the reader/observer role. There is an element of voyeurism
('secret looking') in the reader situation here (though actually, I think
in all reading), and sometimes it might feel to list contributors that the
silent subscribers are 'lurking in the shadows' (the derivation of the
term, presumably - but how that word 'shadow' also resonates in this
particular space, of course!). But 'lurker' is only part of the story - a
subset of 'reader'! I think 'reader' is fairly neutral, and can encompass a
spectrum of involvement-non-involvement. Somewhere in that spectrum is a
term I came up with for myself in my 'reading days': 'involved observer'!


Walter,

To wrap this up: I started out in this post feeling very defensive (okay,
so you could probably tell!). I hate being misunderstood, misread,
misinterpreted, whatever... Not in small misunderstandings so much, but
when it feels sweeping... And this has to do with feelings of invisibility.

I grew up in an environment in which 'I' was made to feel invisible. In a
sense, assuming the reader role for so long was a way of 'holding on to the
tension' about that (to use a lovely phrase which Robert, I believe,
introduced some while back). Part and parcel of this growing-up
invisibility was a stifling of emotional expression, and especially of
anger - very much what you wrote about a few weeks back, Walter, in
connection with your own family environment. So the exchange between Susan
and JoAnne a few weeks back really pushed a lot of buttons for me, and in a
process of natural working through, entwined with other changes that have
been going on for me, brought me 'here' again...

Judith, this also keys into the 'humiliater/humiliated' duality I spoke of
recently; I hope to get back to you on that soon...

For now, there is sunshine outside! Time to go make the most of it before
the storm clouds gather!

Robert, I hope you're walking in sunshine now...

To borrow Marie's gentle words: bright blessings to all,

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 13:23:43 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <3.0.1.32.19980503114402.008f7ce8@qed.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Marie wrote:
>Commitment, yes, that fits -- but to what?  Stay the course?  Feed the
>process?  Reveal the depths of self?  Create community?  In order to
>commit, there must be clarity about what it is to which the commitment is
>made, yes?  Do we have that here?  Or is that the real purpose of this
>thread, to articulate what the space is asking of us and define the
>commitment that must be made in order to answer that asking?

and:

>thank you both, Walter and Simon, for birthing this thread.


Marie,

Thank you so much for this.

You do get to the heart of it, I think. Also, honouring the space,
honouring one another... and, for me, trying to find a way out of the
humiliater/humiliated duality, a way to do it differently...

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 23:01:41 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
In-Reply-To:  <v01550104b172ac74db5d@[207.54.160.50]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>, on Sun, 3 May 1998 23:47:17 -0400,
you wrote:

>JoAnn,
>I want to attend to your response, but I'm in a time constraint so don't
>misconstrue the shortness of my reply...just don't want to let time pass
>between messages...I get lost :-)

I appreciate that you replied quickly.
[Jo]
>>I tend to look for inconsistencies, things that don't make sense, things
>>that don't fit the pattern, and when I want to know, I ask.  I sometimes
>>don't believe what people say, either; another impoliteness, but it seems
>>necessary.
>
>Interesting...a good friend of mine has said the same thing recently, that
>she didn't believe some of the women we were with in a workshop...I found
>it fascinating because it never occurred to me to consider they weren't
>telling the truth...I'm still rolling this around and here you brought it
>up so it must be something for me to be aware of...

When you're in a situation where two people have very different opinions of
the truth, the possibility must emerge that one or the other or both are
misrepresenting, intentionally or otherwise.  It's not a sure thing;
parallax error can occur.  But it's human nature to be inaccurate, to
remember those things that had an emotional impact, for memories to mutate,
and form a more cohesive "whole" than they might otherwise if evaluated
objectively.

In other words, if I believe someone doesn't like me, and she says, hello,
in a diffident fashion, I may well remember that as her "blowing me off,"
when in fact she was not.

>>>Resonates to my childhood dinner table and the *if you can't say something
>>>nice, don't say anything* which only led to me feeling worse...
>>
>>Hiding the negative feelings doesn't make them go away.  I think this is my
>>reason for asking the questions if things smell fishy -- those questions
>>don't go away, and the smell sometimes gets stronger.
>
>I respect this...I tend to let others be and just tend to myself and my
>responses...something about making a decision, which may be faulty, about
>investing my time...then I am fairly ruthless about who I allow into my
>space...

It depends on the power one feels one has, and whether we feel we can make
a difference by saying what we see, versus simply making your personal
space safe and comfortable.
[Jo]
>>Can you tell me more about "trauma trance," it's a phrase I'm
>>not familiar with?
>
>Trauma trance...I'll try to get to this...First some assumptions...I live
>my life from a spiritual focus, I don't mean to be pretentious...it is just
>that the story I live is that All That Is experiences itself through my
>experiences and so I seek to be mindful on a moment to moment basis...when
>I am NOT mindful I can find myself in a place which is out of integrity,
>disconnected from spirit...happends particularly when I'm in
>undifferenciated fear, meaning I am reacting to fear but cannot determine
>the cause...experienced this in spades the first year of my health crisis
>when I was doing everything "right" and I was deteriorating...as I lost
>more and more energy which also translated into not being able to think
>very clearly, I fell into "poor me" which is about losing my connection to
>what is going on...I was aware that I was in an intense dark night of the
>soul, but I couldn't figure out what I was to be doing...enduring was the
>answer...however, there were a lot of tears shed for poor me by me..luckily
>I have good friends who recognize when I'm in my trauma trance and get me
>back into my process...

What do they do to help you back to your process?

>recently at an art opening there was a lovely
>picture of a garden and the closer I got to it way down at the bottom there
>was a figure on her face...Falling on my face in the garden was the
>title...really gave me a good laugh...that's how I picture myself when I'm
>in my trance...wish I'd bought the painting.

I love that picture, well, the one in my mind, anyway!

>Sorry, if this is quick and dirty and off the mark...let me know if you want...

This is great, I appreciate your taking the time to answer.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 21:03:46 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Judith,

I am amused and again feeling synchronistic -- you answered my question
before I sent it!  Thank you for this response.  I agree that Walter models
a wonderful sense of self reflection -- altho I don't know if I would agree
that public self reflection, for me, is comfortable!  I have in the past
called myself a "process pilgrim" and, for me, self reflection is an
intrinsic part of that process -- which is a process of transformation,
however subtle and slow.

Can you say more about how you view the "impact when individuals' life
processes are unaligned?"

intrigued,
Marie

I wrote:
>I have been here throughout the rough waters, was the focus of one stretch
(at least initially), and it is difficult to imagine how it feels to come
into the aftermath.  Do you know what it is that connects you more strongly
now?  Is it in you, or does it come in response to what is written?  What
is your sense of where this space has evolved to now, after a long time
away?  My perspective is colored by my presence here, and I would truly
like to know what your perception is.

Judith wrote:
>Marie,
>So much here for me to engage with you...always cutting to the chase as I
>have experienced your interactions in the past...for me it is a sense of
>integrity and I feel it in you as I read this and in this space with
>others, it seems to be growing...evidentally less tolerant of
>unmindfulness...and a sense of authenticity...I value these and continually
>check to see where I may  be out of alignment within myself...
>
>What is so powerful for me about what you have brought here is your sense
>of reflection...however, in my work coaching people in transformation I am
>struck by a lack of awareness of this as a process...here I experience a
>great capacity for self reflection  modeled by Walter, and a comfortable
>place for others as well...I am more and more aware of the impact when
>individuals' life processes are unalighned...
>
>Blessings,
>Judith in gratefulness for the poetry each brings to this space

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 21:03:52 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Simon,

You have written much recently that made me pause and think, and feel --
this is where I connect most strongly right now.

Simon wrote:
>Marie,
>
>Thank you so much for this.
>
>You do get to the heart of it, I think. Also, honouring the space,
>honouring one another... and, for me, trying to find a way out of the
>humiliater/humiliated duality, a way to do it differently...

Simon, from another post:
>I grew up in an environment in which 'I' was made to feel invisible. In a
>sense, assuming the reader role for so long was a way of 'holding on to the
>tension' about that (to use a lovely phrase which Robert, I believe,
>introduced some while back). Part and parcel of this growing-up
>invisibility was a stifling of emotional expression, and especially of
>anger - very much what you wrote about a few weeks back, Walter, in
>connection with your own family environment. So the exchange between Susan
>and JoAnne a few weeks back really pushed a lot of buttons for me, and in a
>process of natural working through, entwined with other changes that have
>been going on for me, brought me 'here' again...
>
>Judith, this also keys into the 'humiliater/humiliated' duality I spoke of
>recently; I hope to get back to you on that soon...

I had not viewed my own tendency to fall into the reader role here as a
holding of tension, Simon; thank you for this.  It opens a door of inquiry
for me.

I wrote a thesis last year on shame, the aspect of shame that covers the
feeling of being somehow "not good enough" or defective or deficient and
how that is intertwined with relationship, both with self and others -- it
is a core issue for me, and resonates with the "humiliator/humiliated"
duality you are bringing here.  I also grew up being made to feel invisible
(nobody knows who I am, nobody knows what it feels like to be me) -- I
respond to that old story by feeling invisible, and also by making myself
invisible because it feels familiar, as if it is somehow my proper place to
be --  and being scripted to stifle emotionality (my father: if you want to
cry, I'll give you something to cry about!), especially anger.  I seldom
feel it, I fear it in others (even when it is not directed toward me) and I
respond with intense anxiety when I do feel it in myself.  So the exchange
between Joanne and Susan pushed my buttons, too -- woke that old story in
me -- and left me wondering how to separate my personal "shadow" responses
from the real issues that surround abusive interactions.  I know others
feel differently, but try as I may, I cannot find value in expressions of
anger that constitute personal attack, that evoke the
"humiliator/humiliated" dance/duality.  I wish often to be more easily able
to feel and express anger, and to fear it less -- but I do not aspire to be
in any way aggressively abusive, an intimidator, a humiliator.  Like you, I
think part of the answer lies in honoring the space, and each other -- and
in learning ways to do it differently, to scream and rage and hurt and
disagree when those feelings arise, and to respond to them, without
becoming either persecutor or victim.

Joanne, I think I like your (spoken in jest?) notion of a "test shadow" --
might that be a way to play with difference?  Perhaps a cyber-psychodrama,
Walter?  How might we do that here?

Simon, the theme of invisibility reminds me of the rock opera "Tommy" -- do
you know it?  "See me, feel me, touch me, heal me ..."

bright blessings,

Marie

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 21:03:59 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <001c01bd7702$5d4b5560$05804dd1@walterl.es.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 02:14 PM 5/4/98 +1200, you wrote:
>Marie,
>
>I have changed the name using your words that I capture the aspect of your
>post I am responding to.

I am not surprised that you focus here, Walter!

>> The collision with void
>> disturbed me more than I knew at the time, and the unresolved conflict that
>> resulted in Wilbur's departure, and that of Dolores and Is'e.
>
>They were disturbing times and events and I am glad you mention them here.  I
>think that returning to things that "disturbed us more than we knew" and
>continuing with them can allow us to see the patterns that enable us to make
>sense of it all.  I am all for letting the past remain in the past *once* it
>is past but while you feel these feelings now and have new awareness I think
>it is great that you bring them in.  I have not finished with the processing
>by a long shot. What do you think we can or have learnt from all of that?
>Where to with this?

What can we/have we learned?  We have not even yet truly voiced what it is
we felt or how we viewed it then or how it shifted the process!  I am sure
there as many views as participants/observers; I can only speak for myself.
 I want to go back and re-read the posts from void before I respond fully
to this issue, and that may take a little time -- for now, I am most aware
of being repelled, feeling that any response I made was futile and would
likely only provide another avenue for more attack (which it did!), and of
shutting down, disconnecting, wanting to separate myself from a no-win
situation (a place I have been too many times in my life to willingly be
there again).  I watched the subsequent battles that flowed among Wilbur
and Joanne and Julienne (in various configurations) with a detached, yet
horrified fascination -- again feeling repelled, unable to envision a good
outcome, and wanting to stay far away from the battlefield.  I was a little
hurt by Dolores' glee amid the fireworks, which seemed to disregard the
pain it was causing all involved (at least, I sensed pain in all involved,
as well as anger; I certainly felt some).  I was disturbed by the migration
of people -- Wilbur, Dolores, Is'e -- and wondered where it would end, and
if Psyber-L itself would end, if the process was fatal to the collective
spirit struggling to evolve here.

Now comes a revival ...

What have we learned?  For me, what comes are questions, not answers, and I
have already written them.  I feel there is a need to articulate purpose
and parameters, to make choices and commitments, to define process and
possibility in this space.

>> I felt
>> uneasy about your announced shift from facilitator to participant and
>> listowner, Walter, in light of the volatility of that process and the
>> paraylsis that seemed to come over the list in the aftermath.
>
>I can see it was uncomfortable for you ... I felt quite isolated going
>through it, and the work on the shaping of the *space place* is still on my
>agenda ...

What left me feeling uneasy was wondering what this shift in you meant,
Walter.  How would you be different here?  What would change?  Perhaps you
felt isolated because you kept much to yourself?  How does your presence
and this shift in role impact on the "shaping of the 'space place'?"  You
are, inescapably, the keeper of the space, whether named as facilitator or
listowner; what does this role mean to you?

You answer my question here, in part ...

>I am glad that I do not have the word "facilitator" as part of my job
>description.  I think it was utterly wrong.  What is it?  It made me feel as
>if I *had* to do something all the time ... make things "easy" for people ...
>(the root of the word does mean easy?  even if it doesn't that was my take on
>it.  Interesting that you felt "uneasy"! Etymologically I mean, I am aware it
>was unpleasant for you.) List Owner suits me better ... I own and create this
>place as I see fit ... with heaps of help of course.  The list owner roles
>might include some facilitation but that can also be done by anyone ... I
>hope that by vacating the official post it is now open for us all.  Hosting,
>welcoming and so on can be done by all as well ... coaching again we can all
>assist new people ...  I certainly intend to keep it up ... and improve my
>skills at it.  Claiming the list owner role more fully means am more
>conscious of all those things that others *can't* do like unsub someone,
>change the set-up of the list etc., close it even! (I mention that in the
>light of the Jung-psy list, & it highlights the nature of the role.)
>
>I am pleased you mention "the announced shift from facilitator to participant
>and
>list owner"

I want to hear more from you on this, I don't know exactly what ...

>> I hoped for
>> serious dialogue about the issues Susan brought here concerning abusive
>> styles of interaction, and yet I myself did not contribute my thoughts or
>> my feelings, struggling to understand how much of my discomfort came from
>> my own fear of anger and how much was a choice to stay apart from a process
>> that spilled so much toxic energy.  Then I felt a loss of all energy here,
>> lost any sense of collective identity, and I withdrew emotionally, waiting,
>> mourning a little what seemed to be the death of a potential never fully
>> realized ...
>
>I think my contribution might have been to go into an *action* mode rather
>than a grief mode. I had to get out of that sense that I *facilitated* that
>process, I felt bad about that.

Can you speak more of this?  A sense of failure in facilitation?  Or
frustration in being expected to facilitate when you did not choose to own
that role?  What felt bad?

  I crave that in depth discussion about the
>impact of a word change here or there ... I changed a lot of them in the
>Welcome file addressing the concerns re abuse etc.  and the discussion is not
>over ... it is a *meta* list ... I'll need to say more ...

Words are important, naming is powerful.  I think we are doing this,
perhaps in an oblique way?

>> Now comes a shift in the process yet again, and I respond, still not
>> knowing what it is I want from this place and this process ...
>
>Great that you are here noticing your shifts ... the mood and shifts here and
>contributing to what might be a leap and a bound!

From caterpillar to butterfly?  Mutation ... evolution ... transformation?

>I have to go ... there is so much more in the rest of your post ...

Finding time is always an issue here for me, and for all, I suspect.  Full
engagement would be at least a full-time job!  Not possible.  What finds
its way here is what shapes the space ...

bright blessings,

Marie

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 22:25:33 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

JoAnn, this is fascinating to me...thanks

>Hello Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>, on Sun, 3 May 1998 23:47:17 -0400,
>you wrote:
>
>>JoAnn,
>>I want to attend to your response, but I'm in a time constraint so don't
>>misconstrue the shortness of my reply...just don't want to let time pass
>>between messages...I get lost :-)
>
>I appreciate that you replied quickly.
>[Jo]
>>>I tend to look for inconsistencies, things that don't make sense, things
>>>that don't fit the pattern, and when I want to know, I ask.  I sometimes
>>>don't believe what people say, either; another impoliteness, but it seems
>>>necessary.
>>
>>Interesting...a good friend of mine has said the same thing recently, that
>>she didn't believe some of the women we were with in a workshop...I found
>>it fascinating because it never occurred to me to consider they weren't
>>telling the truth...I'm still rolling this around and here you brought it
>>up so it must be something for me to be aware of...
>
J>When you're in a situation where two people have very different opinions of
>the truth, the possibility must emerge that one or the other or both are
>misrepresenting, intentionally or otherwise.  It's not a sure thing;
>parallax error can occur.  But it's human nature to be inaccurate, to
>remember those things that had an emotional impact, for memories to mutate,
>and form a more cohesive "whole" than they might otherwise if evaluated
>objectively.

I assume different opions of the truth and in fact I assume that my truth
probably is not your truth...I don't know what *parallax* means...however,
my belief is that there is no objectivity...that everything is embedded and
connected...sort of particle/wave Bell's Theorum...so my expectation is
always that what a person experiences is correct for them conscious or
unconscious...and my response is correct for me and I'm not invested in how
awake a person is, just that we are all on a continuum based on our life
journey
>
J>In other words, if I believe someone doesn't like me, and she says, hello,
>in a diffident fashion, I may well remember that as her "blowing me off,"
>when in fact she was not.

I'm working on these thots...
>
>>>>Resonates to my childhood dinner table and the *if you can't say something
>>>>nice, don't say anything* which only led to me feeling worse...
>>>
>>>Hiding the negative feelings doesn't make them go away.  I think this is my
>>>reason for asking the questions if things smell fishy -- those questions
>>>don't go away, and the smell sometimes gets stronger.
>>
>>I respect this...I tend to let others be and just tend to myself and my
>>responses...something about making a decision, which may be faulty, about
>>investing my time...then I am fairly ruthless about who I allow into my
>>space...
>
>It depends on the power one feels one has, and whether we feel we can make
>a difference by saying what we see, versus simply making your personal
>space safe and comfortable.

Interesting...have not framed it as a power point...my belief is that I
continually make a difference by the choices I make...feeding the universal
field...I sense there is something here about how one relates to one's
external reality...I'll have to ruminate about this...
>[Jo]
>>>Can you tell me more about "trauma trance," it's a phrase I'm
>>>not familiar with?
>>
>>Trauma trance...I'll try to get to this...First some assumptions...I live
>>my life from a spiritual focus, I don't mean to be pretentious...it is just
>>that the story I live is that All That Is experiences itself through my
>>experiences and so I seek to be mindful on a moment to moment basis...when
>>I am NOT mindful I can find myself in a place which is out of integrity,
>>disconnected from spirit...happends particularly when I'm in
>>undifferenciated fear, meaning I am reacting to fear but cannot determine
>>the cause...experienced this in spades the first year of my health crisis
>>when I was doing everything "right" and I was deteriorating...as I lost
>>more and more energy which also translated into not being able to think
>>very clearly, I fell into "poor me" which is about losing my connection to
>>what is going on...I was aware that I was in an intense dark night of the
>>soul, but I couldn't figure out what I was to be doing...enduring was the
>>answer...however, there were a lot of tears shed for poor me by me..luckily
>>I have good friends who recognize when I'm in my trauma trance and get me
>>back into my process...
>
>What do they do to help you back to your process?

Just remind me that I'm in my trance...mostly we laugh about it...but
mostly they trust my process because they have experienced it and know that
I am continuously asking myself what is going on...it is a phenomenon I
have experienced in my deep connections which people who enter my life and
I theirs...part of the process of relationship is teaching the other about
how to interact, showingmodeling the process or issue...this is kind of
hard to get to...Because my circle of friends are all examining their lives
consciously given whatever issues may be up for each of them, we support
each other by holding space...I've been the focal point until recently when
each has reached out to new experiences which feed their individual
process...and because we hold our lives as a sacred journey, we celebrate
as well as pray...there was such beauty in my health crisis as those around
me had their own experience...as a collective we all grew thru my
experience...
>
>>recently at an art opening there was a lovely
>>picture of a garden and the closer I got to it way down at the bottom there
>>was a figure on her face...Falling on my face in the garden was the
>>title...really gave me a good laugh...that's how I picture myself when I'm
>>in my trance...wish I'd bought the painting.
>
>I love that picture, well, the one in my mind, anyway!
>
>>Sorry, if this is quick and dirty and off the mark...let me know if you
>>want...
>
>This is great, I appreciate your taking the time to answer.

And I am grateful for your insights...I find such joy when I learn from
another point of life view...such enrichment
>
Blessings,
Judith
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 4 May 1998 22:47:51 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Yes, Marie,
I have been experiencing a palpable sense of dialogue here...and it is my
belief that the self-reflective process of each individual here is taking
us into a meta level of communication...sounds a bit grandious I suppose,
but there is a real sense of people here taking responsibility for their
own processself and then reaching out into this *space* and engaging...
>Judith,
>
>I am amused and again feeling synchronistic -- you answered my question
>before I sent it!  Thank you for this response.  I agree that Walter models
>a wonderful sense of self reflection -- altho I don't know if I would agree
>that public self reflection, for me, is comfortable!  I have in the past
>called myself a "process pilgrim" and, for me, self reflection is an
>intrinsic part of that process -- which is a process of transformation,
>however subtle and slow.

exactly...and as I observed recently alignment of process seems to be a key
in relationship...interesting that my work on coaching people in their
transformation, I focus on process...connecting them to whatever process
they resonate to...here I am seeing a coalessing of process...and I'm
fascinated...with Walter modeling self reflection there seems to be a
reorganization of communication at a deeper level...
>
>Can you say more about how you view the "impact when individuals' life
>processes are unaligned?"
>
>intrigued,
>Marie

Recently I read a book by the singer Kenny Logins and his wife I think
called *The Unimagined Life*...it is about their relationship...what I was
struck by in the power of their journey together which BTW was anything but
easy, was that they met when she was his therapist and for 6 years she and
he engaged in her process which he took as his own...which involved daily
journaling...now for the most part men in the US are not big on journaling,
but he did it...when they came together in a romantic relationship they
both continued their own self reflection process of journaling...the book
includes some daily excerpts of what she wrote and what he did...sometimes
appearing as if they were in completely different lives...however, both
attribute this process as the key to those times when things were very
difficult...

on the other hand the young people in the house I live in, came together
and looked like mates because they were focued on their external lives, his
work, her art, buying the house, working in the garden, but when her
projection of her father onto him was satisfied by her father, and he was
in a work crisis losing his job, after time they didn't have a way to
process the experience...it emerged that his way of being was based in his
embracing of Christ as his savior and she was in a completely different
space...they had no process to continue that could hold both ways of being
and thus they have parted...

I think it is an iteration of many years ago when one married within one's
race, religion, etc...now there is great diversity coming together and I
sense the glue is process...process becomes the superordinate...

I'm beginning to write about this because I don't see people focusing on
this consciously...those of us who have it know it and those that don't,
aren't aware of it...

It also has to do with the ability to take information into our beingness
and use it for transformation...lots to ponder.

Blessings,
Judith

>
>I wrote:
>>I have been here throughout the rough waters, was the focus of one stretch
>(at least initially), and it is difficult to imagine how it feels to come
>into the aftermath.  Do you know what it is that connects you more strongly
>now?  Is it in you, or does it come in response to what is written?  What
>is your sense of where this space has evolved to now, after a long time
>away?  My perspective is colored by my presence here, and I would truly
>like to know what your perception is.
>
>Judith wrote:
>>Marie,
>>So much here for me to engage with you...always cutting to the chase as I
>>have experienced your interactions in the past...for me it is a sense of
>>integrity and I feel it in you as I read this and in this space with
>>others, it seems to be growing...evidentally less tolerant of
>>unmindfulness...and a sense of authenticity...I value these and continually
>>check to see where I may  be out of alignment within myself...
>>
>>What is so powerful for me about what you have brought here is your sense
>>of reflection...however, in my work coaching people in transformation I am
>>struck by a lack of awareness of this as a process...here I experience a
>>great capacity for self reflection  modeled by Walter, and a comfortable
>>place for others as well...I am more and more aware of the impact when
>>individuals' life processes are unalighned...
>>
>>Blessings,
>>Judith in gratefulness for the poetry each brings to this space
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 5 May 1998 01:09:04 -0500
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Sometimes the tag lines weave you to the front of the moste exciting
juxtapositions!

(as it is done, a hat tip to: http://www.jungindex.net/trimble/think.htm
which was a doorway in a tag-URL on a recent Jung-pysch posting.)

***


       The Man Watching

       I can tell by the way the trees beat, after
       so many dull days, on my worried windowpanes,
       that a storm is coming,
       and I hear the far-off fields say things
       I can't bear without a friend,
       I can't love without a sister.

       The storm, the shifter of shapes, drives on
       across the woods and across time,
       and the world looks as if it had no age:
       the landscape, like a line in the psalm book,
       is seriousness and weight and eternity.

       What we choose to fight is so tiny!
       What fights with us is so great!
       If only we would let ourselves be dominated
       as things do by some immense storm,
       we would become strong too, and not need names.

       When we win it's with small things,
       and the triumph itself makes us small.
       What is extraordinary and eternal
       does not want to be bent by us.
       I mean the angel, who appeared
       to the wrestler of the Old Testament:
       when the wrestler's sinews
       grew long like metal strings,
       he felt them under his fingers
       like chords of deep music.

       Whoever was beaten by this Angel,
       (who often simply declined the fight),
       went away proud and strengthened
       and great from that harsh hand,
       that kneaded him as if to change his shape.
       Winning does not tempt that man.
       This is how he grows: by being defeated, decisively,
       by constantly greater beings.
              - Rainer Maria Rilke


       A Witch

       Embracing the Elementals
       I am a witch
       I stand on a cliff,
       At the edge of the sea.
       The wind howls,
       Lightning sears the air,
       Waves crash against the rocks,
       Torrents of rain pour down.
       I do not fear the fury of the elements
       I embrace them
       And surrender.....

       My voice is torn away by the gale winds.
       Air fills my lungs and is sucked away again
       My chakras open, my mind is clear
       I hear the ageless voices whispering their wisdom
       I am inspired
       I breathe, I suffocate, I am enlightened
       I am the Air.

       Lightning flashes all around me.
       I am blinded, yet I see the truth.
       The Sacred Fire of Life burns within me,
       My gift from the Lady and the Lord.
       Fire consumes me
       I am engulfed, transformed, and reborn.
       I am the Fire.

       Waves crash over me,
       I am swept away.
       Pulled to the floor of the sea,
       From the waters of our Mother's womb was I born.
       Her tides ebb and rage through my veins,
       Through my being.
       I am submerged, drowned, refreshed.
       I am the Water.

       I am crushed to the rocks, by the rocks.
       Buried beneath the earth,
       I feel all Her pain, Her wounds.
       Overwhelmed by the ageless wisdom,
       The patience and longing.
       I am twisted, cracked, rejuvenated.
       I am the Earth.

       I lay down my body in surrender to the elementals.
       Yet I conquer
       I arise victorious, stronger than before.
       Wiser than before.
       My spirit soars, I am a raw force of nature,
       Wielding the power of the elements
       I am the Lady. I am the Lord.
       I am the Universe.
       I am magic.
       I am a witch.

              - Morgan

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 5 May 1998 21:58:53 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <3.0.1.32.19980504210352.008fbf68@qed.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>, on Mon, 4 May 1998 21:03:52 -0400,
you wrote:

>Joanne, I think I like your (spoken in jest?) notion of a "test shadow" --
>might that be a way to play with difference?  Perhaps a cyber-psychodrama,
>Walter?  How might we do that here?

It was half in jest, but I think we were trying to do that before with the
bananabean.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 5 May 1998 21:58:53 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
In-Reply-To:  <v01550109b173ebb9d8e0@[207.54.160.50]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>, on Mon, 4 May 1998 22:25:33 -0400,
you wrote:

>JoAnn, this is fascinating to me...thanks

I too find your view fascinating.
>JoAnne
>When you're in a situation where two people have very different opinions of
>>the truth, the possibility must emerge that one or the other or both are
>>misrepresenting, intentionally or otherwise.  It's not a sure thing;
>>parallax error can occur.  But it's human nature to be inaccurate, to
>>remember those things that had an emotional impact, for memories to mutate,
>>and form a more cohesive "whole" than they might otherwise if evaluated
>>objectively.

Judith:
>I assume different opions of the truth and in fact I assume that my truth
>probably is not your truth...I don't know what *parallax* means...however,
>my belief is that there is no objectivity...that everything is embedded and
>connected...sort of particle/wave Bell's Theorum...so my expectation is
>always that what a person experiences is correct for them conscious or
>unconscious...and my response is correct for me and I'm not invested in how
>awake a person is, just that we are all on a continuum based on our life
>journey

Parallax is when two viewers see something from a different angle.  They
can't see precisely the same thing because they are not in precisely the
same position.

That what a person sees is correct for him or her to see... that must
involve itself with projections in some way.  That a very strong projection
will place itself in our view until we can't ignore it any longer?  How
does one recognize projection from reality, if there can be such a
differentiation?  Clearly looking back at some things in my past I see the
projections as what I react to instead of the objective reality, the people
who were physically there.  I suppose that's not always possible, or is it?

>>>>>Resonates to my childhood dinner table and the *if you can't say something
>>>>>nice, don't say anything* which only led to me feeling worse...
>>>>
>>>>Hiding the negative feelings doesn't make them go away.  I think this is my
>>>>reason for asking the questions if things smell fishy -- those questions
>>>>don't go away, and the smell sometimes gets stronger.
>>>
>>>I respect this...I tend to let others be and just tend to myself and my
>>>responses...something about making a decision, which may be faulty, about
>>>investing my time...then I am fairly ruthless about who I allow into my
>>>space...
>>
>>It depends on the power one feels one has, and whether we feel we can make
>>a difference by saying what we see, versus simply making your personal
>>space safe and comfortable.
>
>Interesting...have not framed it as a power point...my belief is that I
>continually make a difference by the choices I make...feeding the universal
>field...I sense there is something here about how one relates to one's
>external reality...I'll have to ruminate about this...

In re-reading what I wrote, of course both choices are "power points," just
different in where you make your power felt.  Not investing your time is
taking control of it, making a choice about it.

>>[Jo]
>>>>Can you tell me more about "trauma trance," it's a phrase I'm
>>>>not familiar with?
>>>
>>>Trauma trance...I'll try to get to this...First some assumptions...I live
>>>my life from a spiritual focus, I don't mean to be pretentious...it is just
>>>that the story I live is that All That Is experiences itself through my
>>>experiences and so I seek to be mindful on a moment to moment basis...when
>>>I am NOT mindful I can find myself in a place which is out of integrity,
>>>disconnected from spirit...happends particularly when I'm in
>>>undifferenciated fear, meaning I am reacting to fear but cannot determine
>>>the cause...experienced this in spades the first year of my health crisis
>>>when I was doing everything "right" and I was deteriorating...as I lost
>>>more and more energy which also translated into not being able to think
>>>very clearly, I fell into "poor me" which is about losing my connection to
>>>what is going on...I was aware that I was in an intense dark night of the
>>>soul, but I couldn't figure out what I was to be doing...enduring was the
>>>answer...however, there were a lot of tears shed for poor me by me..luckily
>>>I have good friends who recognize when I'm in my trauma trance and get me
>>>back into my process...
>>
>>What do they do to help you back to your process?
>
>Just remind me that I'm in my trance...mostly we laugh about it...but
>mostly they trust my process because they have experienced it and know that
>I am continuously asking myself what is going on...it is a phenomenon I
>have experienced in my deep connections which people who enter my life and
>I theirs...part of the process of relationship is teaching the other about
>how to interact, showingmodeling the process or issue...this is kind of
>hard to get to...Because my circle of friends are all examining their lives
>consciously given whatever issues may be up for each of them, we support
>each other by holding space...I've been the focal point until recently when
>each has reached out to new experiences which feed their individual
>process...and because we hold our lives as a sacred journey, we celebrate
>as well as pray...there was such beauty in my health crisis as those around
>me had their own experience...as a collective we all grew thru my
>experience...

It sounds like you have a very supportive network, very conducive to growth
of all the members.

How did you awaken to your trance?  How long after that did it take for you
to trust others with discussing it?  Did you make mistakes with others in
trusting them?

>And I am grateful for your insights...I find such joy when I learn from
>another point of life view...such enrichment

Thank you, I too feel enriched, and still curious, as you can see from my
questions!

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 7 May 1998 02:31:56 +1100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Comments:     Authenticated sender is <walterl1@pop.ihug.co.nz>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: Psybernet
Subject:      Re: People and Places
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

All,

Marie wrote to JoAnne:
> >Joanne, I think I like your (spoken in jest?) notion of a "test shadow" --
> >might that be a way to play with difference?  Perhaps a cyber-psychodrama,
> >Walter?  How might we do that here?

JoAnne  replied:
> It was half in jest, but I think we were trying to do that before with the
> bananabean.

Yes, in a way we did.  We have had other attempts at structured
approaches.  Recall the Dialogue with Psyber-L?  Or was it Psybernet?
That involved the psychodramatic principle of concretization and
role reversal.

Many people will not know what the "BannanaBean Method" is JoAnne
... I am not sure that we ever refined it to its great potential!

As far as psychodrama in cs is concerned ... a few thoughts:

I have made the common and easy mistake of trying to translate a rl
thing into cs.  I came with the idea in '93 that something like that
could be done ... quickly the focus was readjusted to *exploring the
psyche in cs* and seeing what *this* medium does with it.  Important
i think, and I have just bought the reissue of McLuhan's "Medium is
the massage" picture book which is so good on that.

However what might *cyber* drama look like?  It appears that we can
develop *forms* that use the principles of psychodrama, and other
methods  but that do not use the form.

Bananabean perhaps.  Perhaps a FAQ is called for.  I'm more than
half serious.  I think interested people could develop that off list
and then present it here. Here is a summary what I recall that to be,
perhaps the beginning of the FAQ:


When you feel strongly about someone  and want to get
through to them ... consider that it might be an aspect of your own
psyche.  Give that aspect a name:  You could call it BananaBean or
whatever you choose.  Then write a post to Bananabean, and you can
let fly all you want!  You can then also *be* Bananabean, role
reverse, and respond.

~~~

Hey!  Synchronicity strikes.  Just as there is the discussion of
"opponents and their departure" in another thread.

~~~

The BannanaBean method as posted above includes the psychodrama
principle of role reversal ... I'm not sure we had that in it before.

Moreno developed the idea and methodology of "auxiliary Egos" ...
essentially place holders for the Bannanabeans. It has a feel of the
psychodramatic.

~~~

The Glass Bead Game as developed by Charles Cameron is another
approach that involves a structured approach to the psyche.

Summary:  A board with fixed positions is used. I turn participants
place items on the board so that they link to adjoining positions.
Items could be dreams, URLs, Poems, people, quotes, pictures, music,
places etc.

It includes some psychodrama principles. Warm-up is one, ie the
preliminary process to enhance spontaneity.  The "aesthetic
production" of the drama is another.  In a recent GBG I noticed that
Charles encouraged participants to "see" the moves as people who said
different things, and then to see who you could be so as to have a
link with each.  This involves some imaginary enactment and
maximization.

People and Places ...

I notice how the methods hinted at here do create a structured
"space" and require people to honour the "rules", or the form.

The advantage of a Dialogue with psychic entity method here is that
one person an post and do that without the need for a complex
*facilitated* agreement among the list members.


Enough for now!


Walter

___________________________________________________
Walter Logeman walter@psybernet.co.nz  www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 7 May 1998 02:42:01 +1100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Comments:     Authenticated sender is <walterl1@pop.ihug.co.nz>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: Psybernet
Subject:      Re: People and Places
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

OOps here is one that I did yesterday but it did not get there ... I
have just changed email programs, again!
Date:  Wed, 6 May 1998 02:26:23 +1100

Simon,

We had some exchange about "meta" and then you wrote:

> Somehow this feels like a lecture, to me (and a lecture to me).

My tone but not my intention and my apologies for that.

At the time of writing i was feeling good about making a bold
statement about the nature of the list ... not in any sense of fight,
but a delight in what i thought was a good discussion and also of
my own grasp of it!

Something got fouled up in the process ...

> I think you're (wilfully?) misreading what I was saying. And there
> are some ironies in what you write, too. It was me who reacted
> against the incursions of 'other list processing' here (though now
> I've integrated that; I feel okay about it - thanks in part to
> Robert's post), and it was me who took you to task for, as I saw
> it, focussing on abstract structural issues - there were other
> issues that weren't being attended to, that were being avoided
> (stifled?), consciously or otherwise. As I said then, I was
> reacting out of a sense of imbalance in the list. I think it's the
> very 'experiential' aspect, and the fact that Psyber-l is
> "certainly a list that should not apologise for being self
> reflective!", as you put it, that make it a meta list. To me,
> 'meta' means 'incorporating everything', and that is what happens
> here.

Nothing wilful, Simon I feel warm towards you and your contribution,
I have in the past and feel really pleased to be doing this with you
... I'm a bit stretched for time or I'd be onto the older unfinished
post but nothing feels problematic, just complex.

I have a sense of "meta" meaning alongside and separate from, perhaps
there is the problem!  Self-reflective is "meta" I read that as you
do, but "incorporating everything" does not fit with the way i
(perhaps incorrectly) use the word ... it is just my take on the
word ~ metaphysics, alongside the physical -- non physical.

> I think that the experiential remit of the list allows
> us to be self-reflective but also the list to be self-reflective through
> our reflections on self and list, on this space which is also us! This
> reminds me of the (very) occasional discussion there has been here about
> the list as a self-aware entity in its own right (hi, Dan!).

I feel met by you Simon when you recall these moments ... I remeber
them vividly ... I'm sure Dan does too ...

There is lots more in your post but will need to go to bed soon so I
will get this posted ...

~~~

In so far as this exchange felt like a "lecture" to you and more so
that I perhaps wilfully misread you it seems like we are on the edge
of one of those shadowy areas ... this might be excacerbated by the
fact that i have yet to reply to another post from a while back,
which also has some difficulty.

I hope and am confident that we can get to a good place ... well a
better one ... however:

It is not a "test shadow" and it might not be one at all ... but it
might just serve ... for what you suggested JoAnne?

~~~


Walter



___________________________________________________
Walter Logeman walter@psybernet.co.nz  www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 6 May 1998 14:15:46 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

JoAnn,
This is getting long, but helpful in rereading...

>Hello Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>, on Mon, 4 May 1998 22:25:33 -0400,
>you wrote:
>
>>JoAnn, this is fascinating to me...thanks
>
>I too find your view fascinating.
>>JoAnne
>>When you're in a situation where two people have very different opinions of
>>>the truth, the possibility must emerge that one or the other or both are
>>>misrepresenting, intentionally or otherwise.  It's not a sure thing;
>>>parallax error can occur.  But it's human nature to be inaccurate, to
>>>remember those things that had an emotional impact, for memories to mutate,
>>>and form a more cohesive "whole" than they might otherwise if evaluated
>>>objectively.
>
>Judith:
>>I assume different opions of the truth and in fact I assume that my truth
>>probably is not your truth...I don't know what *parallax* means...however,
>>my belief is that there is no objectivity...that everything is embedded and
>>connected...sort of particle/wave Bell's Theorum...so my expectation is
>>always that what a person experiences is correct for them conscious or
>>unconscious...and my response is correct for me and I'm not invested in how
>>awake a person is, just that we are all on a continuum based on our life
>>journey
>
>Parallax is when two viewers see something from a different angle.  They
>can't see precisely the same thing because they are not in precisely the
>same position.

So this word may be describing what I am saying...my question is based in
what context...what makes up one"s *position*? I see it as serving my
particular life journey...those who come are engaging in moving me along my
path and I in theirs...this can include working out Karmic issues which
then are embedded in what I consider to be the life path agreed to before
coming here...it is my assumption that this is the purpose of the
interactions...there is then being aware of the process, you might call
this how the universal toaster *works*, and then each individual process
and path...for me the purpose is to become more awake to my soul's path and
I serve this...but I believe that this is my conscious choice...always
learning as the superordinate...

>
>That what a person sees is correct for him or her to see... that must
>involve itself with projections in some way.  That a very strong projection
>will place itself in our view until we can't ignore it any longer?  How
>does one recognize projection from reality, if there can be such a
>differentiation?  Clearly looking back at some things in my past I see the
>projections as what I react to instead of the objective reality, the people
>who were physically there.  I suppose that's not always possible, or is it?
>
>>>>>>Resonates to my childhood dinner table and the *if you can't say something
>>>>>>nice, don't say anything* which only led to me feeling worse...
>>>>>
>>>>>Hiding the negative feelings doesn't make them go away.  I think this is my
>>>>>reason for asking the questions if things smell fishy -- those questions
>>>>>don't go away, and the smell sometimes gets stronger.
>>>>
>>>>I respect this...I tend to let others be and just tend to myself and my
>>>>responses...something about making a decision, which may be faulty, about
>>>>investing my time...then I am fairly ruthless about who I allow into my
>>>>space...
>>>
>>>It depends on the power one feels one has, and whether we feel we can make
>>>a difference by saying what we see, versus simply making your personal
>>>space safe and comfortable.
>>
>>Interesting...have not framed it as a power point...my belief is that I
>>continually make a difference by the choices I make...feeding the universal
>>field...I sense there is something here about how one relates to one's
>>external reality...I'll have to ruminate about this...
>
>In re-reading what I wrote, of course both choices are "power points," just
>different in where you make your power felt.  Not investing your time is
>taking control of it, making a choice about it.

Yes, I see that now too...It comes to mind that *control* was an issue
early on when I knew my father was controlling in diabolical ways...during
that period I was seeking to understand what the nature of this control
was...synchronicity brought me to a magazine article in a doctor's office
about how a parent hooks one of their children to make up for the pains in
their early like...my experience is that when I discover the source and
nature of the control, I am no longer under the control...ironically I
didn't have control as an issue for me...then it is easy for me to simply
be with a person with a control issuse becuase I don't get triggered...and
I'm not invested in a power struggle...and yes always seeking to make
choices from a more awake place...


>
>>>[Jo]
>>>>>Can you tell me more about "trauma trance," it's a phrase I'm
>>>>>not familiar with?
>>>>
>>>>Trauma trance...I'll try to get to this...First some assumptions...I live
>>>>my life from a spiritual focus, I don't mean to be pretentious...it is just
>>>>that the story I live is that All That Is experiences itself through my
>>>>experiences and so I seek to be mindful on a moment to moment basis...when
>>>>I am NOT mindful I can find myself in a place which is out of integrity,
>>>>disconnected from spirit...happends particularly when I'm in
>>>>undifferenciated fear, meaning I am reacting to fear but cannot determine
>>>>the cause...experienced this in spades the first year of my health crisis
>>>>when I was doing everything "right" and I was deteriorating...as I lost
>>>>more and more energy which also translated into not being able to think
>>>>very clearly, I fell into "poor me" which is about losing my connection to
>>>>what is going on...I was aware that I was in an intense dark night of the
>>>>soul, but I couldn't figure out what I was to be doing...enduring was the
>>>>answer...however, there were a lot of tears shed for poor me by me..luckily
>>>>I have good friends who recognize when I'm in my trauma trance and get me
>>>>back into my process...
>>>
>>>What do they do to help you back to your process?
>>
>>Just remind me that I'm in my trance...mostly we laugh about it...but
>>mostly they trust my process because they have experienced it and know that
>>I am continuously asking myself what is going on...it is a phenomenon I
>>have experienced in my deep connections which people who enter my life and
>>I theirs...part of the process of relationship is teaching the other about
>>how to interact, showingmodeling the process or issue...this is kind of
>>hard to get to...Because my circle of friends are all examining their lives
>>consciously given whatever issues may be up for each of them, we support
>>each other by holding space...I've been the focal point until recently when
>>each has reached out to new experiences which feed their individual
>>process...and because we hold our lives as a sacred journey, we celebrate
>>as well as pray...there was such beauty in my health crisis as those around
>>me had their own experience...as a collective we all grew thru my
>>experience...
>
>It sounds like you have a very supportive network, very conducive to growth
>of all the members.
Yes, it has been life changing...prior to this my transformational work was
always done in relationship of course but always alone...alone for a very
clear reason...I'm an empath, this means that until I learned about the
energetic process in a conscious way, I couldn't be in large groups of
people...my response what to feel *crazy* because I would be taking in all
the energy patterns of the people around me unknowingly and my mind would
work to align all the information which of course couldn't be aligned and I
would have huge anxiety...I had an unconscious but survival based
process...when I found the healing community, I learned how the process of
energy worked and how my healing work, worked...I learned that I do what I
do in the *shamanic* way, meaning using my own bodypsyche as the
diagnosis...others in the group go to the place in the other person's
bodymind which is different...when young I just *knew* and didn't know
why....my process was faulty because I didn't know to ground the negative
energy I was taking in and that eventually led to the removal of the tumor
which collected this...

>
>How did you awaken to your trance?

I think it was a knowing I always had...I knew what people said was reality
wasn't...but I had a universal intervention when I was 20 where a doctor
said that I could take pills the rest of my life and get out of my
emotional pain or his words *you can figure it out for yourself.* that was
my Hellen Keller Wa Wa moment...I am fascinated by puzzles and somehow the
doctor found the hook to awaken my fascination with my life because by then
I was totally paralyzed by my lack of understanding about what was
happening..after that I would be led to the next piece I needed as I
engaged the process.

>  How long after that did it take for you
>to trust others with discussing it?  Did you make mistakes with others in
>trusting them?
Can't recall but it was probably 10 years of quietly investigating process
and those dynamics which made up *me*...then my first teacher came and I
was brought into her group and there were people living the radical
viewpoint based in the Seth Material...and for all of my knowing I
experienced an amazing betrayal 3 years ago...I was blindsided...ouch! but
the learning and transformation in the aftermath has been
extraordinary...it was a lesson for me as a teacher...

>
>>And I am grateful for your insights...I find such joy when I learn from
>>another point of life view...such enrichment
>
>Thank you, I too feel enriched, and still curious, as you can see from my
>questions!
>
>-JoAnne
It is easier today to live openly with the spirital path and the fringe
ideas about life now moving into more credibility...just when I was
enjoying the life of an excentric :_)...my conceit...

I sense you live a different process for your life...
Blessings,
Judith
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 7 May 1998 21:10:10 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
In-Reply-To:  <v01550101b1752a253345@[207.54.181.58]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>, on Wed, 6 May 1998 14:15:46 -0400,
you wrote:

>JoAnn,
>This is getting long, but helpful in rereading...

Yes!

[JoAnne]
>>Parallax is when two viewers see something from a different angle.  They
>>can't see precisely the same thing because they are not in precisely the
>>same position.
>
[Judith]
>So this word may be describing what I am saying...my question is based in
>what context...what makes up one"s *position*? I see it as serving my
>particular life journey...those who come are engaging in moving me along my
>path and I in theirs...this can include working out Karmic issues which
>then are embedded in what I consider to be the life path agreed to before
>coming here...it is my assumption that this is the purpose of the
>interactions...there is then being aware of the process, you might call
>this how the universal toaster *works*, and then each individual process
>and path...for me the purpose is to become more awake to my soul's path and
>I serve this...but I believe that this is my conscious choice...always
>learning as the superordinate...

Is this the purpose for all?  I ask only because the general "awake to
soul's path" seems to be a preliminary kind of purpose, a preliminary to
getting on that path.  The paths may be different.

Or perhaps it may be one's purpose to ignore one's path, to learn what that
is like.  I remember discussing original sin and eating from the tree of
knowledge of good and evil, and feeling that the concept is that truly
knowing what sin is occurs instantaneously with committing the sin and not
before.

Which winds its way to the wounded healer, and also to Satan or evil being
necessarily of God in order for God to be omniscient.

[snip]

>>In re-reading what I wrote, of course both choices are "power points," just
>>different in where you make your power felt.  Not investing your time is
>>taking control of it, making a choice about it.
>
>Yes, I see that now too...It comes to mind that *control* was an issue
>early on when I knew my father was controlling in diabolical ways...during
>that period I was seeking to understand what the nature of this control
>was...synchronicity brought me to a magazine article in a doctor's office
>about how a parent hooks one of their children to make up for the pains in
>their early like...my experience is that when I discover the source and
>nature of the control, I am no longer under the control...ironically I
>didn't have control as an issue for me...then it is easy for me to simply
>be with a person with a control issuse becuase I don't get triggered...and
>I'm not invested in a power struggle...and yes always seeking to make
>choices from a more awake place...

Interesting.  I do have control and power issues, and encounters with
others who have control and power issues can get to be rather unpleasant.
I'm happy I can discuss these things with you, I feel unthreatened, and I
appreciate your listening and responding.

>>It sounds like you have a very supportive network, very conducive to growth
>>of all the members.
>Yes, it has been life changing...prior to this my transformational work was
>always done in relationship of course but always alone...alone for a very
>clear reason...I'm an empath, this means that until I learned about the
>energetic process in a conscious way, I couldn't be in large groups of
>people...my response what to feel *crazy* because I would be taking in all
>the energy patterns of the people around me unknowingly and my mind would
>work to align all the information which of course couldn't be aligned and I
>would have huge anxiety...I had an unconscious but survival based
>process...when I found the healing community, I learned how the process of
>energy worked and how my healing work, worked...I learned that I do what I
>do in the *shamanic* way, meaning using my own bodypsyche as the
>diagnosis...others in the group go to the place in the other person's
>bodymind which is different...when young I just *knew* and didn't know
>why....my process was faulty because I didn't know to ground the negative
>energy I was taking in and that eventually led to the removal of the tumor
>which collected this...

Funny, I just went to wash my hands a minute ago and that song "a little
bit of soap" was running through my head as I squeezed out the soap, not
thinking of the part where the soap does (or doesn't) wash away my tears,
then came back to read this and that line instantly sprang to life.

After one particularly unpleasant situation came to a head and I made a
separation decision, I took a long salty bath and had a bit of a cry,
submerging myself in the water, wishing I had some seaweed to drape over
me.  Then got up out of the tub, started the shower and washed away those
tears!  I had to use a very physical grounding method.

Your process is very interesting.  I remember reading about your tumor,
thanks for telling us about it.  This is probably a weird question, but...
Were you at all concerned with or interested in what physically happened to
the tumor after it was removed?

>>How did you awaken to your trance?
>
>I think it was a knowing I always had...I knew what people said was reality
>wasn't...but I had a universal intervention when I was 20 where a doctor
>said that I could take pills the rest of my life and get out of my
>emotional pain or his words *you can figure it out for yourself.* that was
>my Hellen Keller Wa Wa moment...I am fascinated by puzzles and somehow the
>doctor found the hook to awaken my fascination with my life because by then
>I was totally paralyzed by my lack of understanding about what was
>happening..after that I would be led to the next piece I needed as I
>engaged the process.

This makes me think.  I don't see myself trusting anyone enough to give me
any kind of psychoactive pills, at this moment.  I don't like seeing
doctors, I have only recently finally gotten some dental work done which
was needed for years.  I'm an observer, not a truster, even if I'm a
believer, when it comes to my self.  I can lose money and not be too upset;
I can be insulted and figure the person just doesn't know me.  But to mess
with my mind or my body!  That's a line I let very few cross.

Were you in desperation or were/are you more willing to let people cross
that boundary with you?  It sounds like your discovery may have had to do
with doing it yourself, my discovery will probably be about not doing it
myself.

>>  How long after that did it take for you
>>to trust others with discussing it?  Did you make mistakes with others in
>>trusting them?
>Can't recall but it was probably 10 years of quietly investigating process
>and those dynamics which made up *me*...then my first teacher came and I
>was brought into her group and there were people living the radical
>viewpoint based in the Seth Material...and for all of my knowing I
>experienced an amazing betrayal 3 years ago...I was blindsided...ouch! but
>the learning and transformation in the aftermath has been
>extraordinary...it was a lesson for me as a teacher...

Broken trust is disorienting and painful.  Did you learn to look for
something in particular, or to realize that trust can be broken no matter
how well you look?  I think I'm learning the latter, again and again.

>>>And I am grateful for your insights...I find such joy when I learn from
>>>another point of life view...such enrichment
>>
>>Thank you, I too feel enriched, and still curious, as you can see from my
>>questions!
>>
>>-JoAnne
>It is easier today to live openly with the spirital path and the fringe
>ideas about life now moving into more credibility...just when I was
>enjoying the life of an excentric :_)...my conceit...
>
>I sense you live a different process for your life...

I think I'm continually looking for the truth and certainty, and the most
information, and that embodies a conceit too -- that I will know it when I
see it!  I try to look at things from different sides, but still probably
because I think if I see it from all sides I will recognize it later.  I'm
often willing to go through lots of dreck and sort out the pearls from the
muck, listen to drunk and disgusted people in bars, read things written by
"bad" writers, associate with the "lower orders" as they are perceived by
society.

Astrologically, I have a Sagittarian Sun, Jupiter, Moon, (all these
conjunct, Sun now getting that Pluto transit) plus Sag. Midheaven, (looking
for truth and lots of it), Pisces ascendant (going low and high to find
it), Mercury and Mars conjunct in Scorpio (digging deep and thinking deep),
North Node and Venus in Libra (appreciates the pearl), Saturn in Capricorn
(think of myself as practical and not opposed to rules, hierarchy and
system when it's justified).

Uranus in Leo, Neptune in Scorpio, Pluto in Virgo.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 8 May 1998 16:57:49 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <199805061436.CAA28926@cheech.ihug.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Simon,
>
>We had some exchange about "meta" and then you wrote:
>
>> Somehow this feels like a lecture, to me (and a lecture to me).
>
>My tone but not my intention and my apologies for that.
>
>At the time of writing i was feeling good about making a bold
>statement about the nature of the list ... not in any sense of fight,
>but a delight in what i thought was a good discussion and also of
>my own grasp of it!
>
>Something got fouled up in the process ...

...

>Nothing wilful, Simon I feel warm towards you and your contribution,
>I have in the past and feel really pleased to be doing this with you
>... I'm a bit stretched for time or I'd be onto the older unfinished
>post but nothing feels problematic, just complex.

Thank you for this response, Walter. I hadn't realised how much I'd been
holding my breath (holding the tension?) until I read your post. Not that I
was expecting a negative or thoughtless response from you. Rather, I was
daring to hope that the process would lead to better understanding, better
listening, a confirmation that there was something worthwhile to develop.
That creates a tension in itself, I guess.

I would like to know more on this, Walter: "Something got fouled up in the
process ..."

Also: If I say "Your post feels like this... and it feels like this because
of that in me...", is your post left untouched?

Thinking about what I was trying to do:
Trying to respond honestly from an affective level yet also be honest about
where that response was coming from.. which meant taking responsibility for
looking at the *why*... being self-reflective while being self-projective,
perhaps...


>I have a sense of "meta" meaning alongside and separate from, perhaps
>there is the problem!  Self-reflective is "meta" I read that as you
>do, but "incorporating everything" does not fit with the way i
>(perhaps incorrectly) use the word ... it is just my take on the
>word ~ metaphysics, alongside the physical -- non physical.

Is this the perspective of the therapist-patient relationship coming
through? Alongside and separate from...  Having an overview, providing a
container, yet not containing within yourself... always being clear about
barriers, always sticking to a role that is clear about maintaining
separation... Do I read this right? If so, it seems rather different from
the imperatives of psyberspace, and of this list...

Surely metaphysics contains within its field discussion of physics - or at
least the findings of physics, which change our view of the universe, of
reality, of ourselves...

Meta in fact seems quite versatile in its application. As a preposition it
accords with your sense of it, as a prefix perhaps more with mine... you
might disagree! I think of metagalaxy, metalanguage, metalinguistics; eg.
metagalaxy = the set of all galaxies. (There I go with sets again!)

Still, the literal meaning doesn't really matter so much. I think your
phrasing speaks to the real significance: "I have a sense of "meta" meaning
alongside and separate from".

It's that "sense of" that's interesting.
For you: alongside, separate from.
For me: incorporating, containing.

What might this distinction uncover??


>> I think that the experiential remit of the list allows
>> us to be self-reflective but also the list to be self-reflective through
>> our reflections on self and list, on this space which is also us! This
>> reminds me of the (very) occasional discussion there has been here about
>> the list as a self-aware entity in its own right (hi, Dan!).
>
>I feel met by you Simon when you recall these moments ... I remeber
>them vividly ... I'm sure Dan does too ...

This surprised me! I hadn't seen it like that... feeling met. A lovely way
to put it, though.

And isn't this the essence of dialogue? A feeling of being met... (though
not always a pleasant feeling, necessarily - depends, perhaps, on what
parts of you are being met!)


>There is lots more in your post but will need to go to bed soon so I
>will get this posted ...
>
>~~~

And this time I feel pleasurable anticipation in waiting for your next
post... (though maybe I'll regret saying that!). Whenever you're ready to
catch the next wave!

>In so far as this exchange felt like a "lecture" to you and more so
>that I perhaps wilfully misread you it seems like we are on the edge
>of one of those shadowy areas ... this might be excacerbated by the
>fact that i have yet to reply to another post from a while back,
>which also has some difficulty.

As you say, not problematic, just complex.

>I hope and am confident that we can get to a good place ... well a
>better one ... however:
>
>It is not a "test shadow" and it might not be one at all ... but it
>might just serve ... for what you suggested JoAnne?
>
>~~~
>
>
>Walter

A shadowette, perhaps?!


Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 8 May 1998 16:36:09 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: does the shadow have a silly season; events on jung-psych
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

JoAnn,


>Hello Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>, on Wed, 6 May 1998 14:15:46 -0400,
>you wrote:
>
>>JoAnn,
>>This is getting long, but helpful in rereading...
>
>Yes!
>
>[JoAnne]
>>>Parallax is when two viewers see something from a different angle.  They
>>>can't see precisely the same thing because they are not in precisely the
>>>same position.
>>
>[Judith]
>>So this word may be describing what I am saying...my question is based in
>>what context...what makes up one"s *position*? I see it as serving my
>>particular life journey...those who come are engaging in moving me along my
>>path and I in theirs...this can include working out Karmic issues which
>>then are embedded in what I consider to be the life path agreed to before
>>coming here...it is my assumption that this is the purpose of the
>>interactions...there is then being aware of the process, you might call
>>this how the universal toaster *works*, and then each individual process
>>and path...for me the purpose is to become more awake to my soul's path and
>>I serve this...but I believe that this is my conscious choice...always
>>learning as the superordinate...
>
JO>Is this the purpose for all?  I ask only because the general "awake to
>soul's path" seems to be a preliminary kind of purpose, a preliminary to
>getting on that path.  The paths may be different.
>
I work from the assumption that each is on their path, awake or not, and
each path is an individual journey, which is why I work from the assumption
that only the individual knows what that means, that I can only support the
individual knowing, part of this is knowing from a very young age that what
people thot was good for me wasn't, or at least didn't take in the deep
purpose...ironically my empathicness could sense each person's deep purpose
so that even tho experiences hurt me, I nearly always understood why it was
happening...a profound sense of compassion for myself and other's
resulted... ...the issue of being awakened to one's path for me is becoming
in touch with one's soul and what the universe wants to manifest through
me...soul growth, evolution in universal consciousness, which is another
assumption...this all then determines choice and the degree of freedom I
may be able to exercise in any given moment...

>Or perhaps it may be one's purpose to ignore one's path, to learn what that
>is like.  I remember discussing original sin and eating from the tree of
>knowledge of good and evil, and feeling that the concept is that truly
>knowing what sin is occurs instantaneously with committing the sin and not
>before.

which is exactly what I mean by the learning as the superordinate...acting
as if...engaging in life experience and seeing what that means...my life
has been a succession of putting myself into experiences in order to peel
the onion...Marsha Sinetar wrote a book Developing the 21st century
Mind...when I read it I had to laugh because she said that one had to be
mentally healthy to use her process yet it was exactly the process I used
to heal my deepest issues...This all has to do with how one views life and
the story of creation and one's place...I don't think there is any one
answer or *right* way, there is a way or many ways...just as I don't think
there is Truth but that always get me in trouble :-) with philosophers
which then assign me to the relativists camp...
>
>Which winds its way to the wounded healer, and also to Satan or evil being
>necessarily of God in order for God to be omniscient.

I'm not groking this...is this about discernment ultimately...is this
dualism? I'll have to think on this...
>
>[snip]
>
>>>In re-reading what I wrote, of course both choices are "power points," just
>>>different in where you make your power felt.  Not investing your time is
>>>taking control of it, making a choice about it.
>>
>>Yes, I see that now too...It comes to mind that *control* was an issue
>>early on when I knew my father was controlling in diabolical ways...during
>>that period I was seeking to understand what the nature of this control
>>was...synchronicity brought me to a magazine article in a doctor's office
>>about how a parent hooks one of their children to make up for the pains in
>>their early like...my experience is that when I discover the source and
>>nature of the control, I am no longer under the control...ironically I
>>didn't have control as an issue for me...then it is easy for me to simply
>>be with a person with a control issuse becuase I don't get triggered...and
>>I'm not invested in a power struggle...and yes always seeking to make
>>choices from a more awake place...
>
>Interesting.  I do have control and power issues, and encounters with
>others who have control and power issues can get to be rather unpleasant.
>I'm happy I can discuss these things with you, I feel unthreatened, and I
>appreciate your listening and responding.

Yup! Assisting each other's learning...way back in the early 70's when I
discovered Seth (Jane Robert's channeled him for years) he spoke of finding
the beliefs which are holding one, in his context keeping one from engaging
in creating one's reality-which is just a learning step along the way to
co-creation...so whatever issue is being mirrored in my interactions with
other's I follow my response to find the hook...I did this in a
premeditative way  where I would be triggered, keep putting myself into the
experience while I followed the wire to where it was plugged, then I could
rewire it...I did this over a 7 year period in my 30's...just my process,
>
>>>It sounds like you have a very supportive network, very conducive to growth
>>>of all the members.
>>Yes, it has been life changing...prior to this my transformational work was
>>always done in relationship of course but always alone...alone for a very
>>clear reason...I'm an empath, this means that until I learned about the
>>energetic process in a conscious way, I couldn't be in large groups of
>>people...my response what to feel *crazy* because I would be taking in all
>>the energy patterns of the people around me unknowingly and my mind would
>>work to align all the information which of course couldn't be aligned and I
>>would have huge anxiety...I had an unconscious but survival based
>>process...when I found the healing community, I learned how the process of
>>energy worked and how my healing work, worked...I learned that I do what I
>>do in the *shamanic* way, meaning using my own bodypsyche as the
>>diagnosis...others in the group go to the place in the other person's
>>bodymind which is different...when young I just *knew* and didn't know
>>why....my process was faulty because I didn't know to ground the negative
>>energy I was taking in and that eventually led to the removal of the tumor
>>which collected this...
>
>Funny, I just went to wash my hands a minute ago and that song "a little
>bit of soap" was running through my head as I squeezed out the soap, not
>thinking of the part where the soap does (or doesn't) wash away my tears,
>then came back to read this and that line instantly sprang to life.
>
>After one particularly unpleasant situation came to a head and I made a
>separation decision, I took a long salty bath and had a bit of a cry,
>submerging myself in the water, wishing I had some seaweed to drape over
>me.  Then got up out of the tub, started the shower and washed away those
>tears!  I had to use a very physical grounding method.
Gee  I'm a shower taker...so maybe I could have avoided the whole thing if
I'd taken baths? :-)
>
>Your process is very interesting.  I remember reading about your tumor,
>thanks for telling us about it.  This is probably a weird question, but...
>Were you at all concerned with or interested in what physically happened to
>the tumor after it was removed?
Yes, but I'm not one of those that wanted to see it...I'm sure it is being
examined...thymoma tumors are fairly rare and there is no research on them
other than myosemio gravis where the tumor is discovered during
diagnosis...so I wished it well on its journey
>
>>>How did you awaken to your trance?
>>
>>I think it was a knowing I always had...I knew what people said was reality
>>wasn't...but I had a universal intervention when I was 20 where a doctor
>>said that I could take pills the rest of my life and get out of my
>>emotional pain or his words *you can figure it out for yourself.* that was
>>my Hellen Keller Wa Wa moment...I am fascinated by puzzles and somehow the
>>doctor found the hook to awaken my fascination with my life because by then
>>I was totally paralyzed by my lack of understanding about what was
>>happening..after that I would be led to the next piece I needed as I
>>engaged the process.
>
>This makes me think.  I don't see myself trusting anyone enough to give me
>any kind of psychoactive pills, at this moment.  I don't like seeing
>doctors, I have only recently finally gotten some dental work done which
>was needed for years.  I'm an observer, not a truster, even if I'm a
>believer, when it comes to my self.  I can lose money and not be too upset;
>I can be insulted and figure the person just doesn't know me.  But to mess
>with my mind or my body!  That's a line I let very few cross.

Good strategy in my view...seems as if you trust yourself
>
>Were you in desperation or were/are you more willing to let people cross
>that boundary with you?  It sounds like your discovery may have had to do
>with doing it yourself, my discovery will probably be about not doing it
>myself.
There were elements of desperationfear...I only went to the doctor when a
new friend in my life, a medical intuitive, confronted me...other friends
were planning a kidnapping to get me to the doctor...but the real issue was
that I was working through a huge spiritual betrayal which as it turns out
resulted in me losing my faith (which is that discerment thing...I had
always had faith, Richard Moss definition of the ability to stay) That
through me into huge fear which would rise up like waves...I was working
with my healer at the time and nothing we were doing was working which is
why I knew I had to find the spiritual purpose before I went into the
medical system...which I feared...by my internal medicine doctor is aces
and led me to the right place...but I trusted that I would find the right
people who wanted to engage in the experience...always before I had had to
take care of myself because no one understood, but this time I had to have
help and of course it came in waves...people I'd never met before showed up
with teas they had made for me, I was in prayer circles around the country
I found out later...it was huge...now I didn't take this as assisting me
but in assisting my soul growth...it was operating on many levels...and
everyone who participated learned...(this is very LOOOOONNNGG to talk about
because of the complexity of it all) anyway it was a learning to work in
community issue for me...
>
>>>  How long after that did it take for you
>>>to trust others with discussing it?  Did you make mistakes with others in
>>>trusting them?
>>Can't recall but it was probably 10 years of quietly investigating process
>>and those dynamics which made up *me*...then my first teacher came and I
>>was brought into her group and there were people living the radical
>>viewpoint based in the Seth Material...and for all of my knowing I
>>experienced an amazing betrayal 3 years ago...I was blindsided...ouch! but
>>the learning and transformation in the aftermath has been
>>extraordinary...it was a lesson for me as a teacher...
>
>Broken trust is disorienting and painful.  Did you learn to look for
>something in particular, or to realize that trust can be broken no matter
>how well you look?  I think I'm learning the latter, again and again.
The learning had to do with, how can I put this, discerning the probable
self from the person in this reality...however, the person in reality had
issues which I didn't recognize...in this case jeolousy. Jeolousy is not in
my frame of reference, envy yes, but that is different...because I didn't
have jeolousy on my radar screen, I couldn't see it and didn't see how it
was playing out...and though I was this woman's mentor I, mistakenly,
didn't respect my knowledge which I gave freely, and she used it against
me...there is more here but I've made a vow never to revisit it...suffice
to say there were lessons learned which have freed me...
>
>>>>And I am grateful for your insights...I find such joy when I learn from
>>>>another point of life view...such enrichment
>>>
>>>Thank you, I too feel enriched, and still curious, as you can see from my
>>>questions!
>>>
>>>-JoAnne
>>It is easier today to live openly with the spirital path and the fringe
>>ideas about life now moving into more credibility...just when I was
>>enjoying the life of an excentric :_)...my conceit...
>>
>>I sense you live a different process for your life...
>
>I think I'm continually looking for the truth and certainty, and the most
>information, and that embodies a conceit too -- that I will know it when I
>see it!  I try to look at things from different sides, but still probably
>because I think if I see it from all sides I will recognize it later.  I'm
>often willing to go through lots of dreck and sort out the pearls from the
>muck, listen to drunk and disgusted people in bars, read things written by
>"bad" writers, associate with the "lower orders" as they are perceived by
>society.

So truth and certainty must have deep meaning to you...my healer uses the
Medicine Wheel and teaches us to look at each issue from the 9 directions
before making a decision...seems to be a good process...
>
>Astrologically, I have a Sagittarian Sun, Jupiter, Moon, (all these
>conjunct, Sun now getting that Pluto transit) plus Sag. Midheaven, (looking
>for truth and lots of it), Pisces ascendant (going low and high to find
>it), Mercury and Mars conjunct in Scorpio (digging deep and thinking deep),
>North Node and Venus in Libra (appreciates the pearl), Saturn in Capricorn
>(think of myself as practical and not opposed to rules, hierarchy and
>system when it's justified).
>
>Uranus in Leo, Neptune in Scorpio, Pluto in Virgo.
>
>-JoAnne

Wow! I have no idea what all that means, but I believe Astrology is really
a way of describing one's life fractal in relationship to the universe, and
life is then a process of what these aspects mean in one's life for one's
life path..I also have thot that there is an archetypal connnection which
can help decode what is going on ie: what is being triggered...I keep
losing my chart :-) but I am an Aquarian which is a Duh...

Now I have to go make paper...enjoying but I think I am repeating myself EGAD
Blessings,
Judith
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 9 May 1998 07:47:00 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Colaborative filtering at Conference
Comments: To: GROUP-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM, josh on <dee@easynet.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I will be attending the Harvard CyberCon at the end of the month.
I just got an interesting email in preparation for that.  Here is
a quote:

-SPECIAL NOTE: After May 8, you will have the optional
opportunity to
sign-up to be

:: -SPECIAL NOTE:

:: Through use
:: of "collaborative filtering", we can learn more about your interests and
:: match you with likeminded people. Visit the web site at
:: http://cybercon98.harvard.edu and take the time to answer the questions
:: that are posted there.  This will make your experience at the conference
:: even more stimulating.

I have not looked there yet ...

However for those who are familiar with the idea of sociometry
and its relationship to the psyche this is an interesting move!

Walter



___________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 9 May 1998 13:02:22 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: Thoughts and feelings about writing in Psyber-L
In-Reply-To:  <v03110705b168f77b70a1@[195.200.19.148]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Simon,
I appreciated the recent post in "People and Places" before I
respond I wan to return to this thread. This is the one i think
where the ball is in my court:

  Re: Thoughts and feelings about writing in Psyber-L
  Sun, 26 Apr 1998 19:18:35 +0100

you wrote:

> I was trying to get away from endless quoting when I wrote previously, but
> perhaps that's not possible!

I like the conversational style using quoting ... however as
someone said ... Susan? it can promote "point by point"
competitiveness.  Also I like to be selective an pick up on what
i think is most important.

> Well, okay, but what you actually said originally was:
>
> >The difficulty I think I have had is that when I have *open* discussion
> >about list owning ... the very core stuff about creating psychological
> >spaces on the net I feel a lack of response ...
>
> I read that, not unreasonably, as you saying that discussion about
> list-owning was the very core stuff about creating psychological spaces on
> the net. I'm quoting it now just  to point out that that was what I was
> reacting to.

Not unreasonably at all Simon.  I said "the" and then
contradicted myself ... forgive me.  Since this post we have
already discussed what underlies this for me, two things:
Firstly, that I have an interest in design of virtual
conversation spaces which I think has a big influence on the
texture of the discussion. I think this idea ... being somewhat
"hardwired' is not very popular.  More popular is the idea that
people and their heartfelt contributions create the spaces ...
They are not even comparable really ... so "the" was too strong,
but "at the core" I still like.

Secondly ... perhaps the source of the feeling tone you have
picked up on is the isolation i feel here at times.  Marie ... in
a post still awaiting my response ... thought i had withdrawn and
that this contributed to the isolation, that was not my
experience ... I recall writing about the shame I felt posting up
revisions to the "conserved files". I am hard on myself when i do
the "structural stuff" ... I did get some good feedback and
discussion but whatever the facts are about that i *felt*
isolated and still feel unresolved with these issues I call
"valuing my animus".

I did not mean and do not mean to complain though ... and if that
tone was there ore if it persists ... apologies.

Simon said:
> >> Sure, you can have clever, polite, safe discussions
> >> about structural issues, but is this really the essential stuff of
> >> psychological spaces?

I replied:
> >I don't see it as separate from the personal, or the more collective psyche.
> >It does not feel more safe than other discussion to *me*, I think I have
> >been saying that as I do it ... feeling quite vulnerable as I work on those
> >issues.  I find there is a certain pain associated with creating something
> >... yet I keep doing it.

> I think there's a difference between talking about list-owning or, say, the
> seven levels of psyberspace, and talking about the feelings that, for you,
> surround talking about list-owning or the seven levels of psyberspace. If I
> had responded to you by talking about list-owning, rather than keying into
> your feelings about talking about list-owning, that would have been safer
> ground, wouldn't it?

Yes. Both are important to me.  They are different.  I know i can
feel a lot while writing and posting about the structure of
Psybernet ... what it might be, what it is ... I want to come to
some sort of peace with this exploration and invention but i cant
find it.

This is one of those cases where I am merged with my ideas I
think ... I might do well to develop some detachment.  Often they
feel like babies! As I read about more "communities" on the net I
wonder where this fits in and where i fit in and I can't
distinguish the two very clearly!

In 1970 I initiated an alternative community ... a commune and
about 5 years later there were three communal houses and a
cooperatively owned bakery.  Apart from the bakery the community
is still there today ... but nothing like the vision of it that i
had. For about 20 years i totally forgot about it, more recently
i have been involved with it as it had a crisis and called on
assistance from past members ...

Why am I writing this?  I think it is because those past efforts
and this one all tap into a deep place in me and while there is a
difference as you say, about the substantive stuff and the
feelings they are both related to my core.

I'm repetitive ... but this post has taken long enough, so i wont
edit it at this point.

I said:
> >I find there is a certain pain associated with creating something
> >... yet I keep doing it.    Certainly feeling when there were flames that
> >others expect me to put out and so on.

Simon asks:
> I'm not sure how these two sentences relate, Walter. Perhaps you're talking
> about the ongoing creation of psyber-l as a process sometimes forged in
> flames??

The last sentence is badly worded.  I think I was talking of the
feelings i have when I think the *process* here is the result of
the way I have set up the space and / or the way i facilitate.  I
guess like a teacher whose class goes haywire, who then does not
blame the students but looks at his / her own part in that.


> >I also hope that the reflections on
> >the role of listowner -- and the associated questions are pertinent to us
> >all & not just to me.
>
> And also, in your original post, you wrote:
>
> >I have some reluctance to be the "hub" ... keeping things going for the
> >sake of it. I am also >perturbed that a pertinent discussion goes so quiet
> >...
>
> I suppose I am thinking that you weren't perturbed when another pertinent
> discussion went quiet.

It is evident that these "list ownerish" things mean a lot to me.
The more substantive stuff does too ... Simon were *you*
perturbed when the list went quiet on certain themes?

On silence in Psyber-L...
> Your experience can't change whether or not it *is* a breakdown. Whether or
> not you *see* it as a breakdown depends on your experience... What does
> your experience lead you to conclude?

Silence and breakdown of discussion is in that realm which is
neither objective or subjective. Naming what goes on here or in
any sort of complex people thing is to be somewhat of a poet.
Attempts to name these things once and for all I think are quite
oppressive ... the medical model tries to do that in mental
health.  Not to say it should not be done at times ...

I felt did not experience a breakdown over the summer (here)
rather I was in the outdoors a lot and also had the holidays and
christmas.  I know there were sparse times on the list but i also
recall flickers of respect and caring as people went through
grief and changes ... There may well be unfinished threads from
ages ago ... perhaps people who were not welcomed or responded to
... I hope they bring that it, and that it is not too late.

So, I would not call it a breakdown but a time when a lot of
tennyson was held, through the tension there was the best effort
of quite a few to be here and hold the space open.

Now that is my somewhat subjective sense of it, but i am entirely
open to a more fitting description and to modify it totally if I
discover more.  In other words while we may all have different
descriptions and experiences, not just *any* description will do.


> >I find I have filled
> >the silence (in my head) with some yearning & wanting and my last email
> >expressed some of that,
>
> Your yearning and wanting is to build something that people will find
> valuable, yes?

Yes. Also something that fulfills the shaping that makes this the
endeavour that it is.


> Your expression about filling the silence is interesting. Maybe I'm just
> being perverse, but I could (in fact, did initially) read it as saying that
> there's a silence about something in your mind that you fill with your
> desire to talk about "the more cognitive stuff" (to borrow a quote from
> your original post).

Not how i sense my own responses ... I have a sense of there
being a vast space here where many threads can happen at once
which occasionally intertwine and shed light on each other ... as
the conversation between JoAnne and Judith seems to do
occasionally on this discussion.


> It's okay by me, and I'm glad you feel okay about it too. I hope you don't
> mind s-l-o-w discussions though. I'm a slow writer, plus I have to spend a
> lot of time on things that have nothing to do with (thinking about)
> psychological issues. But these issues percolate away in the background,
> nonetheless.
>
> I think 'self-indulgence' is a narrower interpretation of what I said, but
> I guess you've keyed into what 'self-absorbed' means for you. Personally I
> don't think self-indulgence per se is anything to feel bad about, nor is
> self-absorption for that matter; it's all a question of context and degree.

This is all fine.  I'm not sure about self-absorbed and
indulgent, you were annoyed about something i said ... and I
understand that & feel ok about it, I did not like my own tone of
voice at the time ...

In there something got fouled up (to refer to your question in a
recent post.) I am not sure exactly what, though i think we have
straightened out most of the wrinkles in the ongoing discussions.
I have a sense of the shadowette being mostly in the light , with
perhaps a bit of morning mist which the day will take care of.



Walter





___________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 11 May 1998 09:25:37 -0500
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      "Criteria for a paradigm-shifting device"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

all,

from http://www.uia.org/uiadocs/device.htm, (Devising a Paradigm-shifting
Device by Anthony Judge) while the next highest level had the original link
and links to more papers of interest at web site for the cutting edge Union
of International Organizations.

The implications of the following are many, but for me the following raise
questions about designs fluid enough yet structured enough to support the
'line of least resistance' reinforcing these criteria.

***

>Criteria for a paradigm-shifting device

ability to hold attention
ability to offer excitement regarding unforeseen or unpredictable outcomes
sense of surprise and discovery of new patterns
sense of movement, achievement and progress
a new or renewed sense of coherence
a discovery of new abilities, skills or resources
a new sense of identity and individual, or collective, self-respect

But these might well be seen as desirable effects. A sharper focus is
required on the characteristics which lead to these outcomes. These might
include:

"clearing" old patterns, to enable new patterns to emerge
"inventing" or discovering new patterns
"building" the new patterns
"cultivating" emergent patterns
"discovering" unforeseen new levels which offer new perspectives
"reframing" winning and losing
"appreciating" the emergence of unforeseen variants
"passing on" new skills and insights
"being reminded" of the continuing, and unrecognized, merits of older patterns

***

Reframing the paradgim cage: the underlying challenge

If we are in a paradigmatic trap, how can this be usefully visualized? As
noted in the case of personal relationships, the trap bears some
resemblance to a cubic cage. There are categories "above", like parents and
superiors. Those "below" could include children and those we consider
inferiors (or possibly trying to rise above, to reject, or to deny). There
are those on the "right", whether politically or in terms of moral
rectitude; and those on the "left" representing unexplored, even sinister,
alternatives. In "front" are the categories to which we respond as work
challenges or as windows of opportunity for moving "forward"; whereas
"behind" are those corresponding to the context we have come from (our
background), on which we may rely, but from which we are endeavouring to
move away or distinguish ourselves.

Variations of these directional interpretations could be associated with
each of the domains explored above. Many efforts to categorize or explain
the present condition of humanity make use of a standard grid of cartesian
coordinates -- defining options in the four resulting quadrants. Usually
the bottom, left is reserved for the obviously negative, to be rejected;
the top, right is reserved for the favoured combination; the other two are
attributed to extremes, the unbalanced alternatives (Schylla and Charybdis)
between which we must navigate. Missing from such a 4-fold representation
of the trap (lying "perpendicular" to the page), is the context of the
explanation (the broader picture, offering a perspective on alternatives --
"above") and perspectives that have been rejected, denied, excluded or
treated as inferior ("down"). The 4-fold map is like a compass that can
guide navigators north, south, east and west over a cognitive flatland, but
offers no information on "up" and "down".

The "flavour" of the trap can become more evident by seeing each of these 6
directions like a bar on a cage. This would correspond to the constraints
on our ability to get out of the cage and to move successfully in any
particular direction -- without pulling the rest of the cage along. The 6
ways are effectively barred. The question is how to reframe the trap from
this perspective.

One approach is to imagine cutting through one particular bar. It now
appears to offer an escape from the cage -- or at least movement into a
neighbouring cell in the array. But all that this achieves is to change the
conditions of the trap as a whole, possibly for better or for worse. It
remains a cell. It is worth reflecting on the Chinese I Ching as a mapping
of the conditions resulting from sawing through one or more of the 6 bars
of a cell. The 64 hexagrams in that scheme (each depicted as 6 bars, whole
or broken) describe the qualitative experience of decision-making
conditions in which one or more of the categorical bars is "cut".

(Anthony Judge (judge@uia.be))

***

wishes for a good week to everybody!

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 11 May 1998 13:18:22 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      The Hot New Medium Is ... Email
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The Hot New Medium Is ... Email

A recent  article by David S. Bennahum

" List publishing is not merely information delivered to your mailbox,
 it's the devolution of mass media into the hands of everyday people.
 And it's growing faster than the Web. "

http://memex.org/lists.html


Worth reading!



Walter


__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 11 May 1998 09:36:36 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: The Hot New Medium Is ... Email
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Walter,
sounds fascinating...i'm torn between reading the article which I know will
*instigate* a flood of new thots but which will take me out of my *artist's
mode* which I need to be connected to for my rapidly approaching studio
opening on Saturday...

I find that engaging here over the past weeks, and I want to say *very
happily* so, has definitely moved me away from where I need to be to touch
the space which is asking to manifest thru my papermaking...I've been
luxurating in that space for months now since my illness impeded my thot
processes...now I need to reconnect to a process which will allow me to
move withinbetween these realms...interesting the paper is created in the
silence...

I will return to this article and Hoon's stuff later...

In gratefulness,
Judith in a bit of a conflict of interests

>The Hot New Medium Is ... Email
>
>A recent  article by David S. Bennahum
>
>" List publishing is not merely information delivered to your mailbox,
> it's the devolution of mass media into the hands of everyday people.
> And it's growing faster than the Web. "
>
>http://memex.org/lists.html

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 11 May 1998 14:11:24 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <3.0.1.32.19980504210359.008fbf68@qed.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Marie,

I have been wanting to get to this post as it is full of *invitations* for me
to speak ... and I like that!


On the collision with void:
> What can we/have we learned?  We have not even yet truly voiced what it is
> we felt or how we viewed it then or how it shifted the process!  I am sure
> there as many views as participants/observers; I can only speak for myself.
>  I want to go back and re-read the posts from void before I respond fully
> to this issue, and that may take a little time -- for now, I am most aware
> of being repelled, feeling that any response I made was futile and would
> likely only provide another avenue for more attack (which it did!), and of
> shutting down, disconnecting, wanting to separate myself from a no-win
> situation (a place I have been too many times in my life to willingly be
> there again).

I went back and had a look and don't find it a pretty sight! Though I think on
the whole people gave it their best shot.  The July 1997 archive cover most of
it:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9707&L=psyber-l&F=&S=&O=D&H=0&D=0&T=1

How did I feel & what have I learnt?   I felt dreadful ... one of the reasons
"facilitator" was not a good word for my role is that I can't see a role for a
facilitator, though other types of involvement may be a good idea.  All of
that makes me want to move in the direction of more solid containment ...
especially as you, Marie are discovering how damaging that was for you. I
think we would do well to *prevent* such collisions.  How is the question.
Recently I mooted a change of entry procedure which required an exchange of
email with me as list owner ... Simon did not like the idea ... I will respond
to his post on that ... soon.


> Now comes a revival ...
>
> What have we learned?  For me, what comes are questions, not answers, and I
> have already written them.  I feel there is a need to articulate purpose
> and parameters, to make choices and commitments, to define process and
> possibility in this space.

I'm pleased you say this. I agree.  I think we are onto this.

> What left me feeling uneasy was wondering what this shift in you meant,
> Walter.  How would you be different here?  What would change?  Perhaps you
> felt isolated because you kept much to yourself?  How does your presence
> and this shift in role impact on the "shaping of the 'space place'?"  You
> are, inescapably, the keeper of the space, whether named as facilitator or
> listowner; what does this role mean to you?

> You answer my question here, in part ...
>
> >I am glad that I do not have the word "facilitator" as part of my job
> >description.  I think it was utterly wrong.  What is it?  It made me feel as
> >if I *had* to do something all the time ... make things "easy" for people ...
> >(the root of the word does mean easy?  even if it doesn't that was my take on
> >it.  Interesting that you felt "uneasy"! Etymologically I mean, I am aware it
> >was unpleasant for you.) List Owner suits me better ... I own and create this
> >place as I see fit ... with heaps of help of course.  The list owner roles
> >might include some facilitation but that can also be done by anyone ... I
> >hope that by vacating the official post it is now open for us all.  Hosting,
> >welcoming and so on can be done by all as well ... coaching again we can all
> >assist new people ...  I certainly intend to keep it up ... and improve my
> >skills at it.  Claiming the list owner role more fully means am more
> >conscious of all those things that others *can't* do like unsub someone,
> >change the set-up of the list etc., close it even! (I mention that in the
> >light of the Jung-psy list, & it highlights the nature of the role.)
> >
> >I am pleased you mention "the announced shift from facilitator to participant
> >and
> >list owner"
>
> I want to hear more from you on this, I don't know exactly what ...

I am not sure either?  I'll summarise:

Facilitator ... implies a *guiding* of the process.

List Owner ... implies responsibility for the space, as in home builder and
host.

Were you wanting to hear more on my personal aspirations and process?  A
fuller role description of the List Owner?


~~~

Concerning the flames and people leaving, I wrote:
> >I think my contribution might have been to go into an *action* mode rather
> >than a grief mode. I had to get out of that sense that I *facilitated* that
> >process, I felt bad about that.
>
> Can you speak more of this?  A sense of failure in facilitation?  Or
> frustration in being expected to facilitate when you did not choose to own
> that role?  What felt bad?

I felt responsible for the interactions in that I had given myself the stated
role of "facilitator" with all the promise that the title implies.  A promise
I can't fulfil.  People expect things from a facilitator ... more help I think
than from a list owner who does not use such a title.  So I felt some sense of
failure ... not so much in facilitation but in having taken on the role.  Much
of the pressure came onto me ... not as the facilitator but as List owner to
unsub people.  I didn't think that was called for and my non action in that
regard still feels OK.

The discomfort with being a facilitator led me to work on the welcome file
etc.  (action mode) I might have let more of my discomfort hang out (grief
mode).

~~~

> Words are important, naming is powerful.  I think we are doing this,
> perhaps in an oblique way?

You mean gradually and almost unwittingly?  Or something else?

~~~

I am meeting f2f soon with a small group in Christchurch before I go to the
Conference in Boston, with the express purpose of discussing Psybernet and the
future directions.  I'll report on that here ...


Walter



__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 11 May 1998 10:59:15 -0500
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      dialogues worth observing
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I'd just like to state, before I rush out the door to do my bit to
contribute to  the downfall of western civilization, that observing the
ongoing dialogue between JoAnn and Judith, and Walter and Simon, has been
an object lesson in feeling-infused open communication.

I cannot help (!) but see this as a quaternity in form with the conscious
man and woman each, in their feminine (eros, valuation, openness,
creative,) way represented by the dance of the polar, (but not polarized,)
dialogue.

***

HooN



Last night, full of longing, asking
the wine-woman for more, and then more.

She teased me so lovingly I fell
into her and disappeared. then
she was there alone.

Rumi, ra

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 11 May 1998 15:03:35 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <355b06b2.627175606@mail.xtra.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Was there something learned from the encounter with void that was used
later, when Wilbur, Julienne, and I were arguing?

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 11 May 1998 15:17:48 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <35610faf.2689029@mail.clark.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

JoAnne,

> Was there something learned from the encounter with void that was used
> later, when Wilbur, Julienne, and I were arguing?

I'm not aware of that in me.  Did you have an idea about that?


Walter
__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 11 May 1998 18:37:33 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: The Hot New Medium Is ... Email
In-Reply-To:  <3559f994.623816828@mail.xtra.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>The Hot New Medium Is ... Email
>
>A recent  article by David S. Bennahum
>
>" List publishing is not merely information delivered to your mailbox,
> it's the devolution of mass media into the hands of everyday people.
> And it's growing faster than the Web. "
>
>http://memex.org/lists.html
>
>
>Worth reading!
>
>
>
>Walter

I'd considered posting about this article here, but held back - probably
being too sensitive about the space in this particular space!

The article itself was posted to the nettime list, which was where I came
across it, and it's also up on the Web in Wired's Electrosphere section:

http://www.wired.com/wired/6.04/es_lists.html


So what do people think? I detected shades of the same hyperbole that was
used to sell the web to business. In fact, selling email to business seems
to be the article's underlying agenda (well, it was published in Wired!).
That makes me uneasy, seeing what's happened on the web. And somehow the
notion that everyone can become a publisher (oh yes, and make loads of
money) seems just as naive as it was in the case of the web.

Another thing about this article: if the term 'A list' is to be used at
all, I'd rather see it put in the hands of individual subscribers as an
expression of personal preference. Psyber-l is an A list to me!

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 11 May 1998 19:26:08 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: The Hot New Medium Is ... Email
In-Reply-To:  <v01550100b17c743801be@[207.54.160.175]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Walter,
>sounds fascinating...i'm torn between reading the article which I know will
>*instigate* a flood of new thots but which will take me out of my *artist's
>mode* which I need to be connected to for my rapidly approaching studio
>opening on Saturday...
>
>I find that engaging here over the past weeks, and I want to say *very
>happily* so, has definitely moved me away from where I need to be to touch
>the space which is asking to manifest thru my papermaking...I've been
>luxurating in that space for months now since my illness impeded my thot
>processes...now I need to reconnect to a process which will allow me to
>move withinbetween these realms...interesting the paper is created in the
>silence...
>
>I will return to this article and Hoon's stuff later...
>
>In gratefulness,
>Judith in a bit of a conflict of interests


Judith, I've found the dialogue here between you and JoAnne very
heartening; the awareness of questioning, exploration, gradual opening up
you have both brought here is something to be treasured.  Also, your
writing about your illness, sharing your diary entry here, touched me and
set off thoughts and feelings in me that may yet work their way through to
here. You have also brought awareness and thinking about process back into
my consciousness; process is something that means a lot to me, in
particular it resonates with illness and the relationship between mind and
body.

No need to reply to this, of course! My best wishes for your studio
opening. When you are able to write here again, perhaps you could say
something about papermaking; I am rather intrigued, it sounds like a
delightful combination of physicality and contemplation.

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 11 May 1998 20:13:55 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: Thoughts and feelings about writing in Psyber-L
In-Reply-To:  <355509f7.431374440@smtp.ihug.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Walter, for the moment I just want to pick up on this:

>I said:
>> >I find there is a certain pain associated with creating something
>> >... yet I keep doing it.    Certainly feeling when there were flames that
>> >others expect me to put out and so on.
>
>Simon asks:
>> I'm not sure how these two sentences relate, Walter. Perhaps you're talking
>> about the ongoing creation of psyber-l as a process sometimes forged in
>> flames??
>
>The last sentence is badly worded.  I think I was talking of the
>feelings i have when I think the *process* here is the result of
>the way I have set up the space and / or the way i facilitate.  I
>guess like a teacher whose class goes haywire, who then does not
>blame the students but looks at his / her own part in that.

Thank you for this; not just the clarification, but the honesty. Your sense
of responsibility for and in this space has come through clearly in our
exchange of posts, also now in your post to Marie. How to 'actualise' that
sense of responsibility, though? I know that Marie has questions about
this. I sense that what is emerging here at the moment in the various posts
and dialogues is a shared sense of (self) responsibility - and a shared
sense, I hope and think, which is enabling rather than stifling. But what
to do when someone comes along without that sense, without any respect for
this space or the people who share it? Somehow this space needs to be open,
it seems to me - and, perhaps, to have a way of dealing openly
(collectively?) with any problems that come along. A way to embrace rather
than reject, if at all possible.

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 11 May 1998 19:56:30 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <355d164c.631170158@mail.xtra.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>, on Mon, 11 May 1998 15:17:48
GMT, you wrote:

>JoAnne,
>
>> Was there something learned from the encounter with void that was used
>> later, when Wilbur, Julienne, and I were arguing?
>
>I'm not aware of that in me.  Did you have an idea about that?

Not exactly.  Just thought that, since the question was about dealing with
unpleasantness on the list, that the j-incident might have been different
if the void incident had not taken place.

As someone who wasn't here when void was here, and was not in an observer
kind of position when Julienne and I arrived, I don't think my opinion
would have much meaning even if I had one, which I mostly don't.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 11 May 1998 21:32:12 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: The Hot New Medium Is ... Email
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Simon,
A quick but Heartfelt response before I get back to my couching (cooching):-)

>>Walter,
>>sounds fascinating...i'm torn between reading the article which I know will
>>*instigate* a flood of new thots but which will take me out of my *artist's
>>mode* which I need to be connected to for my rapidly approaching studio
>>opening on Saturday...
>>
>>I find that engaging here over the past weeks, and I want to say *very
>>happily* so, has definitely moved me away from where I need to be to touch
>>the space which is asking to manifest thru my papermaking...I've been
>>luxurating in that space for months now since my illness impeded my thot
>>processes...now I need to reconnect to a process which will allow me to
>>move withinbetween these realms...interesting the paper is created in the
>>silence...
>>
>>I will return to this article and Hoon's stuff later...
>>
>>In gratefulness,
>>Judith in a bit of a conflict of interests
>
>
>Judith, I've found the dialogue here between you and JoAnne very
>heartening; the awareness of questioning, exploration, gradual opening up
>you have both brought here is something to be treasured.
I am always in gratefulness for the willingness of all of us to engage with
the fullness of ourselves...I always am learning and JoAnn's engagement
certainly was rich.

 Also, your
>writing about your illness, sharing your diary entry here, touched me and
>set off thoughts and feelings in me that may yet work their way through to
>here. You have also brought awareness and thinking about process back into
>my consciousness; process is something that means a lot to me, in
>particular it resonates with illness and the relationship between mind and
>body.
Yes, process...well, as someone said of me once, Judith you are
process...seems to be my sense of myself.
>
>No need to reply to this, of course! My best wishes for your studio
>opening. When you are able to write here again, perhaps you could say
>something about papermaking; I am rather intrigued, it sounds like a
>delightful combination of physicality and contemplation.
>
>Simon
>
Yes, I will...most of it is about getting wet! great joyfulness...
back soon and I have valued your exchange with Walter...I was
baffled...more later.
Judith soaking wet
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 11 May 1998 21:41:18 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogues worth observing
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>I'd just like to state, before I rush out the door to do my bit to
>contribute to  the downfall of western civilization, that observing the
>ongoing dialogue between JoAnn and Judith, and Walter and Simon, has been
>an object lesson in feeling-infused open communication.
>
>I cannot help (!) but see this as a quaternity in form with the conscious
>man and woman each, in their feminine (eros, valuation, openness,
>creative,) way represented by the dance of the polar, (but not polarized,)
>dialogue.
>
>***
>
>HooN
>
Yeah, Hoon...that's what it felt like to me...awsome!
judith feeling very warm and satisfied
>
>Last night, full of longing, asking
>the wine-woman for more, and then more.
>
>She teased me so lovingly I fell
>into her and disappeared. then
>she was there alone.
>
>Rumi, ra
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 12 May 1998 10:07:50 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: The Hot New Medium Is ... Email
In-Reply-To:  <v03110700b17cb96db721@[195.200.19.219]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Simon,

> I'd considered posting about this article here, but held back - probably
> being too sensitive about the space in this particular space!

I recall mentioning it when I first read it in Wired.  I think here?  Thinking
about and experiencing the medium is important to me from a point of view
which i consider psychological.  Psychological in the sense that McLuhan is
psychological when he notices the impact of the alphabet, the printing press
and TV on consciousness itself.

I think it is worth noticing the impact of Outlook98!  or the very tool we use
here called Listserv (tm).  How does Listerv determine our psychological life
as compared to say Majordomo? Let alone the different feel of web based
conferencing?  Is there anyone for example who only uses the web for this
list?  Who filters the posts here into their own folder?

These matters to me are part of the stuff of psyberspace ... and do not
contaminate the space while we look at them with a soul perspective as you do
below ... which is what McLuhan did with his exploration of media.

I think the respect for different threads ie the subject heading, is important
... with a title like this:  The Hot New Medium Is ... Email.  we create a
"space" within a space.

Ah ... whatever the heading ... paradoxically ... we are back in "space" talk.
Inclusion / exclusion phenomena.  I have no problems with the invitation only
structure ... there are many doorways in life and in psyberspace too.  I work
with all sorts of groups in rl, and they all have different and subtly
different doorways. Lets think of the "psychological art of doorway design in
psyberspace" if we need to remove it from the gross A List concept.  This is
the Temenos question.

> if the term 'A list' is to be used at
> all, I'd rather see it put in the hands of individual subscribers as an
> expression of personal preference. Psyber-l is an A list to me!

AAA no doubt!  heheheh

Much to reflect on in this ...  psychologically and communally.  The main
point of the article for me is simply that someone writes more publicly about
the phenomena we *experience* here ... we are on the threshold, right here,
living in a new *form* of community, that is not hype IMO ... no hype would do
that phenomena justice.

To finish on a very experiential note ... I feel the doors are open here and I
feel the impact of that as i write ... though i have not quite got the words
for it.

Walter



__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 12 May 1998 12:28:01 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Welcome to Peter and Thomas.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

All,

So far this month two people have joined Psyber-L, I'd like to welcome you
both.  I don't usually welcome people until they post ... but i wanted to try
something new.  Please feel free to join in the discussion ... no need to have
read the last 5 years of back log!  <grin>  Please let us know what brings you
here.  If you need help with anything here.  It would be good to hear from
you.  All the best in Psyberspace, Peter & Thomas.


Walter


Mon, 11 May 1998 19:23:12

Peter Chechele <pcheck@SLIP.NET> has just subscribed to the PSYBER-L list
(Psybernet Mailing List).


Sat, 2 May 1998 20:15:10

Thomas Brinson <tbrin@IDT.NET>  has just subscribed to  the PSYBER-L list
(Psybernet Mailing List).

__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 12 May 1998 07:07:30 -0700
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Peter Chechele <pcheck@SLIP.NET>
Subject:      Re: Welcome to Peter and Thomas.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear Walter & Others,

Have subscribed to this group to engage in an active discussion about the
merits and pitfalls of on-line "psychotherapy".  Also interested in the
psychological ramifications of this new medium.  Don't know as of yet if
this forum is open to exploring the aforementioned subject matter.

Sincerely, Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
To: PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Date: Tuesday, May 12, 1998 5:22 AM
Subject: [P] Welcome to Peter and Thomas.


>All,
>
>So far this month two people have joined Psyber-L, I'd like to welcome you
>both.  I don't usually welcome people until they post ... but i wanted to
try
>something new.  Please feel free to join in the discussion ... no need to
have
>read the last 5 years of back log!  <grin>  Please let us know what brings
you
>here.  If you need help with anything here.  It would be good to hear from
>you.  All the best in Psyberspace, Peter & Thomas.
>
>
>Walter
>
>
>Mon, 11 May 1998 19:23:12
>
>Peter Chechele <pcheck@SLIP.NET> has just subscribed to the PSYBER-L list
>(Psybernet Mailing List).
>
>
>Sat, 2 May 1998 20:15:10
>
>Thomas Brinson <tbrin@IDT.NET>  has just subscribed to  the PSYBER-L list
>(Psybernet Mailing List).
>
>__________________________________________________________________
>Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L
>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 12 May 1998 15:06:47 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: Welcome to Peter and Thomas.
In-Reply-To:  <01bd7daf$4d5c8620$f50fd1d1@slip.net.slip.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear Peter

> Have subscribed to this group to engage in an active discussion about the
> merits and pitfalls of on-line "psychotherapy".  Also interested in the
> psychological ramifications of this new medium.  Don't know as of yet if
> this forum is open to exploring the aforementioned subject matter.

Definitely the right place to discuss those things.  On line psychotherapy has
not cropped up here for a while, let us know what you think, perhaps start a
thread with a suitable title and I think you will find there will be a good
discussion.

On the psychological aspects of the medium ... that is our main theme here,
especially when explored experientially. Look forward to your contributions.


Walter
__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 12 May 1998 08:15:44 -0700
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Peter Chechele <pcheck@SLIP.NET>
Subject:      On-line Psychotherapy: Pros & Cons
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
              boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD7D7E.28DF0E20"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD7D7E.28DF0E20
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear Group,
Am exploring the possiblities inherent in providing on-line =
"psychotherapy" would love to hear from people here as to the potential =
benefits and problems of this new method of delivering mental health =
services.  In particular issues of confidentialty, ethics & law, and =
what type of "therapy" would best suit this forum.
Sincerely,
Peter Chechele

------=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD7D7E.28DF0E20
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.71.1712.3"' name=3DGENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT color=3D#800000 face=3DPresident size=3D4>Dear=20
Group,</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT color=3D#800000 face=3DPresident size=3D4>Am =
exploring the=20
possiblities inherent in providing on-line &quot;psychotherapy&quot; =
would love=20
to hear from people here as to the potential benefits and problems of =
this new=20
method of delivering mental health services.&nbsp; In particular issues =
of=20
confidentialty, ethics &amp; law, and what type of &quot;therapy&quot; =
would=20
best suit this forum.</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT color=3D#800000 face=3DPresident=20
size=3D4>Sincerely,</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT color=3D#800000 face=3DPresident size=3D4>Peter=20
Chechele</FONT></STRONG></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD7D7E.28DF0E20--

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 14 May 1998 11:57:36 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: On-line Psychotherapy: Pros & Cons
In-Reply-To:  <01bd7db8$d53de620$f10fd1d1@slip.net.slip.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Peter

> Am exploring the possiblities inherent in providing on-line "psychotherapy" would love to hear
> from people here as to the potential benefits and problems of this new method of delivering
> mental health services.  In particular issues of confidentialty, ethics & law, and what type of
> "therapy" would best suit this forum.

I would like to discuss this and could make a start.  I began Psybernet
with the idea that one of the things I would do was online therapy.  I
have promoted it in my web site and have had several clients.  The work
I did with them was ok, however I removed my shingle about a year ago as
it just did not feel right ...

I am a psychotherapist and recently, as more clients have email I have
begun to use the medium in conjunction with f2f work, that is satisfying
at this point.

The only online work I am currently promoting is consultation on setting
up and running email lists such as this.  I have had one client and that
went quite well.  A very different thing from therapy, however.

~~~

I think I could write a book on this (and might do that!) but let me
have one stroke of the brush at it now:

Psychotherapy is a "medium" as much as a content.  The medium is in a
room for an hour for a fee for a purpose with a clearly defined
functional difference for each person.  Hence I don't believe we can do
Psychotherapy on the net anymore than we can do TV on radio.  I don't
think we can do novels on the net either, and certainly not the net in a
novel.

There is a naive mistake to think we can repackage stuff onto the net
from other media ... what could emerge is something new and native to
the net ... that is what i think we are up to here ... using this medium
*psychologically* is possible, just how best to do that we are exploring
right here.

I think the relationship and dialogue between the client and the
therapist is very important.  Here in cyberspace our identity needs to
be more public ... could we have a therapist who only uses this medium
in private email?  Not in community and lists and web pages?  Perhaps
but i think that it would be to totally discount the psychological power
of the medium -- its ability to connect many to many, to keep a record
of the discussion and thus reveal our personality in a new way ... to
influence the notion of identity ... to create new forms of intimacy and
new barriers to intimacy.

The net is naturally psychological in that we use metaphor, in that we
are engaged in a reflective process as we write, in that we reveal our
identity through visible links which can be adjusted via databases or
manually, in that the hidden dimensions invite us to project creatively
to complete the gestalt.  These natural attributes of the net are
psychological catalysts which as therapists we can learn to enhance and
extend ... in doing so create something new which is not "psychotherapy"
as we know it.

This feels like a brush stroke ... i'd love to rewrite it some time once
i have it clearer.


All for now,


Walter









__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 17 May 1998 03:38:20 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <199708250259.OAA15586@icarus.ihug.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Fri, 8 May 1998 16:57:49 +0100, Simon G. Trask  wrote:

>I would like to know more on this, Walter: "Something got fouled up
>in the process ..."

I am not sure what it was ... however I think we both set out with
good will and honesty and then at some point each? of us felt
uncomfortable ... for me it was around the self-absorbed
self-indulgent theme.

>Also: If I say "Your post feels like this... and it feels like this
>because of that in me...", is your post left untouched?

I find it hard to relate to the "post", but I do not remain untouched.
 Even very clean and good communication, as you describe can affect me
... as it should, as part of the "connecting" but also it might
trigger things in me that you never intended and that were not even
implied!  This happens!  I like to think of that as a Good Thing.  It
is complex to attend to but it is what in psychotherapy we might call
transference.  If I feel attacked and you didn't attack me then that
indicates I was attacked in the past etc.  Worth exploring ...

>Thinking about what I was trying to do:
>Trying to respond honestly from an affective level yet also be honest
>about where that response was coming from.. which meant taking
>responsibility for looking at the *why*... being self-reflective
>while being self-projective, perhaps...

Yes.  In the case of the "self-absorbed" comment it then triggered an
area of my vulnerability ... of finding it difficult to be
"out-there".

~~~

>> ~ metaphysics, alongside the physical -- non physical.

>Is this the perspective of the therapist-patient relationship coming
>through? Alongside and separate from...  Having an overview,
>providing a container, yet not containing within yourself... always
>being clear about barriers, always sticking to a role that is clear
>about maintaining separation... Do I read this right?

Hmmm ... very close but not quite it!  I am free to self-disclose in
therapy, free to be moved, to be real, to be involved.  The bottom
line is that it is doing no harm.  The optimum is that it is for the
benefit of the client.  I feel contained within the container, the
relationship with its transference and counter-transference *is* the
therapeutic tool.

Thus I would occasionally be in a meta dialogue with the client ... ie
dialogue about the dialogue.  But that is rare and could lead to
confusion for some clients and over-intellectualisation for others.
In "supervision" it is a different matter, it needs to be more on the
agenda there.

It is very interesting to compare this with the dialogues here!

>If so, it seems rather different from
>the imperatives of psyberspace, and of this list...
>
>Surely metaphysics contains within its field discussion of physics -
>or at least the findings of physics, which change our view of the
>universe, of reality, of ourselves...
>
>Meta in fact seems quite versatile in its application. As a
>preposition it accords with your sense of it, as a prefix perhaps
>more with mine... you might disagree! I think of metagalaxy,
>metalanguage, metalinguistics; eg. metagalaxy = the set of all
>galaxies. (There I go with sets again!)

Hmmmm ... I am not on about who is right ... but a meta galaxy gives
me the image of a parallel galaxy, perhaps one in a different
dimension.

>Still, the literal meaning doesn't really matter so much. I think
>your phrasing speaks to the real significance: "I have a sense of
>"meta" meaning alongside and separate from".
>
>It's that "sense of" that's interesting.
>For you: alongside, separate from.
>For me: incorporating, containing.

Yes.  At least we know what we each mean by this.

>What might this distinction uncover??

AH!  I think it uncovers why you thought this was a meta list and I
thought it was both a substantive list AND a meta list ... we used
different words to describe the same thing!

~~~

>>I feel met by you Simon when you recall these moments ... I remeber
>>them vividly ... I'm sure Dan does too ...
>
>This surprised me! I hadn't seen it like that... feeling met. A
>lovely way to put it, though.
>
>And isn't this the essence of dialogue? A feeling of being met...
>(though not always a pleasant feeling, necessarily - depends,
>perhaps, on what parts of you are being met!)

Being met is the essence of dialogue ... yes!



>And this time I feel pleasurable anticipation in waiting for your
>next post... (though maybe I'll regret saying that!). Whenever you're
>ready to catch the next wave!

It has taken too long IMO to get back to this but "that is life" at my
end of the screen.  Especially with my trip coming up.

~~~

>A shadowette, perhaps?!

Yes and I think others have entered in to the "test shadow" aspect of
it by acknowledging and valuing the conversation ... more than that,
finding it good to read ... that I think has helped a lot, thanks.



Walter






___________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 17 May 1998 15:33:41 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Welcome to Osama
In-Reply-To:  <9805178954.AA895430345@ccmgate.nbk.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

"Osama Abdul Hadi"<osamah@nbk.com>

In the following post:

  "Osama Abdul Hadi"<osamah@nbk.com>

Thank you for subscribing, I hope you find this a good place to be and
to explore the psyche in cyberspace.

Walter
__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 17 May 1998 15:33:41 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Welcome to Osama
In-Reply-To:  <9805178954.AA895430345@ccmgate.nbk.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

"Osama Abdul Hadi"<osamah@nbk.com>

In the following post:

  "Osama Abdul Hadi"<osamah@nbk.com>

Thank you for subscribing, I hope you find this a good place to be and
to explore the psyche in cyberspace.

Walter
__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 02:35:19 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <35605998.81995719@smtp.xtra.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Walter,

>>I would like to know more on this, Walter: "Something got fouled up
>>in the process ..."
>
>I am not sure what it was ... however I think we both set out with
>good will and honesty and then at some point each? of us felt
>uncomfortable ... for me it was around the self-absorbed
>self-indulgent theme.

I feel that the good will and honesty is still (t)here.

>In the case of the "self-absorbed" comment it then triggered an
>area of my vulnerability ... of finding it difficult to be
>"out-there".

I hope I've been able to meet you in a way that has helped that, but maybe
we're not there yet.

>It is complex to attend to but it is what in psychotherapy we might call
>transference.  If I feel attacked and you didn't attack me then that
>indicates I was attacked in the past etc.  Worth exploring ...

I think there's something here about feeling pushed away. Your post re
psyber-l as a meta list felt to me like a (possibly wilful) misreading of
what I had been trying to say and do on the list, and that coupled with the
tone of the post made me feel that I was being lectured to rather than
listened to. That in turn brought up feelings in me of being invisible - of
not being 'seen', yes, but also, reference our recent comments on dialogue,
of not being 'met'. I think I was already treading close to those feelings.
As I wrote previously:

"Part and parcel of this growing-up invisibility was a stifling of
emotional expression, and especially of anger - very much what you wrote
about a few weeks back, Walter, in connection with your own family
environment. So the exchange between Susan and JoAnne a few weeks back
really pushed a lot of buttons for me."

The quote from you was:
"I think I go a little over the top on valuing anger when I feel like
someone is trying to shut it up and have a *false niceness*  I hate that. I
grew up in a household which could cover up not
only anger but huge mountains of hate and rage!  I mean cover it up so none
of us knew it was there."

I am wondering now, doesn't it actually take effort *not* to meet someone,
in the sense of avoiding dialogue with them - that somehow there is an
effort in pushing away, even if itself unseen (an effort in the hiding,
too, perhaps).

Perhaps also it relates to the concept of holding the tension... though
this seems complicated, because holding the tension also feels like a way
of engaging with someone or something, a way of moving into a 'meeting
area' perhaps (or maybe, more accurately, an 'antechamber' to the meeting
area!). Then the releasing of that tension - walking through the open(ed)
doorway - brings about the meeting, or the feeling of being met (and this
happens within ourselves as well as between one another, I think).

So there's a cycle here, perhaps - or a spiral. Maybe the downward spiral
is an accumulation of tensions, the upward spiral a releasing of tensions.
We always come full circle in our psychological travels (travails?!) but
find ourselves at a slightly different elevation!

Walter, my sense is that the feeling of being pushed away was there in you
when you started the 'Thoughts and feelings' thread back in April, and that
it was expressed in that initial post when you talked about feeling alone
in the process. Perhaps that feeling of being alone was a result of you
having pushed something else away - or of having given the impression that
you did?

I think the uncomfortableness you refer to was already there in you when I
responded to your post, and my comment that you were self-absorbed only
served to amplify it. I would say that the impetus to respond to your post
came from a mixture of sympathy, discomfort and frustration - though you
might not have felt there was much sympathy from me! Your honest expression
struck a chord in me (your were trying to create something and you felt
alone and uncomfortable in that process) but it also jarred with me (to me,
you were ignoring other, unresolved, issues that seemed, to me, more
important within the context of the list - but maybe they were just more
important *for* me). Now I think you may feel, still, that I don't value
what I seemingly disparaged as the more abstract stuff. But really what I
didn't value was the imbalance I felt in the list between the emotional
(personal) and the abstract (impersonal). I know these crude binary
distinctions aren't ideal, but they reflect what I felt at the time - and
it's interesting how we move towards 'binary vision' when we're upset!

Of course there is scope for both the structural stuff and the emotional
stuff. Discussion of form, of the container, yes. Emotional content, that
which is contained, discusses itself through us, I think! And sometimes it
overflows the brim... Form is both around us and internalised within us.
There is interaction between 'container stuff' and 'contained stuff', as
well as an ebb and flow of each in the life of the list.

I think it's possible to talk about 'felt structure' in psyberspace - an
emotionally perceived structure, a kind of liquid architecture. This was
somewhat my experience in the social MOOspace, which was inherently
psychological space and also a wonderful text-based creative space, where
virtual 'rooms' could be built, furnished, and linked in any way
imagineable. Often the links ('entrances' and 'exits') were socially
embedded.  I would say that ultimately everyone created their own sense of
how the space was 'organised', and of how it *felt*. Hmmm, a little
digression there!


>>Also: If I say "Your post feels like this... and it feels like this
>>because of that in me...", is your post left untouched?
>
>I find it hard to relate to the "post", but I do not remain untouched.
> Even very clean and good communication, as you describe can affect me
>... as it should, as part of the "connecting" but also it might
>trigger things in me that you never intended and that were not even
>implied!  This happens!  I like to think of that as a Good Thing.

Ah! Perhaps I should have said 'uncriticised' rather than 'untouched'. But
if *you* are touched, and there is good communication between us, then you
are able to be openly self-critical, and to let me know what was going on
in your post.

I think it's about to-ing and fro-ing on a continuum between the extremes
of owning and disowning projections. Where we are on that continuum depends
on what we can see in ourselves, what we can see in one another, and how we
are prepared to act on that seeing. If I, at one extreme, say "Your post
makes me feel like this and it's *all your fault*." then we're not going to
get very far. But also if I say, at the other extreme, "Your post makes me
feel like this and it's *all my fault*." then we're not going to get very
far either. Both are exaggerations backed up by emotional investment. The
same situation applies if I say that everything bad that you see in me is a
projection on your part, but everything bad I see in you is you *as your
are*.


>>Is this the perspective of the therapist-patient relationship coming
>>through? Alongside and separate from...  Having an overview,
>>providing a container, yet not containing within yourself... always
>>being clear about barriers, always sticking to a role that is clear
>>about maintaining separation... Do I read this right?
>
>Hmmm ... very close but not quite it!  I am free to self-disclose in
>therapy, free to be moved, to be real, to be involved.  The bottom
>line is that it is doing no harm.  The optimum is that it is for the
>benefit of the client.  I feel contained within the container, the
>relationship with its transference and counter-transference *is* the
>therapeutic tool.

A clumsy 'outsider's view' on my part, I think. I always thought therapists
were supposed to be aloof - prodding and interpreting but not getting
involved (maybe I am confusing therapist with analyst here?). If you are
free to self-disclose, to be moved, to be real, to be involved, how is that
different from being here? And I assume that "doing no harm" is a bottom
line for you here as well. The question of who benefits is more open here,
I guess, but I'm assuming that even though you put the client's benefit
first in the relationship you also derive benefit from it.

Please excuse my naive stumblings, Walter! I'm just trying to understand
the essence of what goes on 'there' compared to 'here', in terms of the
interactions between people at the psychological level.


>Thus I would occasionally be in a meta dialogue with the client ... ie
>dialogue about the dialogue.  But that is rare and could lead to
>confusion for some clients and over-intellectualisation for others.
>In "supervision" it is a different matter, it needs to be more on the
>agenda there.

Wouldn't meta dialogue be a part of understanding patterns of interaction?
Or would it bring *you* too much into the frame? And what is "supervision"?


>Hmmmm ... I am not on about who is right ... but a meta galaxy gives
>me the image of a parallel galaxy, perhaps one in a different
>dimension.

Yes, what interests me is not 'right or wrong' but 'different ways of
seeing'. At the moment I'm still having trouble with your meta = parallel
equation - I'd like to 'see' your image. I'm glad (I think!) that you
introduced the concept of dimension...

A phrase was going around in my mind, "overwhelmed by the banality of
life", as some kind of curious parallel (heh!) thought process as I was
thinking about the extension of the notion of 'parallel' into multiple
dimensions... And I remembered a book called 'Multidimensional Man' written
by a mathematician, Ron Atkin, which had fascinated me many years ago. I
still have it, so I pulled it off the bookshelf, and on the back cover
found the quote: "3-dimensional space is only a banal slice of the
multidimensional structures we really live in...".

Then this from the preface:

"This book is a corner of that battlefield - where the mind and the spirit
are fighting it out as champions of 'form' and 'content'. Not that either
side can or should expect to win, but that peace comes only when one side
makes overtures to the other - and in a language which both can understand.
This is my offering for such an overture, and it is couched in a 'language
of structure' which, when spoken by both, allows the mathematician room for
his analysis and the artist space for his synthesis. I would like only to
think that it will help to bring the peace a little nearer."

I think there's some kind of meta process going on here ;)


>>And this time I feel pleasurable anticipation in waiting for your
>>next post... (though maybe I'll regret saying that!). Whenever you're
>>ready to catch the next wave!
>
>It has taken too long IMO to get back to this but "that is life" at my
>end of the screen.  Especially with my trip coming up.

I think the perspective on psyberspace that you outlined to Peter here a
few days ago should be part of any discussion on the Internet and society.
How can we as a society (and, from a global perspective, as a collection of
societies) use "the psychological power of the medium", as you put it, in a
way that is beneficial to everyone?

Walter, do you still plan to write from the conference, and about your
warm-up to it? I think that would be interesting and worthwhile.


>>A shadowette, perhaps?!
>
>Yes and I think others have entered in to the "test shadow" aspect of
>it by acknowledging and valuing the conversation ... more than that,
>finding it good to read ... that I think has helped a lot, thanks.

I have valued the responses here. I'm not naturally someone who steps into
the spotlight, but I feel okay with this ongoing dialogue - or, as HooN put
it so evocatively, this "feeling-infused open communication".

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 06:28:26 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <355b06b2.627175606@mail.xtra.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Walter, all,

I am here, finally -- life has swallowed me whole these past two weeks and
is just now allowing me a small space to be with myself.  It will not last
long, I fear; work goes on, and May 29 I am leaving for Cincinnati for 10
days to start a doctoral program (which will no doubt turn my life upside
down in ways I cannot begin to envision).  In one of my last posts, I wrote
about invisibility, and then disappeared!  Not intentionally, but I find it
amusing.

At 02:11 PM 5/11/98 GMT, you wrote:
>Marie,
>
>I have been wanting to get to this post as it is full of *invitations* for me
>to speak ... and I like that!

I am glad it felt like an invitation, and not a calling-to-account!  Which
was certainly not my intention, but re-reading leaves me aware it may have
come across that way.  I appreciate your willingness to be open.

>On the collision with void:

>I went back and had a look and don't find it a pretty sight! Though I
think on
>the whole people gave it their best shot.  The July 1997 archive cover
most of
>it:
>http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9707&L=psyber-l&F=&S=&O=D&H
=0&D=0&T=1

I found time to read it all myself, and it was not pretty, and yes we gave
it a good shot, and no it has not been processed.  It did not hurt to read
it again, and I was not sorry for what I wrote then -- or what I didn't!

>How did I feel & what have I learnt?   I felt dreadful ... one of the reasons
>"facilitator" was not a good word for my role is that I can't see a role
for a
>facilitator, though other types of involvement may be a good idea.  All of
>that makes me want to move in the direction of more solid containment ...
>especially as you, Marie are discovering how damaging that was for you. I
>think we would do well to *prevent* such collisions.  How is the question.
>Recently I mooted a change of entry procedure which required an exchange of
>email with me as list owner ... Simon did not like the idea ... I will
respond
>to his post on that ... soon.

No role for a facilitator -- I don't agree, although perhaps it is merely
the label on which we differ.  I saw a role for someone to say loud and
clear that this was not welcome here, to state the group charter where it
pertained and show HOW it pertained and WHY it was not welcome -- to state
something that I think did not exist at that time?  You may see this as a
listowner role, Walter?  What do you see as an "entry procedure" that might
prevent such collisions in the future?  It seems to me that may create a
lot of work for you!  A clear statement, a group charter sent upon
subscription and held clearly in focus when necessary, seems a more viable
alternative to me.  Although interpretation and intervention will always be
problematic, there will always be ambiguous areas.  I don't believe
collision can always be prevented, nor that it should -- it can be
illuminating, enlivening, a learning experience -- if there is a collective
commitment to self reflection and dialogue in the aftermath, and zero
tolerance for a refusal to stop personal attacks.

>> What have we learned?  For me, what comes are questions, not answers, and I
>> have already written them.  I feel there is a need to articulate purpose
>> and parameters, to make choices and commitments, to define process and
>> possibility in this space.
>
>I'm pleased you say this. I agree.  I think we are onto this.

A few of us ... I have hoped to hear from others on these issues.

>> >I am pleased you mention "the announced shift from facilitator to
participant
>> >and
>> >list owner"
>>
>> I want to hear more from you on this, I don't know exactly what ...
>
>I am not sure either?  I'll summarise:
>
>Facilitator ... implies a *guiding* of the process.
>
>List Owner ... implies responsibility for the space, as in home builder and
>host.
>
>Were you wanting to hear more on my personal aspirations and process?  A
>fuller role description of the List Owner?

I'm still not sure -- I think more your personal aspirations and process,
which includes (in my mind) your definition of the listowner role.  I would
like to hear from others also on this.

>Concerning the flames and people leaving, I wrote:
>> >I think my contribution might have been to go into an *action* mode rather
>> >than a grief mode. I had to get out of that sense that I *facilitated*
that
>> >process, I felt bad about that.
>>
>> Can you speak more of this?  A sense of failure in facilitation?  Or
>> frustration in being expected to facilitate when you did not choose to own
>> that role?  What felt bad?
>
>I felt responsible for the interactions in that I had given myself the stated
>role of "facilitator" with all the promise that the title implies.  A promise
>I can't fulfil.  People expect things from a facilitator ... more help I
think
>than from a list owner who does not use such a title.  So I felt some
sense of
>failure ... not so much in facilitation but in having taken on the role.
Much
>of the pressure came onto me ... not as the facilitator but as List owner to
>unsub people.  I didn't think that was called for and my non action in that
>regard still feels OK.
>
>The discomfort with being a facilitator led me to work on the welcome file
>etc.  (action mode) I might have let more of my discomfort hang out (grief
>mode).

[Aside -- Maybe it is time for the welcome file to be posted here again --
I read it recently, and there are changes I like, but did not know were
there.]

I think the suppression of your discomfort contributed to my sense of being
"uneasy" about how you intended to be here.  I never believed that it was
your place to make things "easy" -- although I am not immune from wishing
for a savior when things become turbulent!  While I agree that unsubbing
people was not indicated (and should always be a very last resort), how
would you feel about posting a strong invitation to leave if the parameters
of engagement in this space are not something a given individual is willing
to accept?  Much as a host in his home might protect his guests from verbal
attack and harassment?

>> Words are important, naming is powerful.  I think we are doing this,
>> perhaps in an oblique way?
>
>You mean gradually and almost unwittingly?  Or something else?

Yes, gradually and almost unwittingly -- we are talking generally, not
setting specifics as yet.  And again, only a few of us are involved in this
discussion, which concerns all; only certain perspectives have been voiced.
 At some point, consensus must be sought, yes?

>I am meeting f2f soon with a small group in Christchurch before I go to the
>Conference in Boston, with the express purpose of discussing Psybernet and
the
>future directions.  I'll report on that here ...

I am eager to hear of this.  When do you leave?

out of time and energy,

Marie

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 06:29:30 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <3561362c.93594602@mail.clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hello, Joanne.

At 09:58 PM 5/5/98 GMT, you wrote:
>Hello Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>, on Mon, 4 May 1998 21:03:52 -0400,
>you wrote:
>
>>Joanne, I think I like your (spoken in jest?) notion of a "test shadow" --
>>might that be a way to play with difference?  Perhaps a cyber-psychodrama,
>>Walter?  How might we do that here?
>
>It was half in jest, but I think we were trying to do that before with the
>bananabean.
>
>-JoAnne

I can see that, but "bananabean" was closely interwoven with Julienne in my
mind -- even tho you were careful to identify it as *your* perception of
her, it was linked with her for me and therefore held the charged energy of
the ongoing conflict within it.  I was thinking of a constructed "test
shadow" -- a pretend post, with the intention of sending divergent
responses to it and then discussing them and their impact.

Now I am thinking that the dialogue between you and Judith, in one way, and
(even more so) the dialogue between Simon and Walter shows a different way
to engage over hurt feelings and divergent perspectives -- better than a
test shadow, as these dialogues are real.

>Was there something learned from the encounter with void that was used
>later, when Wilbur, Julienne, and I were arguing?

I am interested in this question -- the later arguments felt to me like a
continuation of an explosion of negative energy, an almost instant replay
of the same dynamic as the encounter with void.

Joanne, I would especially like to hear from you on the "process and
parameters" being discussed.  I particularly wonder if the concept of
ground rules and prohibition of abusive interactions leaves you feeling
personally stifled, without a way to express strong feelings and opinions
when you have them, and still be heard and accepted.  Do you believe this
group wants to banish all hint of anger and disgreement?  What image of
interaction comes to you as you read this kind of post (talk of space and
structure)?  What kind of space would you like to see evolve here?

I feel that I understand you better, know you more, through your
conversation with Judith.  I'm sorry I didn't speak to you myself before this.

Marie

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 11:00:50 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: On-line Psychotherapy: Pros & Cons
In-Reply-To:  <355ad460.1703908@mail.ihug.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This new proximity, this new interrelationship.


Listen to this from McLuhan* 1966:

"We now know too much to be strangers to each other.  For example in the
age of information explosion, all walls go out between age groups,
between family groups, national groups, between economies.  The walls
all go out.  People suddenly have to adjust themselves to this new
proximity, this new interrelationship, and merely to tell them this has
happened isn't very helpful.  What they need to know is, if it is
happening, what does it mean to me?"


Psychotherapy relies on a certain distance from the clients and walls
between client and therapist (in the world, not in the consulting room
necessarily) that do not exist in cyberspace.  Can we do anything like
traditional psychotherapy in the time & place of the new proximity? Is
it even necessary?  I think that to promote psychotherapy on the
Internet is to obscure "this new proximity, this new interrelationship",
which is inherently psychological.


Walter



*Originally:"McLuhan on McLuhanism." WNDT Educational board Broadcasting
Network. 1966. Quoted in: Forward Through the Rear View Mirror Edited P.
Benedetti and N. De Hart. 1997 p. 40


__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 06:29:30 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <3561362c.93594602@mail.clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hello, Joanne.

At 09:58 PM 5/5/98 GMT, you wrote:
>Hello Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>, on Mon, 4 May 1998 21:03:52 -0400,
>you wrote:
>
>>Joanne, I think I like your (spoken in jest?) notion of a "test shadow" --
>>might that be a way to play with difference?  Perhaps a cyber-psychodrama,
>>Walter?  How might we do that here?
>
>It was half in jest, but I think we were trying to do that before with the
>bananabean.
>
>-JoAnne

I can see that, but "bananabean" was closely interwoven with Julienne in my
mind -- even tho you were careful to identify it as *your* perception of
her, it was linked with her for me and therefore held the charged energy of
the ongoing conflict within it.  I was thinking of a constructed "test
shadow" -- a pretend post, with the intention of sending divergent
responses to it and then discussing them and their impact.

Now I am thinking that the dialogue between you and Judith, in one way, and
(even more so) the dialogue between Simon and Walter shows a different way
to engage over hurt feelings and divergent perspectives -- better than a
test shadow, as these dialogues are real.

>Was there something learned from the encounter with void that was used
>later, when Wilbur, Julienne, and I were arguing?

I am interested in this question -- the later arguments felt to me like a
continuation of an explosion of negative energy, an almost instant replay
of the same dynamic as the encounter with void.

Joanne, I would especially like to hear from you on the "process and
parameters" being discussed.  I particularly wonder if the concept of
ground rules and prohibition of abusive interactions leaves you feeling
personally stifled, without a way to express strong feelings and opinions
when you have them, and still be heard and accepted.  Do you believe this
group wants to banish all hint of anger and disgreement?  What image of
interaction comes to you as you read this kind of post (talk of space and
structure)?  What kind of space would you like to see evolve here?

I feel that I understand you better, know you more, through your
conversation with Judith.  I'm sorry I didn't speak to you myself before this.

Marie

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 06:28:26 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <355b06b2.627175606@mail.xtra.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Walter, all,

I am here, finally -- life has swallowed me whole these past two weeks and
is just now allowing me a small space to be with myself.  It will not last
long, I fear; work goes on, and May 29 I am leaving for Cincinnati for 10
days to start a doctoral program (which will no doubt turn my life upside
down in ways I cannot begin to envision).  In one of my last posts, I wrote
about invisibility, and then disappeared!  Not intentionally, but I find it
amusing.

At 02:11 PM 5/11/98 GMT, you wrote:
>Marie,
>
>I have been wanting to get to this post as it is full of *invitations* for me
>to speak ... and I like that!

I am glad it felt like an invitation, and not a calling-to-account!  Which
was certainly not my intention, but re-reading leaves me aware it may have
come across that way.  I appreciate your willingness to be open.

>On the collision with void:

>I went back and had a look and don't find it a pretty sight! Though I
think on
>the whole people gave it their best shot.  The July 1997 archive cover
most of
>it:
>http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9707&L=psyber-l&F=&S=&O=D&H
=0&D=0&T=1

I found time to read it all myself, and it was not pretty, and yes we gave
it a good shot, and no it has not been processed.  It did not hurt to read
it again, and I was not sorry for what I wrote then -- or what I didn't!

>How did I feel & what have I learnt?   I felt dreadful ... one of the reasons
>"facilitator" was not a good word for my role is that I can't see a role
for a
>facilitator, though other types of involvement may be a good idea.  All of
>that makes me want to move in the direction of more solid containment ...
>especially as you, Marie are discovering how damaging that was for you. I
>think we would do well to *prevent* such collisions.  How is the question.
>Recently I mooted a change of entry procedure which required an exchange of
>email with me as list owner ... Simon did not like the idea ... I will
respond
>to his post on that ... soon.

No role for a facilitator -- I don't agree, although perhaps it is merely
the label on which we differ.  I saw a role for someone to say loud and
clear that this was not welcome here, to state the group charter where it
pertained and show HOW it pertained and WHY it was not welcome -- to state
something that I think did not exist at that time?  You may see this as a
listowner role, Walter?  What do you see as an "entry procedure" that might
prevent such collisions in the future?  It seems to me that may create a
lot of work for you!  A clear statement, a group charter sent upon
subscription and held clearly in focus when necessary, seems a more viable
alternative to me.  Although interpretation and intervention will always be
problematic, there will always be ambiguous areas.  I don't believe
collision can always be prevented, nor that it should -- it can be
illuminating, enlivening, a learning experience -- if there is a collective
commitment to self reflection and dialogue in the aftermath, and zero
tolerance for a refusal to stop personal attacks.

>> What have we learned?  For me, what comes are questions, not answers, and I
>> have already written them.  I feel there is a need to articulate purpose
>> and parameters, to make choices and commitments, to define process and
>> possibility in this space.
>
>I'm pleased you say this. I agree.  I think we are onto this.

A few of us ... I have hoped to hear from others on these issues.

>> >I am pleased you mention "the announced shift from facilitator to
participant
>> >and
>> >list owner"
>>
>> I want to hear more from you on this, I don't know exactly what ...
>
>I am not sure either?  I'll summarise:
>
>Facilitator ... implies a *guiding* of the process.
>
>List Owner ... implies responsibility for the space, as in home builder and
>host.
>
>Were you wanting to hear more on my personal aspirations and process?  A
>fuller role description of the List Owner?

I'm still not sure -- I think more your personal aspirations and process,
which includes (in my mind) your definition of the listowner role.  I would
like to hear from others also on this.

>Concerning the flames and people leaving, I wrote:
>> >I think my contribution might have been to go into an *action* mode rather
>> >than a grief mode. I had to get out of that sense that I *facilitated*
that
>> >process, I felt bad about that.
>>
>> Can you speak more of this?  A sense of failure in facilitation?  Or
>> frustration in being expected to facilitate when you did not choose to own
>> that role?  What felt bad?
>
>I felt responsible for the interactions in that I had given myself the stated
>role of "facilitator" with all the promise that the title implies.  A promise
>I can't fulfil.  People expect things from a facilitator ... more help I
think
>than from a list owner who does not use such a title.  So I felt some
sense of
>failure ... not so much in facilitation but in having taken on the role.
Much
>of the pressure came onto me ... not as the facilitator but as List owner to
>unsub people.  I didn't think that was called for and my non action in that
>regard still feels OK.
>
>The discomfort with being a facilitator led me to work on the welcome file
>etc.  (action mode) I might have let more of my discomfort hang out (grief
>mode).

[Aside -- Maybe it is time for the welcome file to be posted here again --
I read it recently, and there are changes I like, but did not know were
there.]

I think the suppression of your discomfort contributed to my sense of being
"uneasy" about how you intended to be here.  I never believed that it was
your place to make things "easy" -- although I am not immune from wishing
for a savior when things become turbulent!  While I agree that unsubbing
people was not indicated (and should always be a very last resort), how
would you feel about posting a strong invitation to leave if the parameters
of engagement in this space are not something a given individual is willing
to accept?  Much as a host in his home might protect his guests from verbal
attack and harassment?

>> Words are important, naming is powerful.  I think we are doing this,
>> perhaps in an oblique way?
>
>You mean gradually and almost unwittingly?  Or something else?

Yes, gradually and almost unwittingly -- we are talking generally, not
setting specifics as yet.  And again, only a few of us are involved in this
discussion, which concerns all; only certain perspectives have been voiced.
 At some point, consensus must be sought, yes?

>I am meeting f2f soon with a small group in Christchurch before I go to the
>Conference in Boston, with the express purpose of discussing Psybernet and
the
>future directions.  I'll report on that here ...

I am eager to hear of this.  When do you leave?

out of time and energy,

Marie

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 11:00:50 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: On-line Psychotherapy: Pros & Cons
In-Reply-To:  <355ad460.1703908@mail.ihug.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This new proximity, this new interrelationship.


Listen to this from McLuhan* 1966:

"We now know too much to be strangers to each other.  For example in the
age of information explosion, all walls go out between age groups,
between family groups, national groups, between economies.  The walls
all go out.  People suddenly have to adjust themselves to this new
proximity, this new interrelationship, and merely to tell them this has
happened isn't very helpful.  What they need to know is, if it is
happening, what does it mean to me?"


Psychotherapy relies on a certain distance from the clients and walls
between client and therapist (in the world, not in the consulting room
necessarily) that do not exist in cyberspace.  Can we do anything like
traditional psychotherapy in the time & place of the new proximity? Is
it even necessary?  I think that to promote psychotherapy on the
Internet is to obscure "this new proximity, this new interrelationship",
which is inherently psychological.


Walter



*Originally:"McLuhan on McLuhanism." WNDT Educational board Broadcasting
Network. 1966. Quoted in: Forward Through the Rear View Mirror Edited P.
Benedetti and N. De Hart. 1997 p. 40


__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 12:51:05 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Harvard & London
In-Reply-To:  <v03110701b1848624e4ed@[195.200.13.83]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Simon wrote in another thread:

> Walter, do you still plan to write from the conference, and about your
> warm-up to it? I think that would be interesting and worthwhile.

Here goes Simon:   Harvard & London.

In six days I depart on what promises to be a life changing two week
adventure around the world.  There are two main points of focus:  the
Second International Harvard Conference on Internet and Society taking
place May 26-29, 1998.  After that I go to London to see my son, Josh.

I have been hectic preparing for the trip, and how I can manage to keep
up my promise to write it up as I go I don't know.  I'll do my best.

http://www.psybernet.co.nz/tales.htm

Is where, given that I can find the access I need that I will bring my
travellers tales.  Some of that might well be a link to an email into
this list, as on this occasion.


~~~

On my mind as the time grows nearer:

=The psychological and the social.=
The conference is primarily (obviously!) about the Internet and Society
... I find that fascinating yet not within my specialty interest, which
is the Internet and the *Psyche*.  I notice that there is much on the
agenda on how the net impacts society and vice versa.  My eye and ear
will be out for the mysterious & elusive psych equivalent.


=Listening to Neil Stephenson=
A favourite author will be doing a keynote address on the first day!
What a buzz.


=What a lot of big time business people=
Even though there seems to be a big focus on the famous CEOs I have a
sense that the themes of how the new environment, economics and all is
as much a mystery to the rich an poor alike.


=Connections & Gossip in the Global Village=
Looking forward to meeting people and doing some talking about Psybernet
Psyber-L and Psyberspace etc. I wonder where it will all lead and how it
might impact Psyber-L.


Enough for now.



Walter
Thinking about what to pack.




__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 12:51:05 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Harvard & London
In-Reply-To:  <v03110701b1848624e4ed@[195.200.13.83]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Simon wrote in another thread:

> Walter, do you still plan to write from the conference, and about your
> warm-up to it? I think that would be interesting and worthwhile.

Here goes Simon:   Harvard & London.

In six days I depart on what promises to be a life changing two week
adventure around the world.  There are two main points of focus:  the
Second International Harvard Conference on Internet and Society taking
place May 26-29, 1998.  After that I go to London to see my son, Josh.

I have been hectic preparing for the trip, and how I can manage to keep
up my promise to write it up as I go I don't know.  I'll do my best.

http://www.psybernet.co.nz/tales.htm

Is where, given that I can find the access I need that I will bring my
travellers tales.  Some of that might well be a link to an email into
this list, as on this occasion.


~~~

On my mind as the time grows nearer:

=The psychological and the social.=
The conference is primarily (obviously!) about the Internet and Society
... I find that fascinating yet not within my specialty interest, which
is the Internet and the *Psyche*.  I notice that there is much on the
agenda on how the net impacts society and vice versa.  My eye and ear
will be out for the mysterious & elusive psych equivalent.


=Listening to Neil Stephenson=
A favourite author will be doing a keynote address on the first day!
What a buzz.


=What a lot of big time business people=
Even though there seems to be a big focus on the famous CEOs I have a
sense that the themes of how the new environment, economics and all is
as much a mystery to the rich an poor alike.


=Connections & Gossip in the Global Village=
Looking forward to meeting people and doing some talking about Psybernet
Psyber-L and Psyberspace etc. I wonder where it will all lead and how it
might impact Psyber-L.


Enough for now.



Walter
Thinking about what to pack.




__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 12:51:05 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Harvard & London
In-Reply-To:  <v03110701b1848624e4ed@[195.200.13.83]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Simon wrote in another thread:

> Walter, do you still plan to write from the conference, and about your
> warm-up to it? I think that would be interesting and worthwhile.

Here goes Simon:   Harvard & London.

In six days I depart on what promises to be a life changing two week
adventure around the world.  There are two main points of focus:  the
Second International Harvard Conference on Internet and Society taking
place May 26-29, 1998.  After that I go to London to see my son, Josh.

I have been hectic preparing for the trip, and how I can manage to keep
up my promise to write it up as I go I don't know.  I'll do my best.

http://www.psybernet.co.nz/tales.htm

Is where, given that I can find the access I need that I will bring my
travellers tales.  Some of that might well be a link to an email into
this list, as on this occasion.


~~~

On my mind as the time grows nearer:

=The psychological and the social.=
The conference is primarily (obviously!) about the Internet and Society
... I find that fascinating yet not within my specialty interest, which
is the Internet and the *Psyche*.  I notice that there is much on the
agenda on how the net impacts society and vice versa.  My eye and ear
will be out for the mysterious & elusive psych equivalent.


=Listening to Neil Stephenson=
A favourite author will be doing a keynote address on the first day!
What a buzz.


=What a lot of big time business people=
Even though there seems to be a big focus on the famous CEOs I have a
sense that the themes of how the new environment, economics and all is
as much a mystery to the rich an poor alike.


=Connections & Gossip in the Global Village=
Looking forward to meeting people and doing some talking about Psybernet
Psyber-L and Psyberspace etc. I wonder where it will all lead and how it
might impact Psyber-L.


Enough for now.



Walter
Thinking about what to pack.




__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 13:39:52 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: Welcome to Osama
In-Reply-To:  <355f02ba.23185649@mail.ihug.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Osama,


> "Osama Abdul Hadi"<osamah@nbk.com>

I am sorry to say that your address is causing problems again to the list.  We
are getting duplicates from there.

I will need to remove it.  Please persevere, and feel free to read the archives
and I could post on your behalf should you wish to do that.


PS I am posting this to All by way of explanation for the dupes.



Walter
__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 13:39:52 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: Welcome to Osama
In-Reply-To:  <355f02ba.23185649@mail.ihug.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Osama,


> "Osama Abdul Hadi"<osamah@nbk.com>

I am sorry to say that your address is causing problems again to the list.  We
are getting duplicates from there.

I will need to remove it.  Please persevere, and feel free to read the archives
and I could post on your behalf should you wish to do that.


PS I am posting this to All by way of explanation for the dupes.



Walter
__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 15:10:15 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <3.0.1.32.19980518062826.00754c64@qed.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

All,

I see Void as Wilbur. Not that Void was Wilbur, but that the affect and
actuation that surrounded Void's brief emergence is the precedent to the,
(for me,) much more pained events that precipitated Wilbur's threats,
blackmail of Walter, and leave-taking, and then, also the negative
projections which led to much abusive 'self' expression, my own included.

***

Prior to that are not too many storms on Psyber-L; at least going back to
the Fall of 1995.

Of course, I believe Walter would today handle the influx of similar
dynamics differently. I would my self. I'm aware that part of the learning
which goes on here is the evolution of process, among other aspects, and I
wonder about the events of the past more in the mode of "what have we
learned?".

We all man the gates which protect each other from abusive behavior,
especially the ones which cage our own beasts! Also: reasoning with one's
own complex is hard enough, with another's...

***

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 16:07:26 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <v04011700b185ef1654ac@[207.54.160.151]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 03:10 PM 5/18/98 +0100, Hoon wrote:
>All,
>
>I see Void as Wilbur. Not that Void was Wilbur, but that the affect and
>actuation that surrounded Void's brief emergence is the precedent to the,
>(for me,) much more pained events that precipitated Wilbur's threats,
>blackmail of Walter, and leave-taking, and then, also the negative
>projections which led to much abusive 'self' expression, my own included.
>
>***
>
>Prior to that are not too many storms on Psyber-L; at least going back to
>the Fall of 1995.
>
>Of course, I believe Walter would today handle the influx of similar
>dynamics differently. I would my self. I'm aware that part of the learning
>which goes on here is the evolution of process, among other aspects, and I
>wonder about the events of the past more in the mode of "what have we
>learned?".

How would you handle it differently?

>We all man the gates which protect each other from abusive behavior,
>especially the ones which cage our own beasts! Also: reasoning with one's
>own complex is hard enough, with another's...

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 17:05:09 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <19980518200944.AAE20667@default>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>How would you handle it differently?

Julienne, all,

One, I would attempt to manage my own responses and reactions more
consciously, especially by being more aware of my own tendency to want to
toy around with other people's strong negative affect, and other behaviors
which, when I'm sharp enough, are to be seen as my own constellation of
unconscious effects and cause my own negative, primitive, even nasty
behavior. My problem: I sometimes enjoy pouring fuel on the fire.

Two, I would, nowadays, be quick to backchannel Walter and learn from him
what he perceived to be 'going on'. With that perspective in mind, there
might be some anticipation of an agreed upon response.

Three, I would be much less hesitant in suggesting that certain tactics or
strategems do not provide for communication or dialogue.

Four, I might backchannel the abused person to find out what they are
feeling, and gain their perspective.

***

In response to the first instance, would I be quick to name *abuse* abuse?
That's a really pointed question. The pattern might be:

abusor: "Person X is less than a dog"
person X: "How can you say that?"
group conscience: "That is abuse and it is not allowed."
abusor: "You misunderstand me."
group conscience: "Say what you will without abusing another person."
abusor: "You are all less than dogs."

So the abusor gets unsubbed. But this is a clear case. One can imagine much
less clear ones, especially if the judger of abuse is the abused.

***

Julienne, a provocative question; my answer is strictly preliminary!

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 18:45:24 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <v04011700b1860868193b@[207.54.160.66]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 05:05 PM 5/18/98 +0100, Hoon wrote:

Julienne asked Hoon:
>>How would you handle it differently?

>Julienne, all,

>One, I would attempt to manage my own responses and reactions more
>consciously, especially by being more aware of my own tendency to want to
>toy around with other people's strong negative affect, and other behaviors
>which, when I'm sharp enough, are to be seen as my own constellation of
>unconscious effects and cause my own negative, primitive, even nasty
>behavior. My problem: I sometimes enjoy pouring fuel on the fire.
>
>Two, I would, nowadays, be quick to backchannel Walter and learn from him
>what he perceived to be 'going on'. With that perspective in mind, there
>might be some anticipation of an agreed upon response.
>
>Three, I would be much less hesitant in suggesting that certain tactics or
>strategems do not provide for communication or dialogue.
>
>Four, I might backchannel the abused person to find out what they are
>feeling, and gain their perspective.
>
>***
>
>In response to the first instance, would I be quick to name *abuse* abuse?
>That's a really pointed question. The pattern might be:
>
>abusor: "Person X is less than a dog"
>person X: "How can you say that?"
>group conscience: "That is abuse and it is not allowed."
>abusor: "You misunderstand me."
>group conscience: "Say what you will without abusing another person."
>abusor: "You are all less than dogs."
>
>So the abusor gets unsubbed. But this is a clear case. One can imagine much
>less clear ones, especially if the judger of abuse is the abused.
>
>***
>
>Julienne, a provocative question; my answer is strictly preliminary!
>
>HooN

Thank you, Hoon...
btw - I went to your website - so nice to see more of you. :)

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 23:29:02 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <3.0.1.32.19980518062930.00754c64@qed.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, 18 May 1998 06:29:30 -0400, you wrote:

>Hello, Joanne.
>
>At 09:58 PM 5/5/98 GMT, you wrote:
>>Hello Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>, on Mon, 4 May 1998 21:03:52 -0400,
>>you wrote:
>>
>>>Joanne, I think I like your (spoken in jest?) notion of a "test shadow" --
>>>might that be a way to play with difference?  Perhaps a cyber-psychodrama,
>>>Walter?  How might we do that here?
>>
>>It was half in jest, but I think we were trying to do that before with the
>>bananabean.
>>
>>-JoAnne
>
>I can see that, but "bananabean" was closely interwoven with Julienne in my
>mind -- even tho you were careful to identify it as *your* perception of
>her, it was linked with her for me and therefore held the charged energy of
>the ongoing conflict within it.

I see how that could be a problem.  But at that point, what was the
alternative, if we were going to discuss some of those issues?

>I was thinking of a constructed "test
>shadow" -- a pretend post, with the intention of sending divergent
>responses to it and then discussing them and their impact.

That would be interesting.  Who would create the test post?

>Now I am thinking that the dialogue between you and Judith, in one way, and
>(even more so) the dialogue between Simon and Walter shows a different way
>to engage over hurt feelings and divergent perspectives -- better than a
>test shadow, as these dialogues are real.

Yes, I think there was a much better feeling there, and a willingness
on both sides to listen to the other.  I felt more secure in this
group than ever before, that conversation going on in a good and
productive and nonviolent way.  I appreciate Judith's open heart very
much.

>>Was there something learned from the encounter with void that was used
>>later, when Wilbur, Julienne, and I were arguing?
>
>I am interested in this question -- the later arguments felt to me like a
>continuation of an explosion of negative energy, an almost instant replay
>of the same dynamic as the encounter with void.

I wonder how much of that was intrinsic to the arguments, and how much
was projection of the void arguments onto those arguments?  In other
words, is it possible that one thing that was learned from the void
arguments was to ignore such arguments?  Did the later arguments
reinforce that learning?

Was there a real difference between the two, or were they really
similar?

>Joanne, I would especially like to hear from you on the "process and
>parameters" being discussed.  I particularly wonder if the concept of
>ground rules and prohibition of abusive interactions leaves you feeling
>personally stifled, without a way to express strong feelings and opinions
>when you have them, and still be heard and accepted.

I wonder how such things will be expressed.  I wonder if it is not the
type of interaction, but the content itself, that is being stifled.
What if the truth I see is ugly?  What if the truth I see is not
flattering to someone else on the list?  What if there are different
perceptions of reality?  Others have some very unflattering visions of
my truth.

I don't know if any other people on this list had a history before
meeting here.  It seems that they certainly hadn't had the kind of
history Julienne and I had.  And the situation was such that no one
could accept one of us and the other both, at least not completely.
Perfectly sensible that no one who remained on the list could take a
side, as that would tear the group apart.

Don't take a side, let it ride, take it in your stride.

>Do you believe this
>group wants to banish all hint of anger and disgreement?  What image of
>interaction comes to you as you read this kind of post (talk of space and
>structure)?  What kind of space would you like to see evolve here?

I think the group wants to banish the kind of anger and disagreement
that goes nowhere.  That's just fatiguing.  But I don't know how we
can tell what will happen as a result of any particular anger or
disagreement.

And the argument that seems static, totally pointless, and with sides
that are completely indistinguishable to the group, is to me moving
swiftly in a direction, highly polarized, and relatively easy to
follow.  What to the group sounds like rehashing and yelling sounds to
me like restatement of facts and positions and not backing down.

I guess I felt that the group never understood the argument, so could
never judge it.  I should not have expected anyone to care, really,
since I was a new member and did not know the shape of the group.
That Wilbur was willing to listen and try to evaluate the arguments
must have encouraged me.

And again, to make the investment in the argument would be an
investment in people who are clearly not yet group members, may be
detractors from the group in the long run.  Not yet worth the
investment.

However, on to what I'd like to see.

A place where people do not tell each other what the other is doing,
seeing, thinking, being.  More "I talk," e.g. "I feel hurt," or, "I
don't like hearing that."  A place where judging, diagnostic, and
estimation words and phrases are not thrown around.  People are talked
about as a result of their voluntary actions and words, not as
objects.

This is not just "what I'd like" but "what I like already" in
interactions here.  And it's not a matter of outlawing those things,
but mentioning them when they come up and working them out.  "I felt
hurt when..." leads to clarification, reassurance, not a bigger rift
and a colder shoulder.

This makes me think more about the earlier questions.  If there is a
difference in truths, how is that handled without making a judgment?
One can only give one's evidence, opinions, express one's beliefs.

Asking some kinds of questions is nearly the same as making "you"
statements.  Almost forcing the other person to make the "you"
statement for you.  So that takes it beyond the purely voluntary, but
then again only so far as the person is biddable by those questions.

Something to think about, about my own questioning nature, here.  I
know I won't resolve it immediately.

>I feel that I understand you better, know you more, through your
>conversation with Judith.  I'm sorry I didn't speak to you myself before this.

I'm glad you waited until you felt comfortable, and that you did
eventually feel comfortable, in speaking with me.  And I really
appreciate the questions.  They came at a very good time, as I was
still digesting the last discussion with Judith, and wondering what
will happen in PsyberLand for me.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 03:02:55 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <v04011700b185ef1654ac@[207.54.160.151]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hoon,

> Of course, I believe Walter would today handle the influx of similar
> dynamics differently. I would my self. I'm aware that part of the learning
> which goes on here is the evolution of process, among other aspects, and I
> wonder about the events of the past more in the mode of "what have we
> learned?"

The learing is really coming into its own with these recent posts!  All coming
at a time as I am about to travel.  I will be here with all of this and write in
good time.


Walter



__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 03:08:55 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <v04011700b185ef1654ac@[207.54.160.151]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hoon,

> We all man the gates which protect each other from abusive behavior,
> especially the ones which cage our own beasts! Also: reasoning with one's
> own complex is hard enough, with another's...

That is much better than "one" facilitator, yet Marie's point that a clear
charter is useful is a good one, what do you think?

How we attend to the gates of this space is parallel to how we attend to our own
beast!  It involves the same dynamics yet each has its own "dimension" & we can
& need to attend to each dimension.



Walter
__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 18 May 1998 22:05:10 -0600
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Robert Longpre <odyssey@CYBERSURF.NET>
Subject:      Re: Welcome to Osama
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Welcome Osama, my brother, .... :)

It is good to share this place/space with you.  I hope that with this
sharing of space you can hear more from me.  I have been quiet of late
in this place as well.  You will find this place a good place filled
with good people.

your brother in Canada

Robert

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 08:46:16 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Simon, Walter and all,

I've been interested in the exchange you both have been engaged in from a
number of aspects and as I would read each new post I'd want to ask a
question or make a comment, but wanted to honor your process...plus from a
practical standpoint :-) I'd get lost in the *>*,*>>* etc...

that said I have a thot on the *split*...tho admittedly I didn't experience
it so with that caveat... and *debate*

>>Done! Yes, I like that touch of linking the threads. Not only the practical
>>aspect, but the act of acknowledgement embedded in that linking, the
>>respecting of origins. Jung-psych splits apart and look what happens here!
>
>Oh dear! How ironic... I talk about respecting origins and then get the
>name wrong! Jung-psy, of course...
>
>Ch-ch-ch-changes...
>
>Simon
>
>PS. I suppose the phrase 'split apart' might be up for debate, as well!

I am wondering if the process could be described in terms of physics
meaning the phenomenon of a structure where pressure is applied and at some
point the structure can no longer maintain itself and it reformulates ie:
water into steam...just before that instant there is *clinging* where the
structure holds onto itself tighter and then there is a reordering...(with
apologies to those more steep in the scien tific language;-) there is also
the other side of this where the pressure is not applied in a great enuf
degree to cause the structure to reformulate and there is just
dissipation...ie: the heat is not turned up high enuf to make steam

So *split*...in my work we use the word transformation which is not a
loaded word in our learning context but a word which describes a change...

Another framing of *split* could be described in terms of Robert Fritz's
work on creativity (Peter Senge The Fifth Discipline learning organization
guy uses this work as well as Gregory Bateson's as a basis)
Fritz calls it structural tension...where there is *vision* and then
*reality* and the *gap* between the two...this gap to Fritz is the
structural tension (Senge calls it creative tension)...in order to create
the vision one must be able to stay in this tension caused by the
discrepancy long enuf to reach the vision...two things are possible 1) the
vision is lowered to meet the reality at whatever point one is not
capablechoosing to stay in the critical tension 2) one continues in the
tension using the energy created to move the reality to meet the vision...

so maybe it is possible to draw a parallel between the *split* in terms of
not being able to hold the structural tension, and here in Psyber-L where
we continue to work the reality holding the tension to create the
vision...transformation

My work these days has more to with individual's transforming, however,
from my framing there is a fascinating experience here which is not an
organization in the formal sense but a *group* of *individuals* working
with a vision...

Judith dried off;-)

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 14:47:18 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <v04011700b1860868193b@[207.54.160.66]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>>How would you handle it differently?
>
>Julienne, all,
>
>One, I would attempt to manage my own responses and reactions more
>consciously, especially by being more aware of my own tendency to want to
>toy around with other people's strong negative affect, and other behaviors
>which, when I'm sharp enough, are to be seen as my own constellation of
>unconscious effects and cause my own negative, primitive, even nasty
>behavior. My problem: I sometimes enjoy pouring fuel on the fire.

HooN,

I have been scanning through the Void-era posts, and it's reminded me that
your response to people on occasion is to 'echo' quotes from their posts
back at them, and frame those quotes in a way that could be read as ironic,
as if you're making fun of them, trying to 'bring them down a peg or two' -
and if they don't see it then you can have even more of a laugh at their
expense. That is my impression, anyway. I think you did this with Wilbur
also. So "toying around" with them is a good way to put it. What do you
think? There have been other times when you put together quotes in a way
which seemed positive and supportive, though, so maybe my impression is in
relation to the person you're 'reflecting'.

Having said all this, I am struck by one quote from Void that you pulled
out (and it was your 'pullout' that highlighted it for me):

> Most of the time (and the types of defenses I was talking about)
> people wall themselves up as a way to protect themselves from being hurt
>by the outside world.  They become non-adversarial and avoid conflicts.
>Sometimes, this is augmented by the addition of "arrows" which fire at
>anyone who comes too close to the defenses in the first place.  These
>arrows often-times drive people away who are already close to them or seek
>to be close to them.

It strikes me that Void did have valid, good things to say, but he was his
own worst enemy in getting them across. I think what happens, I dare say
with all of us, is that without realising it we can give signals about the
pain that we're feeling by actually talking about ourselves when we *think*
we're talking about other people.

There was a lot of pain in Void, and maybe the challenge with any 'Void
type' is to focus on the hurting human being behind all the crap, and talk
to that hurt, not to the crap.


Marie,

I don't mean to excuse the way that Void treated you, or to 'push away' the
hurt that you felt. If I had been attacked in the way that you were, I
would have felt just as hurt - and I think just as bewildered, too.

But why is there hurt? We think, perhaps, 'But I'm just trying to express
my feelings, my self, in an honest way, why am I being attacked? Why me?
Why me?'. I think the answer is twofold: I triggered something in that
attacking person that is painful for them, and there is something positive
that I need to learn about myself from this. Maybe the positive thing is
simply that I get a wake-up call on how I feel about myself.

The person doing the attacking needs to take responsibility for their pain
and their actions that spring from it, I need to look at why I'm feeling
hurt, see what the message is for me, accept that I triggered them, and see
how my responsibility pans out. Tough, I know! Maybe I can't handle it,
maybe they can't.

This is not to discount the reality that some people are simply incapable
of seeing any wrongdoing in themselves, and you simply need to get the hell
out of the situation.


>Two, I would, nowadays, be quick to backchannel Walter and learn from him
>what he perceived to be 'going on'. With that perspective in mind, there
>might be some anticipation of an agreed upon response.
>
>Three, I would be much less hesitant in suggesting that certain tactics or
>strategems do not provide for communication or dialogue.
>
>Four, I might backchannel the abused person to find out what they are
>feeling, and gain their perspective.

I'm not sure about the backchannelling, HooN. It seems to me that it's
better to have everything onlist, out in the open, otherwise the
conversation can get skewed and other people can end up feeling left out.
You maybe have in mind 'behind-the-scenes diplomacy', but I think that only
works in formal settings with an uninvolved 'third party' shuttling between
the various injured parties.


>In response to the first instance, would I be quick to name *abuse* abuse?
>That's a really pointed question. The pattern might be:
>
>abusor: "Person X is less than a dog"
>person X: "How can you say that?"
>group conscience: "That is abuse and it is not allowed."
>abusor: "You misunderstand me."
>group conscience: "Say what you will without abusing another person."
>abusor: "You are all less than dogs."
>
>So the abusor gets unsubbed. But this is a clear case. One can imagine much
>less clear ones, especially if the judger of abuse is the abused.

Maybe the group conscience's second response should be: "How is it that we
misunderstand you?" In the situation you describe, the group conscience
substitutes a diktat for any attempt at dialogue - perhaps even manipulates
the 'abuser' into getting themselves unsubbed, or into a situation in which
the group conscience feels justified in unsubbing them.

I would be wary of getting into a situation of 'we're all wonderful people
in a wonderful place, and anyone who upsets that wonderfulness is bad and
needs to be ejected (as soon as possible).' Who defines what's wonderful?
It might be wonderful that someone is upsetting the (perceived)
wonderfulness! Maybe, despite their best efforts to the contrary, they're
actually making the place more wonderful. A lot depends on your definition
of wonderful and on your definition of what is abusive within the given
situation. And perceived 'group conscience' might in fact be 'group denial'.

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 14:13:15 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Welcome Brian!
In-Reply-To:  <199805191229.AAA01704@icarus.ihug.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Brian,

I am glad you are  here.  Phew.

Brian is a friend here in Christchurch and we meet f2f to talk about things
Cyber & Psyber.  We managed to establish that we had crossed our wires and Brian
was awaiting an invitation to the list, while I was under the impression I had
already done that.  Never mind.

I will let Yvonne know she is invited again too Brian.  Not that this is an
invitation only list!  At present we are w i d e open, though this is a matter
we discuss from time to time.  I hope Psyber-L is of interest to you and that
this experiential exploration of the psyche in cs meshes well with your
interests in online education and your perceptions of the "domain shift" you see
us on the edge of.

Just jump right into the discussions if you wish ... or take your time.

Walter




> Tue, 19 May 1998 08:29:18
>
> Brian  Pauling <paulingb@CHCH.PLANET.CO.NZ>  has just  subscribed to  the
> PSYBER-L list (Psybernet Mailing List).




__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 10:08:47 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: The Hot New Medium Is ... Email
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Simon you inquired back as I was having to put my attention on my
papermaking so here goes,BTW it is early morning and the sun is already
blazing and I am experiencing the juxtapostion between the sounds of
construction on the hospital nearby and the white blooms cascading from the
tree outside my window against the blue of the sky...

>>Walter,
>>sounds fascinating...i'm torn between reading the article which I know will
>>*instigate* a flood of new thots but which will take me out of my *artist's
>>mode* which I need to be connected to for my rapidly approaching studio
>>opening on Saturday...
>>
>>I find that engaging here over the past weeks, and I want to say *very
>>happily* so, has definitely moved me away from where I need to be to touch
>>the space which is asking to manifest thru my papermaking...I've been
>>luxurating in that space for months now since my illness impeded my thot
>>processes...now I need to reconnect to a process which will allow me to
>>move withinbetween these realms...interesting the paper is created in the
>>silence...
>>
>>I will return to this article and Hoon's stuff later...
>>
>>In gratefulness,
>>Judith in a bit of a conflict of interests
>
>
>Judith, I've found the dialogue here between you and JoAnne very
>heartening; the awareness of questioning, exploration, gradual opening up
>you have both brought here is something to be treasured.

I am acutely aware of this and always in awe...also as I experienced yours
and Walter's exchange...and I must confess that eavesdropping is a habit
that I have engaged in much to my ex's dismay...and here it is built into
the space! so much for me to learn about people and how they view there
lives...always fascinating...

  Also, your
>writing about your illness, sharing your diary entry here, touched me and
>set off thoughts and feelings in me that may yet work their way through to
>here. You have also brought awareness and thinking about process back into
>my consciousness; process is something that means a lot to me, in
>particular it resonates with illness and the relationship between mind and
>body.
>

Yes, process...it fascinates me...Jean Houston, the amazing anthropologist
who works with her husband Robert Masters on human potential, says that
process is the focus for the shifting consciousness we are experiencing
going into 2000...particularly emphasized with the implosion of diversity
into our individual lives...and we experience that diversity here to some
extent...as I have worked over the past upteen years with people on their
transformation, process has evolved as the superordinate in getting to that
level where difference can be included...and where alignment has the
possibility of occuring (ala Gregory Bateson's logical levels...lately in
working with the young couple who have split the key element in her
frustration was that her world view included his but his couldn't include
her's...which distilled into a process issue...

the body mind connection continues its teaching of me...my immune system is
in the dumper and so my body isn't functioning as it was meant to...and I
am struggling with lung stuff that continues as well as a nerve pinch
somewhere in my shoulder which all keep me not feeling good physically
which then feeds back into my state of mind which then...of course, I
ignored my body for so long that this is the price I pay...on the other
hand my condition keeps my health in my consciousness and thus makes its
presence in my life balance...thus body mind spirit...

>No need to reply to this, of course! My best wishes for your studio
>opening. When you are able to write here again, perhaps you could say
>something about papermaking; I am rather intrigued, it sounds like a
>delightful combination of physicality and contemplation.
>
>Simon

yes, Simon, when it is *working* it is meditation...it is within this
process that I have direct experience with what I think is *it*...a
powerful impetus to exist...and I as the instrument meet this impetus and
in my case paper manifests...as an actor I am always one step removed from
the impetus so papermaking in the way I hold it connects me directly...and
there is a process to it and when all the elements are correct, meaning the
pulp is consistant and free of lumps, when the mold and deck are in good
condition...and when I am in good condition :-) then it all works...when
everything within the process is aligned, what comes into existance for me
is magical and surprising and holds profound beauty...I think of this
process as the Alchemy of the Soul...and everyday the dance of the pulp
seduces me...

Meanwhile, you have mentioned *sets* which I find intriging...something
about process here isn't there?

In gratitude,
Judith

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 08:18:35 -0600
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Robert Longpre <odyssey@CYBERSURF.NET>
Subject:      Re: Welcome Brian!
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Brian,

I would like to echo the welcome given by Walter.  I hope that you bring
some of your interests cyber/psyber here to share with us.  Walter has
built a good place here for this kind of dialogue.

Robert - poet/philospoher-student/teacher ... part-time humanoid

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 14:32:01 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: On-line Psychotherapy: Pros & Cons
In-Reply-To:  <35610cd8.91322234@mail.ihug.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

All,

I think McLuhan was brilliant etc.  But i have adjusted my views a little in the
24 hours since i posted this.  The walls do not all go out.  We do have to
adjust to the new space, but there are doors and walls here.  Our Psyber-L door
is open ... and that has not felt right for some.  There are other lists i am on
where the door is firmly closed and there is not even a name on the door.  Our
money is in cs and well locked away.

I think all my probing of the roles of Listowner, facilitator, host, participant
etc.  has been part of an adjustment to the new proximity.  Who am I in the
various spaces?  Perhaps when i have that really clear then it would be possible
and feel right to do on-line psychotherapy or as I have called it in the past:
psyber explorations?  I can see that i have to have my own digital being (deing
- as Brian informed me tonight! Can you say more Brian?)  well sorted and that
the "spaces / places" would have to have appropriate doors and windows and so
on.

How does that sound?

Walter




> This new proximity, this new interrelationship.
>
>
> Listen to this from McLuhan* 1966:
>
> "We now know too much to be strangers to each other.  For example in the
> age of information explosion, all walls go out between age groups,
> between family groups, national groups, between economies.  The walls
> all go out.  People suddenly have to adjust themselves to this new
> proximity, this new interrelationship, and merely to tell them this has
> happened isn't very helpful.  What they need to know is, if it is
> happening, what does it mean to me?"
>
>
> Psychotherapy relies on a certain distance from the clients and walls
> between client and therapist (in the world, not in the consulting room
> necessarily) that do not exist in cyberspace.  Can we do anything like
> traditional psychotherapy in the time & place of the new proximity? Is
> it even necessary?  I think that to promote psychotherapy on the
> Internet is to obscure "this new proximity, this new interrelationship",
> which is inherently psychological.
>
>
> Walter
>
>
>
> *Originally:"McLuhan on McLuhanism." WNDT Educational board Broadcasting
> Network. 1966. Quoted in: Forward Through the Rear View Mirror Edited P.
> Benedetti and N. De Hart. 1997 p. 40
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
> LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L
>
>

__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 11:41:23 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v03110703b18715ec1fae@[195.200.17.187]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Simon,

This is interesting to read your impressions, especially of my immodest
contributions. <g>

The field we're looking at is *the poster's intention* about which I will
make three hypothetical assertions:

(1) Every post is made with either or combination of overt, tacit, or
unconscious intentions.
(2) Every reader who fully reads a post supposes it carries an intention
which is *wholly or partly identified, correctly or incorrectly* even when
the identification itself is not felt overtly.
(3) The reader's impression of the intention of the post counts for at
least as much as the actual intention of the writer.

What do you think?

***

You identify an impression of my intention.

>
>I have been scanning through the Void-era posts, and it's reminded me that
>your response to people on occasion is to 'echo' quotes from their posts
>back at them, and frame those quotes in a way that could be read as ironic,
>as if you're making fun of them, trying to 'bring them down a peg or two' -
>and if they don't see it then you can have even more of a laugh at their
>expense.

This is much more complicated. What you describe here does not match an
intention I've had, but its close enough to focus on. I cannot remember if
I've stated it here, (I have on Netdynam,) but I have and will make
contributions with a primarily private objective informing my intention,
and use such posts to filter responses.

Now, as for framing without (my own accompanying,) commentary, lacking an
example to review, it is quite possible I might isolate somebody's
self-expression to showcase it on its own terms. Irony isn't the word which
comes to mind however; I think this is more an effort to show someone to be
stupid or silly or whatever excuse I might make to do such a thing. (Yes,
this can be abusive.) However, I don't, my self, think in terms of bringing
a person down a notch or two. In a different kind of circumstance, I might,
(and did on a another forum a few days, post an ironic, even glib,
rejoinder to what struck me as an over-generalized and cynically didactic
post,) try to create a certain subtle tension to help someone see a basic
error in their habituated reasoning. (btw, 'irony' is usually not up to
that task.) Understood by me: this kind of toying is neither fair or
necessarily welcome, but, it has sometimes been successful on the terms
through which it works for me.

On occasion, it has helped turn the key.

***

Yet, such framing might also be to simply highlight something of interest.
Much more likely is my using other's parsed up posts to make a joke. In
that respect: when you write, "if they don't see it then you can have even
more of a laugh at their expense" I must respond, *usually I don't know if
they get it or not, if anybody gets it or not!* I almost always humor my
self and ego-centrically presume everyone else is going to laugh, no guffaw
(!) also. Could somebody feel knocked down a notch or two in response to
such a post of mine? Sure.

So I would have to wonder about the unconscious aspect to the intention,
i.e. what is even unknown to me in my innocence. ;-)

One more point: I very rarely make my intention out of a wish to be
positive and supportive.

***

A lot turns on the "dialogue of intentions"; some would say everything.
But, I have a somewhat willfully tricky approach to this, but not tricky
enough to shut out my unconscious.

Rumi, ra: "If you could give up tricks and cleverness, that would be the
cleverest trick!"

***

best wishes,

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 11:55:47 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <v03110703b18715ec1fae@[195.200.17.187]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Void quoted:

>>These
>>arrows often-times drive people away who are already close to them or seek
>>to be close to them.

Methinks this may have been Void's way of describing a 'parental complex'.
Which, if true, is congruent with Simon stating, "is that without realising
it we can give signals about the pain that we're feeling by actually
talking about ourselves when we *think* we're talking about other people."

Sometimes, projecting it terms of how others structure their 'world', is
the only way we can talk about it!

***

>There was a lot of pain in Void, and maybe the challenge with any 'Void
>type' is to focus on the hurting human being behind all the crap, and talk
>to that hurt, not to the crap.

Which requires the group to first manage the, for lack of a better way to
put it, 'counter-projection'. This is almost impossible to do in a group.

We see in the dyadic dialogue a better example of how to develop the
process; I suggest this is about *receiving* as well as giving. After
refusing to give the projections enough energy (power,) to run on, we
wonder about what it is we are to give and what it is we might receive.

(Often, in my experience, it is the hurting person, who least wants to
*get* anything. Not that their needs don't exist, but that they have no way
to accept their being met.)

***

a bow, peacefulness to all,

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 12:02:00 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      behind-the-scenes diplomacy
In-Reply-To:  <v03110703b18715ec1fae@[195.200.17.187]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Simon wrote:

>I'm not sure about the backchannelling, HooN. It seems to me that it's
>better to have everything onlist, out in the open, otherwise the
>conversation can get skewed and other people can end up feeling left out.
>You maybe have in mind 'behind-the-scenes diplomacy', but I think that only
>works in formal settings with an uninvolved 'third party' shuttling between
>the various injured parties.

Of course the idea of back channel is that no one feels left out because
they aren't privy to the specific back channel! :-)

***

It may work or might not. I don't think the outcome absolutely rides on a
structural determination. But if the front channel is full of fire, I might
initiate communications through cooler channels.

(Hey: thinking of my self as diplomatic in any way is fairly unusual,
especially in contrast to my sometimes running into a room and throwing a
jar full of kerosine into it.)

***

yikes,

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 15:57:42 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <3.0.1.32.19980518062826.00754c64@qed.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Marie,

I think your care and focus on these questions is a fine effort!

> I am here, finally -- life has swallowed me whole these past two weeks and
> is just now allowing me a small space to be with myself.  It will not last
> long, I fear; work goes on, and May 29 I am leaving for Cincinnati for 10
> days to start a doctoral program (which will no doubt turn my life upside
> down in ways I cannot begin to envision).  In one of my last posts, I wrote
> about invisibility, and then disappeared!  Not intentionally, but I find it
> amusing.

I don't think you are gone.  I have a sense that you are always here.  I think
it is because you respond right on the moment when you do.  You read Psybe-L!
All the best with that shift & thesis.


> I am glad it felt like an invitation, and not a calling-to-account!  Which
> was certainly not my intention, but re-reading leaves me aware it may have
> come across that way.  I appreciate your willingness to be open.

No, I did not get that feel.

> >On the collision with void:

http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9707&L=psyber-l&F=&S=&O=D&H=0&D=0&T=1

> No role for a facilitator -- I don't agree, although perhaps it is merely
> the label on which we differ.  I saw a role for someone to say loud and
> clear that this was not welcome here, to state the group charter where it
> pertained and show HOW it pertained and WHY it was not welcome -- to state
> something that I think did not exist at that time?  You may see this as a
> listowner role, Walter?

I think the writing of the charter is the role of the listowner  LO, it did
exist at the time, but was not as well developed.  If I were to sum up the
essence of any charter it would be:  Respect.  He showed no respect.

At the time my initial silence was that i was away for a day or two in rl.  That
has to be ok.  I thought the initial responses  by others and you Marie were as
good as anything i could have done.  I'd like to think we all can play our part
in responding to disrespect.  I'd hate to think only a facilitator can to do all
of that.

What only the list owner can do is kick a member out.  I did not do that and i
don't think I would if I had my time over.  Backchannel as HooN suggested is a
good idea, as it would alert the list owner to a problem and perhaps allow for
some encouragement and thought about appropriate action ... by the person
writing or the LO.

> What do you see as an "entry procedure" that might
> prevent such collisions in the future?  It seems to me that may create a
> lot of work for you!

That each new member when they sub gets an automated response from the LO asking
them to read the charter / list description & to write a short intro to the
list, stating their interests in it.  I then process the sub and send the intro
with a welcome to the list.  I don't think that is too much work.  I think it
would orientate people to the purpose and so on, and foster better initial
welcome and connections.

This would not be to keep people out, though I might enter into dialogue first.
In some extreme cases entry might be refused.

I say I, though i am thinking list owner / host.

> A clear statement, a group charter sent upon
> subscription and held clearly in focus when necessary, seems a more viable
> alternative to me.

~~~

There is something else on my mind here ...

I have wanted Psyber-L to be the foyer or open meeting place, the entry place
for a larger Psybernet endeavour.  That it why it is so open and public.  Yet
what happens here is WAY beyond foyer stuff.  If Psybernet could make its next
spurt of adolescent growth then a few things might change all at once names,
charters, doors and job names and descriptions.

Interesting that as I approach these questions here Judith has writen about
*transformations* in organisation etc.!

> Although interpretation and intervention will always be
> problematic, there will always be ambiguous areas.  I don't believe
> collision can always be prevented, nor that it should -- it can be
> illuminating, enlivening, a learning experience -- if there is a collective
> commitment to self reflection and dialogue in the aftermath, and zero
> tolerance for a refusal to stop personal attacks.

Could it be Marie, that the things you were writing about might ... in a future
Psybernet, be further away from the foyer?  Hence you would have been less open
to disrespect and attack.  Mind you we will take the shadow with us wherever we
go unless we turn the light out!

> A few of us ... I have hoped to hear from others on these issues.

I am pleased we are doing it now ... us few! I value this few!

> >  I'll summarise:

> >Facilitator ... implies a *guiding* of the process.
> >
> >List Owner ... implies responsibility for the space, as in home builder and
> >host.
> >
> >Were you wanting to hear more on my personal aspirations and process?  A
> >fuller role description of the List Owner?
>
> I'm still not sure -- I think more your personal aspirations and process,
> which includes (in my mind) your definition of the listowner role.  I would
> like to hear from others also on this.

Is this of interest to others?  I am getting a renewed interest as I link it
with the "deing" idea and having a sense of match between "deing" and the spaces
I frequent.

> [Aside -- Maybe it is time for the welcome file to be posted here again --
> I read it recently, and there are changes I like, but did not know were
> there.]

I'll do it.

GET Psyber-L Welcome

LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM


> I think the suppression of your discomfort contributed to my sense of being
> "uneasy" about how you intended to be here.  I never believed that it was
> your place to make things "easy"

I don't either but going around saying I was the facilitator did something for
me in that regard ... I think I saw things happening here i would never have
happen in a rl group, and if they did I would feel bad.  In a rl group I would
have a fee and a fixed number and have some input into the selection!

> -- although I am not immune from wishing
> for a savior when things become turbulent!  While I agree that unsubbing
> people was not indicated (and should always be a very last resort), how
> would you feel about posting a strong invitation to leave if the parameters
> of engagement in this space are not something a given individual is willing
> to accept?  Much as a host in his home might protect his guests from verbal
> attack and harassment?

Along the lines of:

Please do not make any further personal attacks.

If he / she did then simply cut their membership?

I have no problem with that if the *prime directive* here was a civil community.
What is the rel between a civil community and exploring the psyche?  To what
extent is this forum a "stage" for the enactment of our whole selves shadow
included, rather than a country town?

> Yes, gradually and almost unwittingly -- we are talking generally, not
> setting specifics as yet.  And again, only a few of us are involved in this
> discussion, which concerns all; only certain perspectives have been voiced.
>  At some point, consensus must be sought, yes?

We might reach some consensus, I hope so.  I also hope we have a good process
and discussion.  One of the other aspects of list owning is that in the end one
person decides certain things, the LO.  The list owner does well to listen, but
is not obliged to go with the majority.  We can expect certain responsibilities
are fulfilled by the LO.

> >I am meeting f2f soon with a small group in Christchurch before I go to the
> >Conference in Boston, with the express purpose of discussing Psybernet and
> the
> >future directions.  I'll report on that here ...

We have had the meeting and it was great.  This post & my rethink of "new
proximity" in the other post gives something of the flavour of the meeting.  We
discussed the broad possibilities.  This is the report at least for now!   I am
sure i will mention more from the night later.

> I am eager to hear of this.  When do you leave?


Saturday 23 May.


whee


walter
__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 12:13:23 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      group conscience
In-Reply-To:  <v03110703b18715ec1fae@[195.200.17.187]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Simon brings back my memories of the late part of the Wilbur era,

>>abusor: "Person X is less than a dog"
>>person X: "How can you say that?"
>>group conscience: "That is abuse and it is not allowed."
>>abusor: "You misunderstand me."
>>group conscience: "Say what you will without abusing another person."
>>abusor: "You are all less than dogs."

>Maybe the group conscience's second response should be: "How is it that we
>misunderstand you?"

Okay, different pattern, then. It's a good question, but does it do a dance
around actual abuse? I think we tried this with Wilbur, but, perhaps, it
was too late; already there was too much fire.

One way or the other, if the abusor doesn't own up to his or her actions,
the abused and the group will possibly be confronted with some kind of
rationalization ranging from the tried and 'true', "It wasn't abuse, it's
fact!" abuse rationalized by more abuse.

***

>Who defines what's wonderful?

Yes. Who defines what's abuse?

>It might be wonderful that someone is upsetting the (perceived)
>wonderfulness! Maybe, despite their best efforts to the contrary, they're
>actually making the place more wonderful.

(Might we find a more apt word than wonderful?) I don't have many ideas
about this, Simon. I do think we can name the forms of abuse and draw
lines. Might this prevent us from experiential learnings we might
individually or as a group go through. Sure.

>perceived 'group conscience' might in fact be 'group denial'.

I'll go farther and suggest that when the group subsumes the conscience of
an individual in the group, it takes a step toward actualizing this kind of
denial.

***

On the other hand, the individuals in this group seem to be learning a lot,
me included.

***

thanks to all!

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 16:12:41 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <v03110703b18715ec1fae@[195.200.17.187]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Simon,

> I'm not sure about the backchannelling, HooN. It seems to me that it's
> better to have everything onlist, out in the open, otherwise the
> conversation can get skewed and other people can end up feeling left out.
> You maybe have in mind 'behind-the-scenes diplomacy', but I think that only
> works in formal settings with an uninvolved 'third party' shuttling between
> the various injured parties.

Interesting ... as LO I like to be alerted if someone thinks i need to do
something, something they can't do  ( EG ... duplicate posts! Thanks to all who
let me know!) As it happened i saw them fairly soon.  If there are abusive
things happening in long posts i have not had time to read then an alert might
help.

I agree the "keep it in the list" is a good motto for *this* work.  The opposite
of "take it to private mail" that we often hear, & which is appropriate in some
(most) places.

Walter



__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 16:21:35 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: Welcome Brian!
In-Reply-To:  <356194BB.201@cybersurf.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Robert,

Good t see you here as well after your efforts in JUNG etc.  I have not kept up
at all, how is it going?  I saw your post (weeks later) re Psyber-L in there and
an invite for me to say more ... I will I promise but i won't say when ...
travel and wedding plans too ...!

Walter




__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 16:28:50 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      "PSYBER-L WELCOME"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

== Welcome to Psyber-L! ==

Last Updated Saturday, Monday, 24 November 1997


Hi,

I am Walter Logeman the List owner of the Psybernet Mailing List,
Psyber-L.  This file automatically goes to all new subscribers.  I am
pleased to welcome you aboard.  I trust that you will have a worthwhile
experience here.  Let me introduce you to Psyber-L.


= Membership =
There are about 60 members.  Two or three have been on the list since
1993, others have joined over the years, there was a big influx when the
list was promoted on the web April 1996, reaching a peak of 150 later
that year.  Mid 1997 the list was reduced by an automated message asking
people to CONFIRM membership, that now happens regularly.  On average
there have been one or two join and leave the list each week.  You can
see a full list of members by sending a REVIEW Psyber-L command to the
listserver.  Concealing membership is not an option, as the list is
regularly sent a command to unconceal.


= Current topics and themes =
August to early November 1997 saw heated debate on the list and this led
to reviews of some procedures.


= On Being a Psyber-L Subscriber =
How can you get what you want from this list?  How can you contribute
usefully to it?  The experiential exploration of the psyche in
cyberspace is Psyber-L's focus, this is a complex idea.  It is worth
some study and asking questions in the list's discussions if this is
confusing.  Of course everyone has a different idea of what it means!
What does it mean to you?  Is this of interest to you?  Please introduce
yourself to the list, and how the purpose of the list relates to your
own reasons for being here.  This question and may require some
reflection and discussion on Psyber-L.  You will see that the topics are
*broad* but that the purpose is to experientially learn about the psyche
in cyberspace.  It will make for a good experience if we connect with
each other around the list's focus.

It is envisaged that if we connect well with each other and work towards
our individual and common interests that there will be a good atmosphere
in the discussions.  The psyche is a complex and unruly phenomena, and
hence we can expect difficulties in our communications.  Working these
though is part of the work of Psyber-L.  How to influence the discussion
so you enjoy the list and get more out of it is part of the challenge.
How to contribute to the list so that it develops for our mutual benefit
is also part of the challenge.

Psyber-L and Psybernet have been inspired by several key ideas and key
people, it is worth looking them up on the Psybernet web site at:
http://www.psybernet.co.nz/p_key.htm   Some study of the public archives
may be useful to learn about the history here and also what might seem
to be our specialised jargon.  It is ok to ask, or to post naively, it
is up to you.


You are requested work towards understanding this PSYBER-L.WELCOME file
and the PSYBER-L.DESCRIPT.  See how to get the latest versions below.
It is requested that you are (or become) familiar with codes of
netiquette, and familiar with relevant laws of you land.  It is
particularly worth noting that spamming on the list is not welcome and
that it is not ethical to post private mail in a public place.  Ad
hominem attack, that is, attack of the person rather than their ideas is
not welcome.


= Public Archives =
The list can sometimes be quite personal, however the archives are
Public, via email and the Web.  Note that everything you say on Psyber-L
will be in a permanent archive and will not be removed once posted.  The
Psyber-L list is the starting point to entry into private and closed
PsyberGroups, which may be a more suitable venue for some discussion.


= Ownership of your words =
Whatever the legal status may be, the ethos in Psybernet is that your
words remain your property.  Please do not use other people's posts
outside the list without their permission, and notify the List owner.
With the public status of the archives, and the open door policy for
this list, it is possible that the ethos upheld here could be
disrespected.  Please keep this in mind as you contribute.


= Role of the List owner =
I am the List owner.  This means that I have responsibility for the
software settings and the content of the Welcome file and the
Description of the list.  These jobs have a profound influence on the
running of the list, and the psychological quality of the list.  It is
within the scope and purpose of the list that this role, and my
performance in it is discussed.  Learning the art and skill of being a
list owner, especially of a list which goes beyond information giving,
and into exploring the psyche, is something that can be learnt through
being here.

I am also a participant on the list, and at times deeply involved in the
discussion.  I may be absent at times, and there is no guarantee I will
read every post immediately.  I rarely enter into discussion outside the
list about matters that could be discussed in the list.  However, please
note:

Should there be matters that you consider require the attention of the
List owner, matters that simply writing to the list will not achieve,
please send a cc to me or email me directly.  I give personal email a
priority and there are times it is important I am involved as List
owner.


= All the Best =
I hope you find this of interest, and find Psyber-L a worthwhile forum
to read and or participate in.  I look forward to meeting you in the
discussions.



Walter



Below are useful links and commands:




== How to send your posts to Psyber-L ==
To send an email that will be distributed to the list you send it to:

Psyber-L.HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Note that this is a different address than the one that takes the
commands.

Please do not send attachments, multimedia or HTML files to the list.
The preferred format for writing and reading the text in the posts is a
fixed pitch font such as Courier New, 10pt and no more than 72
characters per line.
Feel free to start a new topic.  It is best if they relate to the
purpose of the list, however it is very broad.



= Mail Management =
Sometimes the list has many posts each day. The best way to keep track
of the discussions is with a Mail Reader that automatically filters the
mail into folders.  You can also set the list to a digest option which
puts all the posts from that day in one email.  Ask about these things
in the list if you are unsure.

The list is set so that each post has [P] in the subject line.  You can
turn this off if you wish with a SET command.  You receive back copies
of the posts you make.


== Commands to the Listserver ==
It is useful to become familiar with sending commands to the listserver.
Feel free to try them out.  The listserver (the machine that does all
this work) has the following address, you may wish to add it to your
Address Book, note that it is *different* from the one used to send your
posts to the list (see above):

LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM


Here are some frequently used commands:

INDEX  PSYBER-L
    You get a list of files that are available.

INFO PSYBER-L
    The short list Description, useful to send to prospective list
members.

SUBSCRIBE PSYBER-L yourfirstname yourlastname
    You have already done this as you are reading the Welcome file

SIGNOFF  PSYBER-L
    To leave Mailing List at any time.

HELP  PSYBER-L
    More commands you can send.

REVIEW  PSYBER-L
    Will give you a list of all the people who are on the list.



== FILES ==

Using the Listserver address, you can get the following files sent to
you by email:

GET PSYBER-L.WELCOME
    Get the latest version of the file you are reading now!


GET PSYBER-L.DESCRIPT
    Get the latest version of the Description of the list.



To get a list of all files send the following command to the
listserver:

INDEX  PSYBER-L







__________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman walter@psybernet.co.nz  www.psybernet.co.nz

__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 15:28:47 -0600
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Robert Longpre <odyssey@CYBERSURF.NET>
Subject:      On-line Psychotherapy
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Walter, Peter, all ....

This is a topic that fascinates me but one that I think is impossible
for the most part.  I had hoped for an on-line practice, one that
existed to meet the needs of a rural population that lives at great
distances from therapists and counsellors such as found in the western
plains and forest lands of Canada.

I have had the occasion to interact with people (I would hate to use the
word "clients" here because they were not clients as is understood in
the f2f domaine) here in cyberspace in ways that are therapeutic.  And
as many of you are aware, I even mangaged to move through a crisis of
suicidal ideation with one of these people in a manner that led to
intervention and hospitalisation of that person.  That was my last
attempt at conscious online therapeutic endeavour.

Peter, you mention issues:

> In particular issues of confidentialty, ethics & law, and what type of
> "therapy" would best suit this forum.

Confidentiality is not truly an issue if one looks deep into this
domaine as there is as much "confidentiality" here as there is in our
f2f practices.  Assume the same client and same therapist in a f2f
domaine and then a cyberspace domaine ... what are the differences other
than the medium as far as confidentiality is concerned.  If there is a
need by outsiders to breach confidentiality then neither domaine is
"secure".  Potentially there is security using encryption for e-mail
messages and then destroying all traces of the e-mail ... (will both
parties honour that destroying of dialogue archive?).  Potentially there
is security in keeping no records in the f2f practice however there
always does remain the possiblity of others recording the conversation
even at some distance ... science fiction and espionage do show us the
possibilities of this ... just how secure is anything that needs to be
secure?

Ethics?  The relationship between therapist and client is sacred and
needs to be handled as such.  I have a lot of difficulty with a code
that suggests that left to their own devices any given therapist and
client combination will degenerate into unethical/non-therapeutic
levels.  I realise that there are horror stories.  But has there been a
cessation of horror stories with the "code"?  Which code to follow?  Can
these codes be translated into cyberspace to reflect the nature of this
domaine?  A lot of questions.

Legality ... law ... Another area that appears to be very muddled.
American clients with European therapists (any combination possible
under the sun).  Whose legal system?  Who offers accreditation?  Which
accreditation is valid for this domaine?  Californian government suing
an Australian therapist for offering counselling service to a
Californian without holding a state license for such work.  Yes, it's
being considered.  Now, think of the logistics in trying to be
"certified" as therapist in all places (costs and requirements) ...

Rationale ... why settle for e-mail or web-based therapy when one can
add in voice and video?  The technology is there.  Why even offer
therapy at distance?  If it is to meet a real need then all good and
well.  If it is to fill up one's practice (involving all the necessary
marketing) then I wonder about the NEED ... whose NEED is being served?

Still, I think that there is something about this medium and about
dialogue here that can provide for valuable and UNIQUE counselling
moments.

Robert

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 16:49:41 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <3568acdc.197838750@mail.ihug.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 04:12 PM 5/19/98 +0000, Walter wrote:
>Simon,
>
>> I'm not sure about the backchannelling, HooN. It seems to me that it's
>> better to have everything onlist, out in the open, otherwise the
>> conversation can get skewed and other people can end up feeling left out.
>> You maybe have in mind 'behind-the-scenes diplomacy', but I think that only
>> works in formal settings with an uninvolved 'third party' shuttling between
>> the various injured parties.
>
>Interesting ... as LO I like to be alerted if someone thinks i need to do
>something, something they can't do  ( EG ... duplicate posts! Thanks to
all who
>let me know!) As it happened i saw them fairly soon.  If there are abusive
>things happening in long posts i have not had time to read then an alert
might
>help.

Walter,

I did write to you privately in the weeks before my father died, when
I was being threatened by Wilbur. You didn't reply to me. When I
tried again, because what was happening on the list was agony
to me, you told me it was to be handled on the list, and said
nothing else. I had told you that what I was going through as
my father was dying made it impossible and very painful for
me to deal with the attacks. Indeed, after Wilbur told his stories
about breaking a man's ribs - I internalized that and hurt my
own.

I wrote to you privately because I did not want to exacerbate
the furor on the list. We went through a long period where I said
nothing, and then said a few innocuous things in response to
other threads on the list, but still the discussion "about" me
raged on as though I didn't exist. When I did respond previously
to anything, I was barraged. I tried to appeal to you, and received
no response.

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 20 May 1998 03:29:14 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: behind-the-scenes diplomacy
In-Reply-To:  <v04011702b187161bfe0c@[207.54.160.143]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Simon wrote:
>
>>I'm not sure about the backchannelling, HooN. It seems to me that it's
>>better to have everything onlist, out in the open, otherwise the
>>conversation can get skewed and other people can end up feeling left out.
>>You maybe have in mind 'behind-the-scenes diplomacy', but I think that only
>>works in formal settings with an uninvolved 'third party' shuttling between
>>the various injured parties.
>
>Of course the idea of back channel is that no one feels left out because
>they aren't privy to the specific back channel! :-)

Ah, but these things can leak out in some way, either explicitly or tacitly
- maybe unconsciously! ... (a leaky back channel? hmm...)

I remember in the MOO environment that it was usually possible to tell, one
way or another, when people were paging or whispering. I can recall being
sussed more than once myself (I'm talking about situations with a certain,
shall we say, emotional intensity hanging in the air). The exclusion
antennae were finely honed!

Of course this may not translate to the mailing list medium, but I wouldn't
be so sure.

>It may work or might not. I don't think the outcome absolutely rides on a
>structural determination. But if the front channel is full of fire, I might
>initiate communications through cooler channels.

Cooler channels... nice turn of phrase!

>(Hey: thinking of my self as diplomatic in any way is fairly unusual,
>especially in contrast to my sometimes running into a room and throwing a
>jar full of kerosine into it.)
>
>***
>
>yikes,
>
>HooN

Heh, maybe you're mellowing out!

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 20 May 1998 03:09:31 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v04011700b1870b0963a8@[207.54.160.173]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

HooN,

>(1) Every post is made with either or combination of overt, tacit, or
>unconscious intentions.

I like this analysis as a starting point for thinking about layers of
communication and failed communication.


>(2) Every reader who fully reads a post supposes it carries an intention
>which is *wholly or partly identified, correctly or incorrectly* even when
>the identification itself is not felt overtly.

I find this confusing. Surely by their nature overt and tacit intentions
are identified by the poster and unconscious ones aren't.


>(3) The reader's impression of the intention of the post counts for at
>least as much as the actual intention of the writer.

Or intentions. From a list process perspective, yes. On a personal level,
your impression of my intentions might not count for anything to me -
especially if I think that you're less than a dog ;)


>I have and will make
>contributions with a primarily private objective informing my intention,
>and use such posts to filter responses.

If I was paranoid I'd accuse you of sinister intent.


>Understood by me: this kind of toying is neither fair or
>necessarily welcome,

Ah, HooN, you get what you give. The law of karmolodics!


>but, it has sometimes been successful on the terms
>through which it works for me.
>
>On occasion, it has helped turn the key.

Could you expand on this? Or would that breach the HSA (HooN Secrecy Act)?

(Now am I being sarcastic, or am I just teasing you?)


>Now, as for framing without (my own accompanying,) commentary, lacking an
>example to review, it is quite possible I might isolate somebody's
>self-expression to showcase it on its own terms.

An example of what I was referriing to regarding framing would be the post
titled 'Void. wit & wisdom, more of it' from July 30th ('97, for those
unfamiliar with the territory).

I thought 'sarcastic' seemed a bit strong, 'ironic' nearer the mark.

> ... try to create a certain subtle tension to help someone see a basic
>error in their habituated reasoning. (btw, 'irony' is usually not up to
>that task.)

It's hard to tell what will work (if anything!). There's no absolute 'right
way'.


>One more point: I very rarely make my intention out of a wish to be
>positive and supportive.

Okay. That seems to accord with what I said:

> There have been other times when you put together quotes in a way
>which seemed positive and supportive, though, so maybe my impression is in
>relation to the person you're 'reflecting'.

(Perhaps ' the text and the person' would be clearer.)


>Much more likely is my using other's parsed up posts to make a joke. In
>that respect: when you write, "if they don't see it then you can have even
>more of a laugh at their expense" I must respond, *usually I don't know if
>they get it or not, if anybody gets it or not!*

My comment was in reference to making fun of someone - not the same as
making a joke (though making a joke at someone's expense would be closer).


>Could somebody feel knocked down a notch or two in response to
>such a post of mine? Sure.

And that may be okay. For some people, getting egg on their face may be the
only way that they can get the message; for others, it may only egg them on!

I feel a bit edgy around all this. I don't like calculated unkindness, and
passive aggression can really irritate me. On reflection and further
recollection, your parsing of Void seems/seemed passive aggressive to me.
Not that I'm immune to being passive aggressive myself, I'm sure, as I'm
not by nature (or maybe 'nurture') an openly aggressive person. So maybe
I'm projecting something I don't like in myself onto you. <sigh>

Btw, this isn't my total impression of you! (and also I try not to make
totalising statements about people)

HooN, thanks for filling out my sketchy interpretation of your intentions.
I hope you don't mind the new squiggles I've added to the picture!


Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 20 May 1998 05:08:58 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: group conscience
In-Reply-To:  <v04011703b187174a4537@[207.54.160.143]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

HooN:

>Simon brings back my memories of the late part of the Wilbur era,
>
>>>abusor: "Person X is less than a dog"
>>>person X: "How can you say that?"
>>>group conscience: "That is abuse and it is not allowed."
>>>abusor: "You misunderstand me."
>>>group conscience: "Say what you will without abusing another person."
>>>abusor: "You are all less than dogs."
>
>>Maybe the group conscience's second response should be: "How is it that we
>>misunderstand you?"
>
>Okay, different pattern, then. It's a good question, but does it do a dance
>around actual abuse? I think we tried this with Wilbur, but, perhaps, it
>was too late; already there was too much fire.

The fire of anger burned up the oxygen of goodwill, to be sure (sorry,
couldn't resist a bit of wordplay - I don't mean to be flippant about a
painful time).

Okay, so your little sequence starts at the point where an exchange has
slowly and inexorably descended into abuse and is becoming intolerable. I
thought from your original post that you were talking about a fresh
situation, where you might want to give a new poster a chance, and try to
learn something about them.

The wording of the question that I suggested allows it to be read two ways:
"What is it in you that we misunderstand?" and "What is it in us that
causes us to misunderstand you?"

Whether the person answers one way, the other way, or both ways, you learn
something about their outlook. Of course, if they don't answer any way, you
learn something also!


>One way or the other, if the abusor doesn't own up to his or her actions,
>the abused and the group will possibly be confronted with some kind of
>rationalization ranging from the tried and 'true', "It wasn't abuse, it's
>fact!" abuse rationalized by more abuse.

Yes, if there continues to be no acknowledgement of wrongdoing then there
comes a time when the law of diminishing returns kicks in.


>>Who defines what's wonderful?
>
>Yes. Who defines what's abuse?
>
>>It might be wonderful that someone is upsetting the (perceived)
>>wonderfulness! Maybe, despite their best efforts to the contrary, they're
>>actually making the place more wonderful.
>
>(Might we find a more apt word than wonderful?)

Sure. I don't have any particular attachment to it. What irks you about it?


>I don't have many ideas
>about this, Simon. I do think we can name the forms of abuse and draw
>lines. Might this prevent us from experiential learnings we might
>individually or as a group go through. Sure.

I think it's good that these issues get discussed, and yes there are
certainly lines to be drawn (to my mind, Wilbur stepped over one of them
with his infamous veiled threat to Julienne, which I found quite chilling).

But I'm wary of the 'Crimewatch' syndrome taking over - crime gets such
high coverage in the media that everyone becomes afraid out of proportion
to the reality and we get CCTV everywhere and a fortress mentality in the
home.

In all of Psyber-L's history, how many people have actually been
out-of-control abusive? Not that I was here from the beginning, but I can
only think of two: Void and Wilbur. And Void actually only posted 14
messages, across the space of just nine days.

So it's important to keep perspective here.


>>perceived 'group conscience' might in fact be 'group denial'.
>
>I'll go farther and suggest that when the group subsumes the conscience of
>an individual in the group, it takes a step toward actualizing this kind of
>denial.

Yes, well observed. Food for thought in this environment (heh, I thought
I'd avoid using the 's' word!)

>On the other hand, the individuals in this group seem to be learning a lot,
>me included.
>
>***
>
>thanks to all!
>
>HooN

Indeed!

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 20 May 1998 16:56:27 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Brian Pauling <paulingb@CHCH.PLANET.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: Welcome Brian!
In-Reply-To:  <356194BB.201@cybersurf.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Walter, Robert
Many thanks for your words of welcome. I am looking forward to being
involved. You will understand if I am a "silent observer" for a while as I
get a feel for the list and the directions of current discussion.
Perhaps a brief bio is appropriate as this time:
I have recently given up my position as Head of the New Zealand Broadcasting
School to concentrate my energies on things a little closer to my heart. I
am particularly interested in the impact of converging technologies on the
way teaching and learning are delivered. I am also aware of the complex
interrelationships between politics, economics, the globalisation process
and the aforementioned technologies(techno-capitalism). I suspect a paradigm
shift in both the role of the teacher and learner that will go to the heart
(dare I suggest "soul") of the teaching and learning process.
Consequentially, I have embarked on a doctoral programme at the tender age
of 57!
Both Yvonne, my partner, and I are interested, as laypersons, in the works
of such people as Riane Eisler, Jean Houston, Marija Gimbutas, Joseph
Campbell, Terrence McKenna. Robert Johnson and Wayne Muller, among others.
Whilst I still maintain a strong interest in and fascination with, in
particular, the electronic media and its cultural significance, I am
broadening (and perhaps deepening)the directions of my thinking.
I look forward to reading the list and becoming familiar with your stories.
Cheerfully, Brian

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 20 May 1998 11:26:34 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <19980519205005.AAB73@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Julienne,



> I did write to you privately in the weeks before my father died, when
> I was being threatened by Wilbur. You didn't reply to me. When I
> tried again, because what was happening on the list was agony
> to me, you told me it was to be handled on the list, and said
> nothing else. I had told you that what I was going through as
> my father was dying made it impossible and very painful for
> me to deal with the attacks. Indeed, after Wilbur told his stories
> about breaking a man's ribs - I internalized that and hurt my
> own.

My intention here is certainly to *be* here with you in the aftermath of those
times ... It was a painful time for you and I understand it was agony and that i
was not much use to you.  I found it hard to keep up and more than that did not
engage with the process.  I thought it best to keep it all on the list, and
encouraged others to assist.   I thought it was reasonably facilitative to be at
least up front about that and also to offer specific help, as in the following
post, what do you think?

Subject:      Re: Relating & Debating

http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind9709&L=psyber-l&P=R21141


With the specific threats of offline action I approached him on the list quite
directly and I thought that was not too bad.  Again it is hard to know what is
best ... I have no better answers than others and hence I am pleased that these
discussions are occurring 6 months later ... I am pleased to that on the agenda
are broad ideas about structure and roles that might *prevent* this rather than
need strategies for fire fighting.

> I wrote to you privately because I did not want to exacerbate
> the furor on the list. We went through a long period where I said
> nothing, and then said a few innocuous things in response to
> other threads on the list, but still the discussion "about" me
> raged on as though I didn't exist. When I did respond previously
> to anything, I was barraged. I tried to appeal to you, and received
> no response.

It would have been better if i had responded.  I think I would do that with the
hindsight i have ... however the content of my response might still be "take it
to the list", and also to draw attention again to the recommendations I made in
the post quoted above.  But it might not too!  As was eventually the case in
those  discussions, where I took it to the list, very conscious that i had the
power to dismiss!


Walter
PS I am way behind in the discussions and I have no idea if I can be back here
for the next few days.  I know I seem to simply forgo sleep, but i really should
not do that with a big flight ahead!  I hope they are full rich and plentiful
and that others come in with useful posts and good intentions.











__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 20 May 1998 07:50:01 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v03110700b1879df63d2f@[195.200.17.187]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

It all comes back to me, Simon.

>An example of what I was referriing to regarding framing would be the post
>titled 'Void. wit & wisdom, more of it' from July 30th ('97, for those
>unfamiliar with the territory).

In my series of parsings of Void, isolating his wit and wisdom without
comment, my intention was to embarrass him, hopefully into a more
considered and respectful of the 'space' (as opposed to the group or
dialogue,) mode of communication. Yeah, what a high minded fellow I am,
looking out for this space. Ha!

When I realized Void was just going to make his witless waves try to count
for something no matter what, I thought to my self, "How shall I try to
torture him and piss him off?"

Wit and wisdom; it was a primitive strategem, kind of like repeating
someone's words automatically (ahhh, to be nine again!) back to them. My
intention had elements of toying and cruelty, and, at the time, a wish to
see Void squirm, and, later, leave.

Void was an ass. I'm an ass, so I know when somebody else is an ass.

***

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 20 May 1998 07:58:31 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v03110700b1879df63d2f@[195.200.17.187]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>I don't like calculated unkindness, and
>passive aggression can really irritate me. On reflection and further
>recollection, your parsing of Void seems/seemed passive aggressive to me.

I'm passive aggressive. It's more consoling to me than people who know me
or kind of do, but, over the years, I've become less so.

But, I can be a very calculating cruel bastard. Trying to extrude a laugh
at another's expense? I'll do it.

This is partly a performance space too, a party too.

This is all good to talk about. Identifying our own intentions is one way
to draw one perspective about the patterns of a process.

It's the squiggles which often start the investigation into the intentions
which are unconscious, hidden.

***

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 20 May 1998 10:06:59 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v03110700b1879df63d2f@[195.200.17.187]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Or intentions. From a list process perspective, yes. On a personal level,
>your impression of my intentions might not count for anything to me -
>especially if I think that you're less than a dog ;)

Simon,

Yet, they might especially count for more precisely because one has cast
another in the 'dog' role. One pattern we've seen here is the escalation
which follows from the denial of several things in succession:

(1) that one intended to harm

(2) that the harm occurred

(3) that the increase in fear or anger in response to the instigator is the
instigator's responsibility

***

Another way to put it is: to intentionally act to (apparently) ignore the
impression may have as its intention a desire to see the impression
magnified.

If I insult you, the measure of my intention in your response may be of
great interest to me. I suggest it usually is. From another angle, *not
engaging* is hard to do because the impression of the intention becomes so
quickly hot...makes one think the triggers, metaphorically, heat up,
expand, and trip the switch. <g>

What do you think?

***

more later,

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 20 May 1998 16:33:13 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: group conscience
In-Reply-To:  <v04011703b187174a4537@[207.54.160.143]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, 19 May 1998 12:13:23 +0100, you wrote:

>Simon brings back my memories of the late part of the Wilbur era,
>
>>>abusor: "Person X is less than a dog"
>>>person X: "How can you say that?"
>>>group conscience: "That is abuse and it is not allowed."
>>>abusor: "You misunderstand me."
>>>group conscience: "Say what you will without abusing another person."
>>>abusor: "You are all less than dogs."
>
>>Maybe the group conscience's second response should be: "How is it that we
>>misunderstand you?"
>
>Okay, different pattern, then. It's a good question, but does it do a dance
>around actual abuse? I think we tried this with Wilbur, but, perhaps, it
>was too late; already there was too much fire.
>
>One way or the other, if the abusor doesn't own up to his or her actions,
>the abused and the group will possibly be confronted with some kind of
>rationalization ranging from the tried and 'true', "It wasn't abuse, it's
>fact!" abuse rationalized by more abuse.

But what if it is fact?  What if it's something like what you admit
that you like to do, where a person's words are repeated back to him
or her?  There's little room for doubt that those things were said;
they can be checked in the archives.  But the way you do it is
specifically to mock or demean or point up something about the person
which he or she would not admit to freely.

>>Who defines what's wonderful?
>
>Yes. Who defines what's abuse?

Good question.  We could leave it to the person who feels the abuse,
which would be the most restrictive path.

Interestingly, another list I'm on is right now going through changes
in its rule set because of behavior by a couple of individuals that is
unwanted by most of the other members.  And just recently Julienne
threw me off her list because she and others on her list didn't like
my behavior.  Her prerogative.

>>It might be wonderful that someone is upsetting the (perceived)
>>wonderfulness! Maybe, despite their best efforts to the contrary, they're
>>actually making the place more wonderful.
>
>(Might we find a more apt word than wonderful?) I don't have many ideas
>about this, Simon. I do think we can name the forms of abuse and draw
>lines. Might this prevent us from experiential learnings we might
>individually or as a group go through. Sure.

To have a container there have to be things excluded, by definition.
If we can agree on what is to be excluded then the container is that
much stronger.  If we make the lines too wavy, or insist that they
don't exist, the container will be weakened.

>>perceived 'group conscience' might in fact be 'group denial'.
>
>I'll go farther and suggest that when the group subsumes the conscience of
>an individual in the group, it takes a step toward actualizing this kind of
>denial.

And yet if the group makes decisions overtly, then the members of the
group can decide whether they wish to continue to stay with the group
or not.  As is the case with the other list I mentioned.

>On the other hand, the individuals in this group seem to be learning a lot,
>me included.

Me too.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 20 May 1998 16:33:13 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: "PSYBER-L WELCOME"
In-Reply-To:  <356ab2fa.199405056@mail.ihug.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Walter, On Tue, 19 May 1998 16:28:50 GMT, you wrote:

[from list guidelines]

>= Ownership of your words =
>Whatever the legal status may be, the ethos in Psybernet is that your
>words remain your property.  Please do not use other people's posts
>outside the list without their permission, and notify the List owner.
>With the public status of the archives, and the open door policy for
>this list, it is possible that the ethos upheld here could be
>disrespected.  Please keep this in mind as you contribute.

Hmmm.   Someone has used my posts on this list without permission.
Now, I did say afterwards that it didn't bother me, my own words do
not upset me, but I didn't remember this particular policy or I might
have reminded them at the time.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 20 May 1998 15:18:56 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v04011702b1882be379bc@[207.54.160.178]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 07:50 AM 5/20/98 +0100, Hoon wrote:
>It all comes back to me, Simon.
>
>>An example of what I was referriing to regarding framing would be the post
>>titled 'Void. wit & wisdom, more of it' from July 30th ('97, for those
>>unfamiliar with the territory).
>
>In my series of parsings of Void, isolating his wit and wisdom without
>comment, my intention was to embarrass him, hopefully into a more
>considered and respectful of the 'space' (as opposed to the group or
>dialogue,) mode of communication. Yeah, what a high minded fellow I am,
>looking out for this space. Ha!
>
>When I realized Void was just going to make his witless waves try to count
>for something no matter what, I thought to my self, "How shall I try to
>torture him and piss him off?"
>
>Wit and wisdom; it was a primitive strategem, kind of like repeating
>someone's words automatically (ahhh, to be nine again!) back to them. My
>intention had elements of toying and cruelty, and, at the time, a wish to
>see Void squirm, and, later, leave.
>
>Void was an ass. I'm an ass, so I know when somebody else is an ass.

Hoon, I have never been able to figure you out...suddenly you feel real.
I love this post - and am going to frame it.

No...I don't have you *all* figured out - nor anyone else. :)

Julienne - Another in the Company of Asses

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 21 May 1998 01:39:25 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v04011702b1882be379bc@[207.54.160.178]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hoon,

> Void was an ass. I'm an ass, so I know when somebody else is an ass.

Nah, it is a little more complex!  <grin>



Walter

__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 21 May 1998 03:13:48 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Group conscience, Here and Now
In-Reply-To:  <3570ecfc.3841553@mail.clark.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

JoAnne you wrote:


> Interestingly, another list I'm on is right now going through changes
> in its rule set because of behavior by a couple of individuals that is
> unwanted by most of the other members.  And just recently Julienne
> threw me off her list because she and others on her list didn't like
> my behavior.  Her prerogative.


All,

We are doing a great job processing our unfinished business from the past on
this list, may it fruitfully continue.

There is also this matter that you raise ... an area of potential conflict
between two of the esteemed members of psyber-L, Julienne and JoAnne

This is no "test" shadow.  This is a list where, what we are about is exploring
psyche ... which must include facing shadow.  We are also about the medium and
this potential conflict includes all the questions about list owner roles etc.
hence JoAnne you are welcome and on topic to bring all this here!  Essential
that you do imo.  Also Julienne may wish to respond to your remarks, fair
enough!

~~~

I have a suggestion  ...

That both Julienne and JoAnne discuss this (or not) as they wish ... that is a
given ... the suggestion is that in this thread:  "Group conscience, Here and
Now" the rest of us, respectfully and purposely discuss the process and our
process.

I am not suggesting others refrain from any other things they might say or that
Julienne and JoAnne do not join this discussion ... but that here we have a cool
channel, without having to create a back channel.  That this is a process
channel, where we work out how best to respond ... just as we have been doing
about the past if we could have it over.

Make sense?  What do you think?  Simon, this is what I might call a
meta-channel!  Would that word fit for you?

Let me start by saying that I feel good intentions to both Julienne and JoAnne
in this but have no idea how to be of much use (apart from doing what i am doing
now ... which I think is a culmination of many ideas and thoughts by us all.)
How can I help?  How can we help?


Walter





__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 21 May 1998 13:54:53 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v04011702b1882be379bc@[207.54.160.178]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>It all comes back to me, Simon.
>
>>An example of what I was referriing to regarding framing would be the post
>>titled 'Void. wit & wisdom, more of it' from July 30th ('97, for those
>>unfamiliar with the territory).
>
>In my series of parsings of Void, isolating his wit and wisdom without
>comment, my intention was to embarrass him, hopefully into a more
>considered and respectful of the 'space' (as opposed to the group or
>dialogue,) mode of communication. Yeah, what a high minded fellow I am,
>looking out for this space. Ha!
>
>When I realized Void was just going to make his witless waves try to count
>for something no matter what, I thought to my self, "How shall I try to
>torture him and piss him off?"
>
>Wit and wisdom; it was a primitive strategem, kind of like repeating
>someone's words automatically (ahhh, to be nine again!) back to them. My
>intention had elements of toying and cruelty, and, at the time, a wish to
>see Void squirm, and, later, leave.

Echoing Julienne's sentiment, thanks for this, HooN. It feels direct, real,
rings true, and somehow 'reclaims' (regains?) something from that time.

So now you seem a little less enigmatic to me! Not a bad thing - from my
perspective, anyway.

I should say that I've never felt you were disrespectul of this space. Far
from it. So I understand that you might respond with disrespect towards
someone who disrespects it. Still I am intrigued by your strategy and your
reasons for choosing it. Interesting that you should say you wanted to
embarrass Void into being more respectful of the space - I detect in you a
note of embarrassment about yourself sticking up for this space (or maybe
just about admitting to it openly).

I remember now something (else!) I found intriguing about your posts at
that time. Here was this character called Void, and it was like you were
opening up a void for him to fall into. That was my *sense* of your posts,
before any reflection or analysis.

>a more
>>considered and respectful [use?] of the 'space' (as opposed to the group or
>>dialogue,) mode of communication.

Interesting that you should place the focus on the 'space' as opposed to
the group or dialogue. This has a diferent effect, doesn't it?  Might we
have another useful triunity here, along with overt-tacit-unconscious?

I would think of the three elements of the space-group-dialogue triunity
like this:

Space = the field of interaction
Group = the vectors of interaction
Dialogue = the content of interaction

The vectors operate within the field, the dialogue operates within and
between the vectors.

The space, then, is the sum of all the vectors *plus* all the 'stuff'
inbetween (dark matter?? also the agreements and understandings about the
space which become embedded in it, part of it).

Can we think of all these elements as modes of communication?

None of which is meant to deny the human beingness of us all! (To borrow
from 'The Prisoner': "I'm not a vector, I'm a free wo/man"!). It's just a
(hopefully valid and useful) way of seeing.


>Void was an ass. I'm an ass, so I know when somebody else is an ass.
>
>***
>
>HooN

Ah, HooN, we're all capable of ass-like behaviour. I expect you'll give me
a kick up mine should I manage to realise such capability here!

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 21 May 1998 13:43:10 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v03110700b1879df63d2f@[195.200.17.187]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>>I have and will make
>>contributions with a primarily private objective informing my intention,
>>and use such posts to filter responses.

[snip]

Simon writes,

Could you expand on this? Or would that breach the HSA (HooN Secrecy Act)?

(Now am I being sarcastic, or am I just teasing you?)

***

I'm sure I deserve one or the other, if not both. Anyway...the secrecy act
isn't a secret, it's an act!

***

As far as my private objectives, they become public when the key fits. Let
me put it this way, my own illogic or others doesn't offend me until I
literally can smell the shit. Luckily, my nose tis n't so good.

One thing I enjoy doing, and, hopefully, these actions of moi are backed by
sweet intentions, is putting my training to the test to see if what I know
about the corrective to certain errors in reasoning might be demonstrated
within the flux of reasoning back-and-forth.

Privately, it's practice. Publicly, and Judith understands this is an
aspect of our own work, this is an attempt to solve a problem on a level it
wasn't created on. Why? God willing, to effect learning. So, to me, these
are trial balloons somewhat cast indulgently, sometimes arrogantly, into
the drama of this dialogue. (Umm, not so much here!)

***

Here's a somewhat 'solunary' way to put it. (Not a pure example of the
'solunary')  One way I take in dialogue is to see it as a

*reasoning drama* sure, reasoningdrama. (This may have a resonation with
Moreno.) This is one way I describe the self-assertion of expressing one's
self using language, but what interests me, is the way in which we embed
our expression in our own logic.

Logic here representing the gravitas of own rules, or the way in which we
report the structure of our own universe and experience to each other. The
point is this: it is not true that such subjective rules have their own
logic. They are an aspect of where we are *at*. Alternately: we are at our
own *drama*. It's 'rules' are our own *reasoning*. We are at our own
*reasoningdrama*.

Our reasoningdrama acts as a foreclosure if it is stuck on the level its
logic was created at. It forecloses 'quantum' leaps in awareness, above
all. (One certainly might develop or change within the 'space' of a given
level; again where one is at; akin to productively bumping around in a
room). Turn it around: *our logic acts a foreclosure if it is stuck on the
same level its reasoningdrama was created at.

Now that I've lost everybody, and am braying to my self, let me give an
example.

I wrote:

"Void was an ass. I'm an ass, so I know when somebody else is an ass."

The logic behind this is: "We all share the same humanity."

The reasoningdrama which follows is that we do think we make that
identification when we are communicating with each other, or
miscommunicating, as it were. But, really, it does not follow, that hoon
the ass recognizes void the ass because hoon is an ass.

The problem at the level of sharing our humanity is that we don't really
share it; we do, however, think we do. (Sharing may be a verb, a process.
Put another way: sharing is different, "on another level", as a process,
than it is as a proposition in our belief system.)

***

No, what happens is that, "even though I am an ass, (ass-nature, ya know?)
I go about my communication with void as if he's an ass and I'm just the
ass keeper or whatever.

We do not share our humanity on the level we make the identification on. We
cannot do this, in fact. I've said "there but for the Grace of God, go I."
Now, do I ever stand in my tracks and watch my self go?

So much follows from this reasoningdrama of the rationalization of
identification. This gets into process: the only way to break through this
is to *truly* identify, to do the verb.

Well, there is a technique. How does it happen? Have you ever either
participated in or observed a dialogue here, especially the back and forth
of asserting one's own 'truth' and not getting anywhere, ("I'm
misunderstood!") and said to your self, "This is ridiculous!"

*This is ridiculous.* How many times I've gotten to that point and blown
right past it, and then gone on to *try again*. ("Maybe this time I'll make
myself understood.") But, that ridiculous point is the place where for a
moment you are standing in a different level of logic. My goodness, it is
ridiculous! How hard it is to stay there and watch your self about to go...

Truly Grace is needed to catch one's self and stay in the ridiculous and
make the identification on the new level. No, we try again, go for another
round. I'll spend tons of energy trying to make the logic work for another
round of misunderstanding.

So we fight to be understood instead of standing in the ridiculous! Round
and round we go.

***

Walter wrote: "Nah, it is a little more complex!"

Well, there's a terrific intuition, Walter. Our complexes are ridiculous.
Stand in the ridiculousness, I say.

Another example: someone states: "I don't know what your problem is, I'm
just telling the truth." Most times I see the logic of identification of
content with fact, I'll be looking for the reasoningdrama behind it; the
key in this example is the assertion: "I'm *just*,".

So, the trial balloon is my attempt to stake the sign in at another level.
Rather pretentious, don't you think? One of my favorite techniques is to be
really glib. Glibness is a great sign, stuck in a level apart from taking
ourselves so damn seriously.

***

Anyway, you asked, Simon. If anybody can grok this they're a better ass
than me.

***

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 21 May 1998 16:32:23 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: Group conscience, Here and Now
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Walter,

hummmmm....feeling uncomfortable...first as we know I wasn't present during
any exchanges so I suppose I can be here present and listen...

I've been reading the posts and interested in how other's process...hoon's
revelation about his intention when engaging...mine very different...which
in one aspect is why his and my work together works...the juxtaposition of
processes creates opportunity when the intention is to learn...my own
intention...I have experienced other's processes very differnt than my own
and I find mine is informed...one assumption is that I am open to an every
changing assumptive set for myself...process of
explorationdiscoveryreformulation..

.what I have experienced is stuckness when the process is a closed system,
meaning for example both people working in the same system with
unexaminedexamined assumptions and incomplete logics which lead to double
binds...my own reflections fall victim to this double bind and I'm left on
the gerble track going round and round until I can interject a juxtapostion
or totally illogical piece which then inserted causes me to reformulate
thus being released from the double bind...

this is what I find so exciting about diversity of world views, of
beingness, of process...I am more for the engagement...but then this is an
expression of my personal aesthic...I've never been a good debator, first
because I resonate to all points of view and can see other's view, an
advantage of my non hierarchical, non linear brain organization, and second
because I'm not a good debator :-) see *first* ;-)

My own personal sense of incongruencies between people seems to be to sit
quietly and hold space... and then sometimes my experience is that people
just like to mix it up...

In gratitude for the sustenance I am receiving

Judith

>JoAnne you wrote:
>
>
>> Interestingly, another list I'm on is right now going through changes
>> in its rule set because of behavior by a couple of individuals that is
>> unwanted by most of the other members.  And just recently Julienne
>> threw me off her list because she and others on her list didn't like
>> my behavior.  Her prerogative.
>
>
>All,
>
>We are doing a great job processing our unfinished business from the past on
>this list, may it fruitfully continue.
>
>There is also this matter that you raise ... an area of potential conflict
>between two of the esteemed members of psyber-L, Julienne and JoAnne
>
>This is no "test" shadow.  This is a list where, what we are about is exploring
>psyche ... which must include facing shadow.  We are also about the medium and
>this potential conflict includes all the questions about list owner roles etc.
>hence JoAnne you are welcome and on topic to bring all this here!  Essential
>that you do imo.  Also Julienne may wish to respond to your remarks, fair
>enough!
>
>~~~
>
>I have a suggestion  ...
>
>That both Julienne and JoAnne discuss this (or not) as they wish ... that is a
>given ... the suggestion is that in this thread:  "Group conscience, Here and
>Now" the rest of us, respectfully and purposely discuss the process and our
>process.
>
>I am not suggesting others refrain from any other things they might say or that
>Julienne and JoAnne do not join this discussion ... but that here we have
>a cool
>channel, without having to create a back channel.  That this is a process
>channel, where we work out how best to respond ... just as we have been doing
>about the past if we could have it over.
>
>Make sense?  What do you think?  Simon, this is what I might call a
>meta-channel!  Would that word fit for you?
>
>Let me start by saying that I feel good intentions to both Julienne and JoAnne
>in this but have no idea how to be of much use (apart from doing what i am
>doing
>now ... which I think is a culmination of many ideas and thoughts by us all.)
>How can I help?  How can we help?
>
>
>Walter
>
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________________________
>Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 22 May 1998 04:50:15 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <19980519205005.AAB73@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>, on Tue, 19 May 1998 16:49:41
-0400 you wrote:

>Walter,
>
>I did write to you privately in the weeks before my father died, when
>I was being threatened by Wilbur.

I will support Julienne here.  I know she did ask for your help and she
felt hurt that you did not respond to her personally or on the list in any
kind of detail or with much support.

Regardless of my point of view about the disagreement between Julienne and
I, I do understand her feeling abandoned by you.

I read your reply, and don't mean to make this a "you did something wrong"
kind of post.  Just wanted to say that I understand Julienne's feelings at
that point, though I didn't consider them at that time.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 22 May 1998 01:14:35 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
In-Reply-To:  <3567b826.266275006@mail.ihug.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 11:26 AM 5/20/98 +0000, Walter wrote:
>Julienne wrote:

>> I did write to you privately in the weeks before my father died, when
>> I was being threatened by Wilbur. You didn't reply to me. When I
>> tried again, because what was happening on the list was agony
>> to me, you told me it was to be handled on the list, and said
>> nothing else. I had told you that what I was going through as
>> my father was dying made it impossible and very painful for
>> me to deal with the attacks. Indeed, after Wilbur told his stories
>> about breaking a man's ribs - I internalized that and hurt my
>> own.
>
>My intention here is certainly to *be* here with you in the aftermath of
those
>times ... It was a painful time for you and I understand it was agony and
that i
>was not much use to you.  I found it hard to keep up and more than that
did not
>engage with the process.  I thought it best to keep it all on the list, and
>encouraged others to assist.   I thought it was reasonably facilitative to
be at
>least up front about that and also to offer specific help, as in the
following
>post, what do you think?

I can't read that post, Walter...

My whole point in writing to you Walter was to tell you I COULD NOT deal
with it at all - on of off the list. I was getting 3-4 hours of sleep a
night -
and my father could have been dead any morning. It was the saddest
and most physically difficult time of my life.

I didn't ask you to yell at Wilbur, or to take my side. I was hoping you could
just ask that it be stopped till I could deal with it, or something. I
didn't make
a specific request, I don't think.

>With the specific threats of offline action I approached him on the list
quite
>directly and I thought that was not too bad.

Walter, you did that much later. Can you imagine how I felt,
trying to keep my father alive, and having the spectre of Wilbur
maybe arriving at the door or harassing us somehow? Anything
done to me at the time affected my father, My father could not
walk, move, or do anything, and no one else could look after him.
If I were hurt and unable to be here, my father would have died
very quickly.

J>> I wrote to you privately because I did not want to exacerbate
>> the furor on the list. We went through a long period where I said
>> nothing, and then said a few innocuous things in response to
>> other threads on the list, but still the discussion "about" me
>> raged on as though I didn't exist. When I did respond previously
>> to anything, I was barraged. I tried to appeal to you, and received
>> no response.
>
W>It would have been better if i had responded.  I think I would do that
with the
>hindsight i have ... however the content of my response might still be
"take it
>to the list", and also to draw attention again to the recommendations I
made in
>the post quoted above.  But it might not too!  As was eventually the case in
>those  discussions, where I took it to the list, very conscious that i had
the
>power to dismiss!

Your response to the same situation again might still be "Take it to the
List", Walter? Wow. I feel Walter, as though that response reflects an
attitude which suggests that the process, or this space,  is more
important to you than the people here. We are flesh and blood, Walter,
even though we communicate without seeing or feeling or scenting
each other.

What did you want me to take to the List? What did you think I
could do? Maybe I should just have left the list.

I don't ask you to have sympathy for me now, or to be protective of me now...
I am healing. But I am stunned that you would let all that happen to
another "me" at another time.

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 22 May 1998 02:17:56 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: Harvard & London
In-Reply-To:  <35622e33.99863062@mail.ihug.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 12:51 PM 5/18/98 +0000, Walter wrote:

>Here goes Simon:   Harvard & London.
>
>In six days I depart on what promises to be a life changing two week
>adventure around the world.  There are two main points of focus:  the
>Second International Harvard Conference on Internet and Society taking
>place May 26-29, 1998.  After that I go to London to see my son, Josh.

>=Connections & Gossip in the Global Village=
>Looking forward to meeting people and doing some talking about Psybernet
>Psyber-L and Psyberspace etc. I wonder where it will all lead and how it
>might impact Psyber-L.

Walter,

Where will you be staying? I attended Harvard Graduate School as a student
- and my son will be this year. He lives up in Boston now. My other son
graduates from Oberlin College in Ohio on the 25th, and we may be all
driving up to
Boston late next week. When does your conference end, and when do you leave
Boston? Do you know where you will be staying, in case I get up there?

My phone number, if you want to call me, is 973-746-9030.

You can call me collect late at night if you like, and maybe we can arrange
something.

Enjoy your travels and conferences. :)

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 22 May 1998 11:15:49 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
In-Reply-To:  <19980522051438.AAB22517@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Julienne
you wrote:

> My whole point in writing to you Walter was to tell you I COULD NOT deal
> with it at all - on of off the list. I was getting 3-4 hours of sleep a
> night -
> and my father could have been dead any morning. It was the saddest
> and most physically difficult time of my life.

I am sorry that I was not able to be there in the way you needed.

In any future situation I hope I can find a better way.  I don't think that what
you went through here was ok and this *processing*  I take part in here is
exactly to learn how to do that.

Good to hear that you are healing from that time.


Walter



__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 22 May 1998 19:17:10 EDT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JGerh50699 <JGerh50699@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 98-05-18 14:57:14 EDT, you write:

<< We all man the gates which protect each other from abusive behavior,
 especially the ones which cage our own beasts! Also: reasoning with one's
 own complex is hard enough, with another's...
  >>
I have only been on the list for a month or two, I missed the incident you
write about; although there has been alot of discussion.  (I'll have to check
the archives one of these days, when get time, perhaps in my dotage!)  I like
what you write that each member of a given group has a responsibility to
protect the others from being abused rather than "not get involved."
Unfortunately, human behavior often takes the opposite track and gangs up on
the victim.  Only one says, "crucify him" and before long the group is
chanting in unison, "Crucify him or her or them!"

If science wants to understand people they should study sheep, not apes.

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 22 May 1998 20:54:40 EDT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JGerh50699 <JGerh50699@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process and a weeks worth of posts!
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 98-05-18 16:50:47 EDT, you write:

<< My problem: I sometimes enjoy pouring fuel on the fire. >>


Not just your problem, we all love to do this at one time or another; although
some are better at controlling it.  I also believe the process (group or
individual psychic?) is such that it is difficult to see abuse at an early
stage.  Similar to spousal or child abuse--it takes awhile for the bruises to
show.  It is seldom a clear case until the process has proceeded to the point
where hindsight permits clearer vision.  I' m speaking from my experience.

Simon you wrote
Who defines what's wonderful?
It might be wonderful that someone is upsetting the (perceived)
wonderfulness! Maybe, despite their best efforts to the contrary, they're
actually making the place more wonderful. A lot depends on your definition
of wonderful and on your definition of what is abusive within the given
situation. And perceived 'group conscience' might in fact be 'group denial'.

One of my best friends has a totally different background, can be charming as
don juan, as viscious as a ninja warrior.  Why is he my friend, because he
will tell me exactly how he feels and why.  I value his opinion even though I
don't always agree with it.  His opinion and feelings give me a check on my
obviously prejudiced opinion of myself and my feelings. :-)

Hoon
Your post was addressed to Simon, but it jarred some of my thoughts...1)The
intention of the poster is muddled in this format due to the lack of nonverbal
cues.  2,3)The reader brings a set of experiences which help determine his or
her impression of the poster's intention and both experiences are valid.  The
experiences that each communicator brings may be colored by recent experiences
such as a fight with the boss or getting a raise.

Walter, You wrote
Please do not make any further personal attacks.

If he / she did then simply cut their membership?

I have no problem with that if the *prime directive* here was a civil
community.
What is the rel between a civil community and exploring the psyche?  To what
extent is this forum a "stage" for the enactment of our whole selves shadow
included, rather than a country town?

Not having been attacked I can view this academically and get back to Simon's
idea of definition and say define "civil community."  How much open debate is
permitted?  At one point does difference of opinion become abusive?  When is
censorship warrranted if ever?  If this is a stage, then aren't our posts more
of a characture than our real psyches?   In regard to the shadow I like what
you wrote earlier "Mind you we will take the shadow with us wherever we go
unless we turn the light out!"  I never thought about it but unles we can see
the truth we can't se our shadow.  Or am I misinterpreting you?

Regarding a welcome post of teh List Charter, I was on another list which
mailed rules and FAQ's every four weeks, which may be too often.

John

more often an observer

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 22 May 1998 23:11:13 EDT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JGerh50699 <JGerh50699@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Intro
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

I posted a couple of times and Walter's welcome message made me realize I
had'n't introduced myself.  My interests are mythology, Jungian Psychology,
shamanism, Native Americans, spiritual matters, nature and seeking truth; all
of the foregoing concern God.  I tend to be brief and to the point or is that
incomplete.  I value divergent beliefs and opinions.  I hope to, already have,
learn from discussion on the list.  I'm realatively new to the Internet and
sometimes worry that I'll spend too much time at the computer rather than
livinmg life!  I like to keep it simple.  I tend to be an observer.

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 22 May 1998 23:30:39 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: group conscience
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi JoAnne,

Belatedly responding to your post...
Been followingnot following the Void experience...suppose I could read the
archives but am choosing to find my way, through everyone's exchange...I
resonnated with your use of the *container*...

>On Tue, 19 May 1998 12:13:23 +0100, you wrote:
>
>>Simon brings back my memories of the late part of the Wilbur era,
>>
>>>>abusor: "Person X is less than a dog"
>>>>person X: "How can you say that?"
>>>>group conscience: "That is abuse and it is not allowed."
>>>>abusor: "You misunderstand me."
>>>>group conscience: "Say what you will without abusing another person."
>>>>abusor: "You are all less than dogs."
>>
>>>Maybe the group conscience's second response should be: "How is it that we
>>>misunderstand you?"
>>
>>Okay, different pattern, then. It's a good question, but does it do a dance
>>around actual abuse? I think we tried this with Wilbur, but, perhaps, it
>>was too late; already there was too much fire.
>>
>>One way or the other, if the abusor doesn't own up to his or her actions,
>>the abused and the group will possibly be confronted with some kind of
>>rationalization ranging from the tried and 'true', "It wasn't abuse, it's
>>fact!" abuse rationalized by more abuse.
>
>But what if it is fact?  What if it's something like what you admit
>that you like to do, where a person's words are repeated back to him
>or her?  There's little room for doubt that those things were said;
>they can be checked in the archives.  But the way you do it is
>specifically to mock or demean or point up something about the person
>which he or she would not admit to freely.
>
>>>Who defines what's wonderful?
>>
>>Yes. Who defines what's abuse?
>
>Good question.  We could leave it to the person who feels the abuse,
>which would be the most restrictive path.
>
>Interestingly, another list I'm on is right now going through changes
>in its rule set because of behavior by a couple of individuals that is
>unwanted by most of the other members.  And just recently Julienne
>threw me off her list because she and others on her list didn't like
>my behavior.  Her prerogative.
>
S>>>It might be wonderful that someone is upsetting the (perceived)
>>>wonderfulness! Maybe, despite their best efforts to the contrary, they're
>>>actually making the place more wonderful.
>>
H>>(Might we find a more apt word than wonderful?) I don't have many ideas
>>about this, Simon. I do think we can name the forms of abuse and draw
>>lines. Might this prevent us from experiential learnings we might
>>individually or as a group go through. Sure.
>
J>To have a container there have to be things excluded, by definition.
>If we can agree on what is to be excluded then the container is that
>much stronger.  If we make the lines too wavy, or insist that they
>don't exist, the container will be weakened.
>

I agree and I'm wondering about something that came up from a Margaret
Wheatley talk laterly...she for those not familiar wrote Leadership and the
New Science a few years back and then an amazing book called The Simple
Way...focusing on the organic nature of reality...anyway she related how
groups were coming together and finding the simplest of *rules* to operate
within...this goes to the fractal work and chaos theory...anyway a school
having trouble within the student body agreed to the following 3 rules

1) take care of yourself
2) take care of others
3) take care of this space

Her annecdote then:
There was a practice fire drill at the school...it was raining and everyone
had to exit into the rain...when the drill was over, the students were
allowed to return to class...the principal entered last and found 700 pairs
of shoes in the hall by the door...


>>>perceived 'group conscience' might in fact be 'group denial'.
>>
>>I'll go farther and suggest that when the group subsumes the conscience of
>>an individual in the group, it takes a step toward actualizing this kind of
>>denial.
>
>And yet if the group makes decisions overtly, then the members of the
>group can decide whether they wish to continue to stay with the group
>or not.  As is the case with the other list I mentioned.
>
>>On the other hand, the individuals in this group seem to be learning a lot,
>>me included.
>
>Me too.
>
>-JoAnne

Ditto
Judith
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 22 May 1998 22:39:59 -0600
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Robert Longpre <odyssey@CYBERSURF.NET>
Subject:      Re: Intro
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

John,

Pleased to meet you :)

> My interests are mythology, Jungian Psychology,
> shamanism, Native Americans, spiritual matters, nature and seeking truth; all
> of the foregoing concern God.

I don't really know if I have any interests other than just stumbling
around cyberspace and bumping into people and ideas.  If anything, I'm
trying to come out of a silent world of dissociation in order to sense a
being behind that mask in the mirror that poses as Robert.

How?  Talking with you and others here in cyberspace, writing poetry and
painting dreams, walking city streets and parkland pathways, playing
music with my guitar and on my CD player, writing ... writing ...
writing, talking to God, listening to her/his voice in the world,
playing with my grandsons (no grand-daughters to play with ... yet),
golfing with strangers, making love with/to my wife with
words/thoughts/action, smiling at strangers as I pass them in life ....

As you see, I don't keep it short and simple and to the point.  I tend
to talk a lot while observing.  Hardest part is "being" fully present to
myself.  Easiest part is "doing" for others.

ciao
Robert

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 23 May 1998 00:50:01 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: group conscience
In-Reply-To:  <v01550101b18893f74b40@[207.54.181.108]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 11:30 PM 5/22/98 -0400, Judith wrote:

JoAnne said:

>> And just recently Julienne threw me off her list because
>> she and others on her list didn't like my behavior.
>> Her prerogative.

Point of fact: *I* did not throw JoAnne off. The List is not just mine,
but is co-managed by two people. JoAnne was removed
after 50 people left the list within the space of 16 days, and more,
including the other person managing the List with me, threatened
to leave if JoAnne were allowed to stay. This after JoAnne had been
repeatedly asked to change the way she was communicating on
the List.

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 23 May 1998 01:49:08 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: group conscience
In-Reply-To:  <v01550101b18893f74b40@[207.54.181.108]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 11:30 PM 5/22/98 -0400, Judith wrote to JoAnne:

>I agree and I'm wondering about something that came up from a Margaret
>Wheatley talk laterly...she for those not familiar wrote Leadership and the
>New Science a few years back and then an amazing book called The Simple

>Way...focusing on the organic nature of reality...anyway she related how
>groups were coming together and finding the simplest of *rules* to operate
>within...this goes to the fractal work and chaos theory...anyway a school
>having trouble within the student body agreed to the following 3 rules
>
>1) take care of yourself
>2) take care of others
>3) take care of this space

One of my Lists on the Internet is named "CHA*OS", and
the name does reflect back to the creative seed power
of chaos. The List is an off-shoot of an organization I
founded several years ago, with the same name, CHA*OS.

Under the auspices of CHA*OS, we have held a live
five-day conference on live TV, as well as several other events.
past and being planned.

Years ago- 1968 to be exact, I founded The International
Society for Astrological Research - an organization which
changed the face of modern astrology by creating an
international community-network of astrologers, physicists,
psychologists, psychiatrists, medical doctors and others
in the health care fields, artists, historians, philosophers, etc.

Concerned about the low level of astrology being practiced
at the time, and the almost non-existant communication
between astrologers, not just from country to country but city to
city within any one country, a great effort was made through
the organization to create a base of communication between
all the above who were interested in astrology, to create a
more professional and academic practice for the discipline.

We had standards of education for membership, and were
pretty formal about our structure from the Board of Directors
to our conference agenda.

After 10 years as President, I left and went on to have babies, etc.

I then decided to creat a new organization on very different lines.
Where we had before been very hierarchical and structured,
such an approach no longer felt adequate or appropriate.

So, over breakfast with a friend, CHA*OS was born as a
loosely structured, egalitaran organization. No offices, no
dues, no rules and regulations. We simply come together
as we need to, or want to, whether for conferences, planned
publications, discussions, etc. Although I founded CHA*OS,
activities of other "members" so not have to be cleared through
me.

I could go on and on, but I won't.:) I also founded a professional
magazine in 1968, named KOSMOS, and my radio and TV
shows have been called "You and the KOSMOS" for decades.
So I suppose I've come full circle now - in reverse - from
KOSMOS to CHA*OS. :)

>Her annecdote then:
>There was a practice fire drill at the school...it was raining and everyone
>had to exit into the rain...when the drill was over, the students were
>allowed to return to class...the principal entered last and found 700 pairs
>of shoes in the hall by the door...

There you go. :)

Just as we now know that students seem to learn more when not
graded or marked, when not told they will be examined on the
material, maybe we also can learn more from each other in  the
long run through a different type of professional connecting which
is not tied to rank, salary, title, tenure, etc.?

The old authoritarian structures are fading...
Mainly because they just are no longer adequate or effective
enough for what we want to do today.

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 23 May 1998 15:47:36 +0300
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Anita Konkka <anitak@MEGABAUD.FI>
Subject:      Re: on  victims and abusers
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hello Julienne,
I wonder, who is  a  victim, and who is an abuser.  You are complaining,
that Walter didn't   reply to you , when  you were being  abused by the big,
bad  Wilbur-male.  Why did  you keep on arguing with Wilbur,  all the more
as since your father  was dying at that time - he could have been dead any
morning - as you said. How  you  had energy  to write  on the list  at such
a trying time?  It is  totally incomprehensible to me.
    Maybe you are not  quite honest to yourself -    maybe you  want/ fish
for  empathy  and sympathy.  It's so human.  When I read some days ago you
post  addressed to Walter,  I felt   some discordance.  I recalled  one of
your former posts.   To my mind it  was very abusing.   You abused  your
son,  i.e.  took unfair  advantage of his words  against Wilbur - see below.
That's  the  indirect aggressive way often used  by  women, and  then  they
wonder why  a man hits.  Some women are looking  for it.  So  who is a
victim, and who an abuser?  After that post Wilbur  hit you  very hard,
because he was  hurt by you so painfully.   That's  my  feeling , an
outsider's view, not  necessary right.
 Best regards
Anita


You wrote  9/2/97
>Wilbur, I turned to one of my sons for a response to your post. His first
>words are unprintable. He then said: "Some people don't deserve rebuttal.
>Why waste time on him? I've neither taken part in, nor observed, these
>activities - and I've lived in many places. He's a f*** f***, and that is
>the appropriate response when you're fighting someone who hasn't examined
>life and has a very skewed view. This man seems very disturbed - cracking
>ribs isn't a solution. He should not presume his neuroses, his anger and
>violence, to be symptomatic of all people. Sounds like a very violent man
>who enjoys hitting. Very disturbing the way that's (the paragraph about
>breaking the other boy's ribs) worded. Sounds like he has a lot of anger
>which he rarely gets to release. Also seems to be suggesting you're only a
>person if you're a male - has made repeated sexist remarks."

>My son again: "Why are you talking to this man? He's an ignorant sexist,
>very angry and competitive with women, and an idiot. There's nothing to
>debate here. Who's the greater fool - the fool, or the one who argues with a
>fool?"

>His advice to me - "There is a lot of work this is keeping you away from, Mum."

>As my son said - I have more important things to do. If you really wanted to
>share, I would - but you are out to bash - and that just makes you look silly.

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 23 May 1998 17:12:14 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: group conscience
In-Reply-To:  <v01550101b18893f74b40@[207.54.181.108]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>, on Fri, 22 May 1998 23:30:39 -0400
you wrote:

>Hi JoAnne,
>
>Belatedly responding to your post...
>Been followingnot following the Void experience...suppose I could read the
>archives but am choosing to find my way, through everyone's exchange...I
>resonnated with your use of the *container*...

It's a concept we've kicked around here a while, not one I thought of
myself.

>H>>(Might we find a more apt word than wonderful?) I don't have many ideas
>>>about this, Simon. I do think we can name the forms of abuse and draw
>>>lines. Might this prevent us from experiential learnings we might
>>>individually or as a group go through. Sure.
>>
>J>To have a container there have to be things excluded, by definition.
>>If we can agree on what is to be excluded then the container is that
>>much stronger.  If we make the lines too wavy, or insist that they
>>don't exist, the container will be weakened.
>>
>
>I agree and I'm wondering about something that came up from a Margaret
>Wheatley talk laterly...she for those not familiar wrote Leadership and the
>New Science a few years back and then an amazing book called The Simple
>Way...focusing on the organic nature of reality...anyway she related how
>groups were coming together and finding the simplest of *rules* to operate
>within...this goes to the fractal work and chaos theory...anyway a school
>having trouble within the student body agreed to the following 3 rules
>
>1) take care of yourself
>2) take care of others
>3) take care of this space
>
>Her annecdote then:
>There was a practice fire drill at the school...it was raining and everyone
>had to exit into the rain...when the drill was over, the students were
>allowed to return to class...the principal entered last and found 700 pairs
>of shoes in the hall by the door...

Wonderful picture.  These are good guidelines, would they work for us?  We
could learn by trying them voluntarily.

And there's also the concern that we will clutter the hall with shoes to
the detriment of the process we're trying to encourage, because we can't
figure out when we're taking care of something, and when we're damaging it.
There's a lot of doing things for someone's own good that end up being
wrong for that person.  And conflicts inevitably occur -- taking care of
both or all participants in a conflict is very difficult.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 23 May 1998 17:12:16 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: group conscience
In-Reply-To:  <19980523045003.AAA9577@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>, on Sat, 23 May 1998 00:50:01
-0400 you wrote:

>At 11:30 PM 5/22/98 -0400, Judith wrote:
>
>JoAnne said:
>
>>> And just recently Julienne threw me off her list because
>>> she and others on her list didn't like my behavior.
>>> Her prerogative.
>
>Point of fact: *I* did not throw JoAnne off. The List is not just mine,
>but is co-managed by two people. JoAnne was removed

"Was removed" is passive voice.  You are still skirting the issue as to who
removed me.  Was it you, Kris, the list, God?  You deny it was you, but
don't say who it was.

>after 50 people left the list within the space of 16 days, and more,
>including the other person managing the List with me, threatened
>to leave if JoAnne were allowed to stay. This after JoAnne had been
>repeatedly asked to change the way she was communicating on
>the List.

I only received a message telling me I had been dropped from the list, and
neither you nor Kris responded when I asked if it was done by one of you,
or as a trick by someone else.  I figured it was official when the "you are
welcome to subscribe again anytime" proved to be false, but I never got any
kind of explanation.

Bluntly, I think you're avoiding responsibility for the decision, though I
don't know why.  If it was such a good thing to do, why not say you were
part of the decision?

And yes, I agree, you did ask me to stop posting the way I was posting.  I
was confused by the application of the list's rules, so I could never get
the hang of following them and still speaking my mind.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 23 May 1998 13:42:01 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: group conscience
In-Reply-To:  <3569c57b.982390252@mail.qis.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 05:12 PM 5/23/98 +0000, JoAnne wrote:
>Hello Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>, on Sat, 23 May 1998 00:50:01
>-0400 you wrote:
>
>>At 11:30 PM 5/22/98 -0400, Judith wrote:
>>
>>JoAnne said:
>>
>>>> And just recently Julienne threw me off her list because
>>>> she and others on her list didn't like my behavior.
>>>> Her prerogative.
>>
>>Point of fact: *I* did not throw JoAnne off. The List is not just mine,
>>but is co-managed by two people. JoAnne was removed

>"Was removed" is passive voice.  You are still skirting the issue as to who
>removed me.  Was it you, Kris, the list, God?  You deny it was you, but
>don't say who it was.

JoAnne, I have spent months of my life, here on this List and
on my own, trying to relate to you, and finding myself assaulted.
I am not going to try any more. I am no longer responding to
your confrontations or accusations. I will skirt whatever issues
I want.

>>after 50 people left the list within the space of 16 days, and more,
>>including the other person managing the List with me, threatened
>>to leave if JoAnne were allowed to stay. This after JoAnne had been
>>repeatedly asked to change the way she was communicating on
>>the List.

>I only received a message telling me I had been dropped from the list, and
>neither you nor Kris responded when I asked if it was done by one of you,
>or as a trick by someone else.  I figured it was official when the "you are
>welcome to subscribe again anytime" proved to be false, but I never got any
>kind of explanation.

>Bluntly, I think you're avoiding responsibility for the decision, though I
>don't know why.  If it was such a good thing to do, why not say you were
>part of the decision?

I am not discussing with you whether it was a "good" thing to do.
And nor am I going to deal with your accusations of my "avoiding
responsibility". What I have learned is that whatever I offer you
will counter with another accusation and a distortion or
mistrepresentation of what I say.

>And yes, I agree, you did ask me to stop posting the way I was posting.  I
>was confused by the application of the list's rules, so I could never get
>the hang of following them and still speaking my mind.

The List has only 2 rules, which were, incidentally, posted on this List
after Walter asked/suggested I post them as part of the CHA*OS Welcome
Letter:

1) No plagiarism.
2) No adhominem attacks.

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 23 May 1998 14:30:33 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: on  victims and abusers
In-Reply-To:  <199805231247.PAA16210@walrus.megabaud.fi>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 03:47 PM 5/23/98 +0300, Anita wrote:
>Hello Julienne,
>I wonder, who is  a  victim, and who is an abuser.  You are complaining,
>that Walter didn't   reply to you , when  you were being  abused by the big,
>bad  Wilbur-male.  Why did  you keep on arguing with Wilbur,  all the more
>as since your father  was dying at that time - he could have been dead any
>morning - as you said. How  you  had energy  to write  on the list  at such
>a trying time?  It is  totally incomprehensible to me.

I didn't have the energy to "argue" - which was why I turned to my son for
his
assessment of what was going, and let his words stand for mine. I tried, after
Wilbur and JoAnne attacked and attacked, to explain, restate, and do all the
reasonable things one can try to do when one's words have been distorted
and one has become the brunt of that type of attack. I also withdrew from
contributing to the List, but the discussion "about" me went on as though
I were contributing to it.

>    Maybe you are not  quite honest to yourself -    maybe you  want/ fish
>for  empathy  and sympathy.  It's so human.  When I read some days ago you
>post  addressed to Walter,  I felt   some discordance.  I recalled  one of
>your former posts.   To my mind it  was very abusing.   You abused  your
>son,  i.e.  took unfair  advantage of his words  against Wilbur - see below.

My 25 year old son knew exactly where his words were going, and he
saw Wilbur's attacks on me as the abuse.  I was more vulnerable
because my father was dying, and my thinking not as clear as it
might have been because I was getting 3-4 hours of sleep at night.

I think you need to look, Anita, at why you were so willing to join the mass
attack on me, to so easily join JoAnne's attack on me when I first appeared
on the list. You didn't know me at all - but you were willing to join the
attack
and add your own embellishments.

>That's  the  indirect aggressive way often used  by  women, and  then  they
>wonder why  a man hits.  Some women are looking  for it.  So  who is a
>victim, and who an abuser?  After that post Wilbur  hit you  very hard,
>because he was  hurt by you so painfully.   That's  my  feeling , an
>outsider's view, not  necessary right.

It became quite apparent on this list that many of you thought that
I "asked for it".  And boy you gave it to me. Wilbur didn't hit me
very hard "after" that post - Wilbur hit me the minute I suggested
to him that the differences between men and women are not
that clear - that we are still exploring what is genetic and
biochemical and what is sociologically programmed. Wilbur
started prating about how he was a "real" man, and parading
his stories of how he beat up people and smashed their ribs.
I hurt my rib soon after - clearly my subconscious reacting to
Wilbur. This created a real crisis, because I could no longer
move my immobile father  - and there was no one else here
very often to do it.

The idea that women, children, anyone, is "looking to be
hit" is ignorant, and angry, and an excuse used by those
 who are violent and condone violence. I suggest
you read some of the literature on battered women and
children. The excuse "She provoked it", is the most
common excuse used by wife-and children-batterers.

I am not going to continue to explain, defend, or talk
about this whole incident any more than I want to from
now on.  I take responsibility for my part - but I refuse
to carry the group guilt or assume the role of scapegoat
for you. Clearly there are issues quite outside me, and
predating my advent on the list. Deal with it. My father
has died, I am healing, and I will not be  a part of such
an event again.

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 24 May 1998 10:52:57 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Barry Kennedy <kennedy.levy@XTRA.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Group Conscience
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Warm greetings to all subscibers

I have been on the list for a couple of months and have followed most
discussions.  I live in Christchurch, New Zealand, where I work as a
counsellor, with particular experience in alcohol and drug problems.  I
have known Walter in real life for ten years, and was an active participant
in the early days of his Psybernet project when it was a BBS.  I fiddle
with computers, enjoy finding out how they work (and don't work).

Walter's role in the list intrigues me.  He has a central and complex role,
I know, but in essence he seems to provide this space called Psyber-L  In
other subscriber's opinions, does/should he have a therapist role ?  And
should he provide more support, be more available, than other subscribers ?
 I am thinking of Julienne's posts as I write this.

Barry
____________________________________
Barry Kennedy<kennedy.levy@xtra.co.nz>

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 23 May 1998 20:02:23 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: group conscience
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

JoAnne,
Entering delicately where angels fear to tread:-) however, I think you
raise a point for me which strikes a chord...

>Hello Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>, on Sat, 23 May 1998 00:50:01
>-0400 you wrote:
>
>>At 11:30 PM 5/22/98 -0400, Judith wrote:
>>
>>JoAnne said:
>>
>>>> And just recently Julienne threw me off her list because
>>>> she and others on her list didn't like my behavior.
>>>> Her prerogative.
>>
>>Point of fact: *I* did not throw JoAnne off. The List is not just mine,
>>but is co-managed by two people. JoAnne was removed
>
>"Was removed" is passive voice.  You are still skirting the issue as to who
>removed me.  Was it you, Kris, the list, God?  You deny it was you, but
>don't say who it was.
>
>>after 50 people left the list within the space of 16 days, and more,
>>including the other person managing the List with me, threatened
>>to leave if JoAnne were allowed to stay. This after JoAnne had been
>>repeatedly asked to change the way she was communicating on
>>the List.
>
>I only received a message telling me I had been dropped from the list, and
>neither you nor Kris responded when I asked if it was done by one of you,
>or as a trick by someone else.  I figured it was official when the "you are
>welcome to subscribe again anytime" proved to be false, but I never got any
>kind of explanation.
>
>Bluntly, I think you're avoiding responsibility for the decision, though I
>don't know why.  If it was such a good thing to do, why not say you were
>part of the decision?
>
>And yes, I agree, you did ask me to stop posting the way I was posting.  I
>was confused by the application of the list's rules, so I could never get
>the hang of following them and still speaking my mind.

For months in my on-line PhD course work we discussed *tone* which seemed
to be very tricky...Juliene and JoAnne,I'm not asking for a rehash of your
list experience...what I am interested in IS the issue which is raised...I
have experience dramatically different *tones* here in this space...I
remember people having difficulty experiencing my humor during PhDing...I
tend to see the humor in my life and in how I experience others in my
life...here in Psyber-L, I have been totally unsuccessful in bringing that
part of me to the screen :-) (I have had critical comedic acclaim on
stage;-)

So I wonder what does *tone* have to do with it (sounds like a song to me;-)
which leads me to music and my affinity with dissonance and jazz, and being
baffled by major keys and 1-3-5...

How does one express oneself here?  Does someone set the *tone*, is there
an implied tone through Walter as the ListOwner?  then this gets violated
as with the Wilbur experience...I'm not advocating the communication
conceits of stuff like "what I hear you saying, Judith..." however, in a
business collaborative I was acused of not having civility...which was
correct in that person's eyes, but then I didn't hold a value of civility
so I had no expectation or even filter for civility...thus value systems...


I remember in a previous exhchange over a year ago with Wilbur when he came
blazing off the screen saying that everyone had rage...well, I could
certainly see he had it, and he was totally attached to his opinion...I
just stated I didn't have any rage, I had lots of other stuff,  but not
rage...very different tones he and I...

I will say that IMO *tone* has major ramifications...there are no warning
labels on the messages posted and I know I am very conscious of where I am
in my space when I log on...my PhDing mentor shot an arrow into my heart
one day when I wasn't thinking, clicked on his message to me and zing it
came...totally unexpected...what I learned is that there is potential to
take an arrow so I always picture myself as a window screen with lots of
holes so it goes on thru and doesn't get stuck, cause the blood messes up
my keyboard;-)

Thanks to you both...my experience is of two very powerful, able women...
Judith


>-JoAnne
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 23 May 1998 20:03:03 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: group conscience
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi JoAnne,
you raise interesting points for me...

>Hello Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>, on Fri, 22 May 1998 23:30:39 -0400
>you wrote:
>
>>Hi JoAnne,
>>
>>Belatedly responding to your post...
>>Been followingnot following the Void experience...suppose I could read the
>>archives but am choosing to find my way, through everyone's exchange...I
>>resonnated with your use of the *container*...
>
>It's a concept we've kicked around here a while, not one I thought of
>myself.
>
>>H>>(Might we find a more apt word than wonderful?) I don't have many ideas
>>>>about this, Simon. I do think we can name the forms of abuse and draw
>>>>lines. Might this prevent us from experiential learnings we might
>>>>individually or as a group go through. Sure.
>>>
>>J>To have a container there have to be things excluded, by definition.
>>>If we can agree on what is to be excluded then the container is that
>>>much stronger.  If we make the lines too wavy, or insist that they
>>>don't exist, the container will be weakened.
>>>
>>
>>I agree and I'm wondering about something that came up from a Margaret
>>Wheatley talk laterly...she for those not familiar wrote Leadership and the
>>New Science a few years back and then an amazing book called The Simple
>>Way...focusing on the organic nature of reality...anyway she related how
>>groups were coming together and finding the simplest of *rules* to operate
>>within...this goes to the fractal work and chaos theory...anyway a school
>>having trouble within the student body agreed to the following 3 rules
>>
>>1) take care of yourself
>>2) take care of others
>>3) take care of this space
>>
>>Her annecdote then:
>>There was a practice fire drill at the school...it was raining and everyone
>>had to exit into the rain...when the drill was over, the students were
>>allowed to return to class...the principal entered last and found 700 pairs
>>of shoes in the hall by the door...
>
>Wonderful picture.  These are good guidelines, would they work for us?  We
>could learn by trying them voluntarily.

Not sure if they would work here...mostly because the list has been in
existance for a long while...

>
>And there's also the concern that we will clutter the hall with shoes to
>the detriment of the process we're trying to encourage, because we can't
>figure out when we're taking care of something, and when we're damaging it.
>There's a lot of doing things for someone's own good that end up being
>wrong for that person.  And conflicts inevitably occur -- taking care of
>both or all participants in a conflict is very difficult.

Yes,particularly a lot of damage in the name of *love*...I come from the
assumption that I am the authority on me and while I will be open to
someone voicing their opinion, I make my own choice based on my sense of
what needs to happen next...I think inherent in a given system there are
givens and unexamined assumptions tho we certainly are experiencing systems
in extreme pressure which tends to surface the conflicts...my sense is that
we who are along in our life journey at least in the US have *rules* we
have agreed with ourselves...conflict comes often when these rules
collide...a rule I have is that I seek to expand my heart space in the face
of experiences which would have in the past caused me to contract...I have
consciously chosen to commit myself to this rule...one of the lessons for
me has been to experience vulnerability as a result, pretty terrifying in
the beginning...Another rule I'm working from these days is to be in
integrity to myself...and what this means in terms of exercising my
authenticity...I was triggered recently by the young artist I invited to
share my studio for the show...she has a highly developed masculine and is
a might mouse in how she is marketing her art...she came roaring into my
space and I experienced her as not respecting me...however, I also had to
look at my integrity since I have been experiencing judgment around some
issues she has, plus my trauma trance is envy...when I discussed this with
a friend who also is very comfortable in her assertiveness, she said I
needed to tell her...I chose to use my process of prayer...because I felt
my judgment was taking me out of integrity...and I needed clarity...that
evening she had completely shifted...and our day together was
comfortable...an implicity rule I operate from is
*easefulness*...particularly since my illness and my need to conserve my
energy, needing to be careful in my prioritization...

I suppose which is to say I have an assumption that later in life we each
have a sense of our beingness which comes with long years of history...so,
no, I don't think it would work here or is even appropriate...on the other
hand :-)

Blessings,
Judith
>-JoAnne
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 23 May 1998 20:03:45 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: group conscience
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Julienne,
thanks for your sharing...I thought as I read your post how different some
of our life experiences are...and feeling your sense of involvement in the
outer reality around ideations which resonnate to you, the passion I sense
as you create...so my experience of you through this time is how connected
you are to your life...such a direct connection...because I'm about process
I think it often takes me out of direct connection with the content...a
flaw maybe...tho once I discovered the Tao years ago I found I understood
my detatchment a bit in that framing...

I'm wordering if the group you spoke of creating is a mixed gender
group...(I ask this delicately from an interest in how gender might play
out...I did a bit of research in my master's in workplace learning on
gender perception of *team*...fun...plus I must reveal that I was raised
the oldest son in a family of two girls and have been until recently more
comfortable with men)

Blessings,
Judith

>At 11:30 PM 5/22/98 -0400, Judith wrote to JoAnne:
>
>>I agree and I'm wondering about something that came up from a Margaret
>>Wheatley talk laterly...she for those not familiar wrote Leadership and the
>>New Science a few years back and then an amazing book called The Simple
>
>>Way...focusing on the organic nature of reality...anyway she related how
>>groups were coming together and finding the simplest of *rules* to operate
>>within...this goes to the fractal work and chaos theory...anyway a school
>>having trouble within the student body agreed to the following 3 rules
>>
>>1) take care of yourself
>>2) take care of others
>>3) take care of this space
>
>One of my Lists on the Internet is named "CHA*OS", and
>the name does reflect back to the creative seed power
>of chaos. The List is an off-shoot of an organization I
>founded several years ago, with the same name, CHA*OS.
>
>Under the auspices of CHA*OS, we have held a live
>five-day conference on live TV, as well as several other events.
>past and being planned.
>
>Years ago- 1968 to be exact, I founded The International
>Society for Astrological Research - an organization which
>changed the face of modern astrology by creating an
>international community-network of astrologers, physicists,
>psychologists, psychiatrists, medical doctors and others
>in the health care fields, artists, historians, philosophers, etc.
>
>Concerned about the low level of astrology being practiced
>at the time, and the almost non-existant communication
>between astrologers, not just from country to country but city to
>city within any one country, a great effort was made through
>the organization to create a base of communication between
>all the above who were interested in astrology, to create a
>more professional and academic practice for the discipline.
>
>We had standards of education for membership, and were
>pretty formal about our structure from the Board of Directors
>to our conference agenda.
>
>After 10 years as President, I left and went on to have babies, etc.
>
>I then decided to creat a new organization on very different lines.
>Where we had before been very hierarchical and structured,
>such an approach no longer felt adequate or appropriate.
>
>So, over breakfast with a friend, CHA*OS was born as a
>loosely structured, egalitaran organization. No offices, no
>dues, no rules and regulations. We simply come together
>as we need to, or want to, whether for conferences, planned
>publications, discussions, etc. Although I founded CHA*OS,
>activities of other "members" so not have to be cleared through
>me.
>
>I could go on and on, but I won't.:) I also founded a professional
>magazine in 1968, named KOSMOS, and my radio and TV
>shows have been called "You and the KOSMOS" for decades.
>So I suppose I've come full circle now - in reverse - from
>KOSMOS to CHA*OS. :)
>
>>Her annecdote then:
>>There was a practice fire drill at the school...it was raining and everyone
>>had to exit into the rain...when the drill was over, the students were
>>allowed to return to class...the principal entered last and found 700 pairs
>>of shoes in the hall by the door...
>
>There you go. :)
>
>Just as we now know that students seem to learn more when not
>graded or marked, when not told they will be examined on the
>material, maybe we also can learn more from each other in  the
>long run through a different type of professional connecting which
>is not tied to rank, salary, title, tenure, etc.?
>
>The old authoritarian structures are fading...
>Mainly because they just are no longer adequate or effective
>enough for what we want to do today.
>
>Julienne
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 23 May 1998 20:44:39 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: group conscience
In-Reply-To:  <v01550104b18ccf03b610@[207.54.181.108]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 08:03 PM 5/23/98 -0400, Judith wrote:
>Julienne,
>thanks for your sharing...I thought as I read your post how different some
>of our life experiences are...and feeling your sense of involvement in the
>outer reality around ideations which resonnate to you, the passion I sense
>as you create...so my experience of you through this time is how connected
>you are to your life...such a direct connection...because I'm about process
>I think it often takes me out of direct connection with the content...a
>flaw maybe...tho once I discovered the Tao years ago I found I understood
>my detatchment a bit in that framing...

Dear Judith,

Hmmmm...??? <grin> I am wondering what on earth I said?
Nietzsche speaks of the Dionysian and the Appollonian. The Dionysian
is the creation frenzy - the inspiration, the sweat and spirit of birthing,
creating something. The Appollonian is the finished product - the statue
we admire in the town square or in our gallery .

I suppose my post was Appollonian - my description of what was -
perhaps without the passion of reflection and involvement? Although
I do feel passionately involved in what I have created.:) I was not really
describing the process...my process.

>I'm wondering if the group you spoke of creating is a mixed gender
>group...(I ask this delicately from an interest in how gender might play
>out...I did a bit of research in my master's in workplace learning on
>gender perception of *team*...fun...plus I must reveal that I was raised
>the oldest son in a family of two girls and have been until recently more
>comfortable with men)

I am absolutely intrigued by your question! :) What made you ask this?
And did you mean to say you were raised the eldest "son"? What
gender are you now?

Of course it is mixed gender - probably five or more genders - I don't
think there are just two - certainly not according to gender researchers.

I was raised the oldest girl in a family of three younger boys. I have
usually not been more comfortable with men, because the "golden
girl" as a man called me last week, is often not popular with men.
And professionally I found what I created being taken away by men
frequently - men who "won't work for a woman" and such. And in
truth, it was not just men who behaved this way, but also women.
Beyond all that, I love men, and despite the above, have had and
continue to have many wonderful male associates as well as
female, and a very romantic and deep and poetic and wonderful
and magical and profound and and and...love life. :)

Is that what you were asking?

If you are asking if my gender made a difference to my experience -
and to people's response to me - yes. And my age. I started most
of this very young. And I am not a "masculine" looking woman - which
complicated things even more. Long legs and long blonde hair
confuse people - as does such a person breast-feeding babies
at board meetings. :)

But I'm not sure what you really want to know - so will wait until
you tell me if there is more you want to know.:)

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 24 May 1998 12:18:20 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <v03110703b18715ec1fae@[195.200.17.187]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Simon,

At 02:47 PM 5/19/98 +0100, you wrote:

>Marie,
>
>I don't mean to excuse the way that Void treated you, or to 'push away' the
>hurt that you felt. If I had been attacked in the way that you were, I
>would have felt just as hurt - and I think just as bewildered, too.

I haven't felt discounted at all, but thank you for stating this.  I was
hurt and bewildered, but in a curious detached kind of way.  He came here
out of nowhere, unknown and without context, and I was an (apparently) easy
target for his barrage of criticism.  He swiftly and with glee shifted to
others.  I never had a feeling it was *about* me, and that made a
difference.  I would have felt very differently if that same post came from
someone else, someone I knew here and who knew me.

>But why is there hurt? We think, perhaps, 'But I'm just trying to express
>my feelings, my self, in an honest way, why am I being attacked? Why me?
>Why me?'. I think the answer is twofold: I triggered something in that
>attacking person that is painful for them, and there is something positive
>that I need to learn about myself from this. Maybe the positive thing is
>simply that I get a wake-up call on how I feel about myself.

"But why is there hurt?"  Good question!  I don't think there is ever hurt
unless there is some underlying fear that the attacker is right, unless
there is resonance with hidden doubts about self.  "Why me?"  Why not me?
I was curious about what got triggered in Void -- I asked him about it, but
he didn't respond, except with more of the same -- which prevented the
encounter from becoming a real learning experience, for either of us.  I
don't know if the something to be learned is always positive, Simon, altho
I suppose any learning about self can itself be considered a positive thing.

>The person doing the attacking needs to take responsibility for their pain
>and their actions that spring from it, I need to look at why I'm feeling
>hurt, see what the message is for me, accept that I triggered them, and see
>how my responsibility pans out. Tough, I know! Maybe I can't handle it,
>maybe they can't.

Maybe ...  however, one-sided work of this nature leaves an incompleteness,
an inability to reality-test, I think.  I was left with wondering -- was my
choice of response style a failure to defend myself and my ideas, as he
alleged?  Was I a scared wimp, unable to give as good as I got?  Is my
refusal to engage in flaming really an expression of insecurity and
self-doubt?  Yes, in part, to all of the above.  I was also left wondering
about my own judgmentalism in reaction to Void.  He didn't like the "tone"
of my post (thanks for this phrasing, Judith, and for raising the issue) --
and I didn't like his.  That he was expressing himself in terms that most
of us experienced as being insulting and aggressive allows me to be
self-righteous and defensive, but really I have no more right to censor him
than I give him to censor me.  However, I can choose how I want to engage,
and who I want to engage with, and that brings us back to the issues we
have been discussing here.  What is our purpose, and what kind of process
and parameters enhance it, or dilute it?

>This is not to discount the reality that some people are simply incapable
>of seeing any wrongdoing in themselves, and you simply need to get the hell
>out of the situation.

I believe that mutual growth in interaction, in relationship, requires
willingness and capacity on both sides (and capacity is a wide and deep
concept for me, with many dimensions).  Does admission of wrongdoing need
be a factor?  An apology from Void, in itself, would have meant little to
me.  I had no sense of who he was, and thus no context for evaluating his
response to me.  It left me with little opportunity to learn, to go deeper.

This is a safe area of focus, isn't it -- this discussion about the
"void-era" -- as far as I know, he is long gone, and the episode remains an
encapsulated example to play with; there is no ongoing encounter.  I value
it nonetheless, but I value more the ones who stay and reveal self, explore
self.  There is no dance without the dancers ...

Thank you, Simon.

Marie

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 24 May 1998 12:18:27 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: People and Places
In-Reply-To:  <3565ba2a.8661676@mail.clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Joanne,

I wish I had more time!  I need to contain this response; I hope I can do
it without losing anything vital.  I am also aware that I am going away on
Friday, and have much to do in the meantime, and that I will not be able to
even read posts until I return June 7 (if then), which leaves me reluctant
to feed a dialogue I cannot sustain.  Hopefully, I can return to it.

At 11:29 PM 5/18/98 GMT, you wrote:

>> ... "bananabean" was closely interwoven with Julienne in my
>>mind -- even tho you were careful to identify it as *your* perception of
>>her, it was linked with her for me and therefore held the charged energy of
>>the ongoing conflict within it.
>
>I see how that could be a problem.  But at that point, what was the
>alternative, if we were going to discuss some of those issues?

I wish I knew; I think we are trying (in our individual and various ways)
to find out.  My bias is that what is hidden is destructive -- within self,
within relationship -- that I can only seek to discover and reveal what is
hidden in myself -- and that I can only seek to understand the experience
of another, not assume it.  I value inquiry -- Judith models this,
beautifully -- "tell me how it is for you, please" -- this is easier
without a conflictual history, I know.  Positions and hurts often become
cumulative and polarized, and shifting approach can feel like a loss of
integrity, a giving in or giving up.  Hard to do.  However (to stay with
the dance metaphor that keeps coming to me of late), there cannot be a
tango if one partner begins to waltz.  I suppose I envision a time-out -- a
call to look at what is going on, beginning with self -- and an honest
interest in hearing and understanding the other.  I was not involved in the
arguments among you and Wilbur and Julienne, and I could not find a way to
connect at that level myself at that time; this is not meant to disparage
anyone.  I still cringe when I read posts that point a finger at another,
even when I agree with the point being made (interesting turn of phrase
here!) -- this may be excessive sensitivity on my part, but I think it
shuts down opportunity for connection and understanding.

>>>Was there something learned from the encounter with void that was used
>>>later, when Wilbur, Julienne, and I were arguing?
>>
>>I am interested in this question -- the later arguments felt to me like a
>>continuation of an explosion of negative energy, an almost instant replay
>>of the same dynamic as the encounter with void.
>
>I wonder how much of that was intrinsic to the arguments, and how much
>was projection of the void arguments onto those arguments?  In other
>words, is it possible that one thing that was learned from the void
>arguments was to ignore such arguments?  Did the later arguments
>reinforce that learning?
>
>Was there a real difference between the two, or were they really
>similar?

There was difference -- void was an "arrow out of darkness" -- he found in
us easy targets for his battlestance, and we found in him an easy target
for retaliation.  He did not stay, did not seem to seek connection here, or
meaningful engagement with either people or process.  The similarity, for
me, was in the sense of escalated anger and negative energy.  For me, the
learning that came from the encounter with void was the futility of
response, of any kind, to shift the interaction to another level.  I felt
the same sense of hopelessness and futility later, and did not want to get
caught in yet another battle, and so I remained apart -- I did not ignore,
not within myself.  I am not satisfied with that, but I have not yet found
a different way.

>>Joanne, I would especially like to hear from you on the "process and
>>parameters" being discussed.  I particularly wonder if the concept of
>>ground rules and prohibition of abusive interactions leaves you feeling
>>personally stifled, without a way to express strong feelings and opinions
>>when you have them, and still be heard and accepted.
>
>I wonder how such things will be expressed.  I wonder if it is not the
>type of interaction, but the content itself, that is being stifled.
>What if the truth I see is ugly?  What if the truth I see is not
>flattering to someone else on the list?  What if there are different
>perceptions of reality?  Others have some very unflattering visions of
>my truth.

I understand this, and there are no simple answers to the issues you raise.
 I have found that if I *really* understand the experience of another,
their truth is no longer ugly to me -- even if I still cannot condone their
behavior, even if I choose not to be in relationship with them, I disengage
with sorrow and compassion, not self-righteous anger.  This is still
judgmental, I know -- I have long been pondering Hoon's post that addressed
"discrimination" as an alternate phrasing or dimension of judgment (if I
understood the point as you meant it, Hoon).

>I don't know if any other people on this list had a history before
>meeting here.  It seems that they certainly hadn't had the kind of
>history Julienne and I had.  And the situation was such that no one
>could accept one of us and the other both, at least not completely.
>Perfectly sensible that no one who remained on the list could take a
>side, as that would tear the group apart.
>
>Don't take a side, let it ride, take it in your stride.

I did not have a clear understanding of the history between you, but
rapidly gained a sense of it, and certainly there is no way to disregard it
simply because you are both now in a different place, together.  However,
it IS a different place, which could perhaps be an opportunity to meet on
another level?  I do not wish to take sides, you are right -- I am, much
like Judith, an Empath who feels with others, all others -- and to respond
warmly to both of you did seem incongruent at the time, so I remained
silent.

I think one significant factor in this was the lack of context beforehand
-- the conflict came at once, before either of you had any history here,
before we had a sense of who you were.  It is difficult to see someone
behind full battle regalia!

>However, on to what I'd like to see.

[I am sorry to skip what is in-between, but I am conscious of time
constraints.]

>A place where people do not tell each other what the other is doing,
>seeing, thinking, being.  More "I talk," e.g. "I feel hurt," or, "I
>don't like hearing that."  A place where judging, diagnostic, and
>estimation words and phrases are not thrown around.  People are talked
>about as a result of their voluntary actions and words, not as
>objects.
>
>This is not just "what I'd like" but "what I like already" in
>interactions here.  And it's not a matter of outlawing those things,
>but mentioning them when they come up and working them out.  "I felt
>hurt when..." leads to clarification, reassurance, not a bigger rift
>and a colder shoulder.

This fits with what I feel, what I value. The difficulty comes when some
commit to this and some do not; one person cannot work out what is a
relationship issue in isolation, especially when the other(s) continue to
be judgmental, accusing, diagnostic, or defensive.

>This makes me think more about the earlier questions.  If there is a
>difference in truths, how is that handled without making a judgment?
>One can only give one's evidence, opinions, express one's beliefs.

Yes.  And share one's feelings.

>Asking some kinds of questions is nearly the same as making "you"
>statements.  Almost forcing the other person to make the "you"
>statement for you.  So that takes it beyond the purely voluntary, but
>then again only so far as the person is biddable by those questions.

I am often liable to bring questions, I believe they can open doors and
windows of insight, provide space to explore.  Sometimes my questions
contain my own convictions within them; is this what you are saying here?
So that questions can be a hidden challenge, a way to disavow
responsibility for my own beliefs and desires, a way to avoid the necessity
of confrontation by hoping the other will admit to whatever it is I see and
avoid naming directly?

>Something to think about, about my own questioning nature, here.  I
>know I won't resolve it immediately.

Definitely food for thought, thank you!

>>I feel that I understand you better, know you more, through your
>>conversation with Judith.  I'm sorry I didn't speak to you myself before
this.
>
>I'm glad you waited until you felt comfortable, and that you did
>eventually feel comfortable, in speaking with me.  And I really
>appreciate the questions.  They came at a very good time, as I was
>still digesting the last discussion with Judith, and wondering what
>will happen in PsyberLand for me.

I often wonder what will happen in Psyberland for me; dialogue like this
keeps me coming back to find out more.

Marie

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 24 May 1998 12:18:35 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <356697f7.192488770@mail.ihug.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Walter,

I know you are away, on a journey, and I hope it is all you wish it to be.
I answer now anyway, before it is my turn to travel!

At 03:57 PM 5/19/98 GMT, you wrote:
>Marie,
>
>I think your care and focus on these questions is a fine effort!

>I don't think you are gone.  I have a sense that you are always here.  I
think
>it is because you respond right on the moment when you do.  You read Psybe-L!
>All the best with that shift & thesis.

Thank you, Walter.  I do read Psyber-L, I am always here -- sometimes more
emotionally invested than other times, sometimes most here in feeling
distant and disconnected (as paradoxical as that seems!).


On void:

>I think the writing of the charter is the role of the listowner  LO, it did
>exist at the time, but was not as well developed.  If I were to sum up the
>essence of any charter it would be:  Respect.  He showed no respect.

Yes, I agree with this.

>At the time my initial silence was that i was away for a day or two in rl.
 >That has to be ok.  I thought the initial responses  by others and you
Marie >were as good as anything i could have done.  I'd like to think we
all can play >our part in responding to disrespect.  I'd hate to think only
a facilitator >can to do all of that.

No, a facilitator is always only part of the process, no matter how the
role is defined.

>What only the list owner can do is kick a member out.  I did not do that
and i
>don't think I would if I had my time over.  Backchannel as HooN suggested
is a
>good idea, as it would alert the list owner to a problem and perhaps allow
for
>some encouragement and thought about appropriate action ... by the person
>writing or the LO.

I had not considered a "backchannel" line of communication as a way to
facilitate process; I think there is much merit in the idea.  As an adjunct
to the group process, of course, not a replacement for it.  Sometimes it is
difficult to see the whole from a stance within, and private dialogue can
allow a stepping back in order to seek a "meta" perspective (using the word
in both your sense, Walter, and Simon's -- separate and alongside, while
still containing the whole).


>There is something else on my mind here ...
>
>I have wanted Psyber-L to be the foyer or open meeting place, the entry place
>for a larger Psybernet endeavour.  That it why it is so open and public.  Yet
>what happens here is WAY beyond foyer stuff.  If Psybernet could make its
next
>spurt of adolescent growth then a few things might change all at once names,
>charters, doors and job names and descriptions.

I find it hard to envision what you mean here, altho I understand the
concept of foyer or open meeting place, and I agree that we go "WAY beyond
foyer stuff" at times.  I can see, then, a place for other groups, closed
and private (like the DreamEvent, whether time-limited or ongoing).  What I
am not clear about is what this "spurt of adolescent growth" might involve?

>Could it be Marie, that the things you were writing about might ... in a
>future Psybernet, be further away from the foyer?  Hence you would have
been >less open to disrespect and attack.  Mind you we will take the shadow
with us >wherever we go unless we turn the light out!

Maybe -- yet I wonder what would then remain here, in the foyer?
Introductions and superficial chatting?  Eruptions of shadow and stretches
of shadow-dancing?  Theoretical discussions?  Swift sorting of members into
sub-groups that fit their style and interests?  I do not assume this would
be a negative evolution, I am just wondering how the web might weave
together, or if it would, and what that might mean.

>> I think the suppression of your discomfort contributed to my sense of being
>> "uneasy" about how you intended to be here.  I never believed that it was
>> your place to make things "easy"
>
>I don't either but going around saying I was the facilitator did something
for
>me in that regard ... I think I saw things happening here i would never have
>happen in a rl group, and if they did I would feel bad.  In a rl group I
would
>have a fee and a fixed number and have some input into the selection!

Yes, when I first came here you often spoke of facilitation, and
leadership, and it no doubt built certain expectations in my mind toward
your role (informed by how I saw you respond and initiate posts over time
here).  Your move away from that term, and that role, made me aware of
issues that had remained underground before, and left me wondering what
would change in respond to this shift in you.  Altho I have seen little
difference in you, beyond more clarity in naming and definition of vision.

>I have no problem with that if the *prime directive* here was a civil
>community.
>What is the rel between a civil community and exploring the psyche?  To what
>extent is this forum a "stage" for the enactment of our whole selves shadow
>included, rather than a country town?

Back to purpose again (what is our "prime directive?") -- back to the issue
of "foyer" again -- back to the question of "temenos" that often arises --
back to wondering how, in this medium, to explore psyche experientially.  I
do not see this as a choice between a "civil community" akin to a "country
town" OR a place for the "enactment of our whole selves shadow included" --
rather how to create a "stage" or find agreement about what we are doing
now that we are on this stage or how we can protect self and others while
we explore/reveal psyche on this stage ...

>> Yes, gradually and almost unwittingly -- we are talking generally, not
>> setting specifics as yet.  And again, only a few of us are involved in this
>> discussion, which concerns all; only certain perspectives have been voiced.
>>  At some point, consensus must be sought, yes?
>
>We might reach some consensus, I hope so.  I also hope we have a good process
>and discussion.  One of the other aspects of list owning is that in the
end >one person decides certain things, the LO.  The list owner does well
to >listen, but is not obliged to go with the majority.  We can expect
certain >responsibilities are fulfilled by the LO.

Consensus might well be expressed in who stays and who leaves after the LO
"decides certain things" and implements them!  I too hope we have a good
process and discussion.  As others have said, I am learning a lot.

It is strange to think of you here, in my country, sharing my geography and
season and time zone!  I hope it is a good experience for you.

bright blessings,

Marie

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 24 May 1998 12:18:43 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: Group Conscience
In-Reply-To:  <199805232256.KAA14987@cyclops.xtra.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 10:52 AM 5/24/98 +1200, you wrote:
>Warm greetings to all subscibers

Welcome, Barry.

>I have been on the list for a couple of months and have followed most
>discussions.  I live in Christchurch, New Zealand, where I work as a
>counsellor, with particular experience in alcohol and drug problems.  I
>have known Walter in real life for ten years, and was an active participant
>in the early days of his Psybernet project when it was a BBS.  I fiddle
>with computers, enjoy finding out how they work (and don't work).

We bring such diverse life context and experience here!  I like that.

>Walter's role in the list intrigues me.  He has a central and complex role,
>I know, but in essence he seems to provide this space called Psyber-L  In
>other subscriber's opinions, does/should he have a therapist role ?  And
>should he provide more support, be more available, than other subscribers ?
> I am thinking of Julienne's posts as I write this.

Walter has always done more than provide this space -- he is a powerful
presence here, the most consistent and visible one, which in itself gives
him a "central and complex role."  It is his vision we are engaged in here,
and it is not easy to determine what the experiential exploration of psyche
in cyberspace means, so his voice and his vision have served as an anchor
point for me -- an example, an inspiration, a model.  It is not as if
someone provided a space for the discussion of "Jungian theory and its
relevance for cyberspace" and said "now, discuss amongst yourselves!"  I
think we are -- all of us, Walter included -- creating the dimensions of
the space as we move within it.

Does he or should he have a therapist role?  Not in my mind, altho the
distinction between facilitator and therapist is easily blurred, and I am
still not clear about the difference between the role of facilitator and
listowner.  Walter is not just another subscriber, one who happens to
provide the space.  He also maintains the charter of the space, and has
power over membership (access and "unsubbing") and even the power to close
the list down, erase the archives.  In times of confusion and conflict, I
find myself looking to Walter for clarification of what fits here and what
does not -- to recall purpose and parameters -- to keep us on course.
Perhaps it is not fair to expect this of him, but he is the central thread,
the one most committed to this place and this process, and the one most
intimately knowledgeable about what has gone on here and what helps or
hinders the process -- sharing this knowledge, sharing his vision for this
place (when it is met and when it is not) is something only he *can* be
expected to do, if others do not or cannot try.

Should he provide more support, be more available than other subscribers?
He usually is, within the group; perhaps that sets up an expectation for
more than he ever meant to offer.  I have heard Walter voice many times his
belief in bringing it to the list -- whatever *it* might be involved -- so
that response to Julienne's private post is consistent, for me, with Walter
as I know him.  I also find him to be caring and compassionate, so I do not
believe that he was cold and callous in his feelings for Julienne and her
situation -- altho I can understand how she might have felt dismissed and
abandonned by him.  Did he have a responsibility to support her, to help
her, to intervene?  Not in a therapeutic sense, this is not therapy -- in a
human sense?  Not more than anyone else -- but it was Walter she wrote to,
privately, so nobody else *could* respond -- probably eliciting his wish to
have her bring it to the list, hoping an honest expression of her feelings
would shift the process in some way, without requiring him to step in and
become the voice of authority.  Delicate situation, this -- I can
understand Julienne's needs in this, and Walter's response -- I don't know
if I see a different and more positive way it might have been handled,
except that perhaps Walter might have explained the reasons for his stance
to Julienne, so it did not feel like a personal rejection.

I think as we become clear about what we are doing here, and why, and how,
that Walter's role will diminish in the intensity of its importance and he
can become more participant and less central.  He does not have a
responsibility to do or be anything, in my mind -- except that he then
loses the possibility of realizing his vision for this place, by default.

Did I answer your question?  Or merely stimulate more?  Either way, it made
me think, and I value that.

Marie









>Barry
>____________________________________
>Barry Kennedy<kennedy.levy@xtra.co.nz>
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L
>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 03:34:04 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v04011700b1884b596c8a@[207.54.160.178]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>>Or intentions. From a list process perspective, yes. On a personal level,
>>your impression of my intentions might not count for anything to me -
>>especially if I think that you're less than a dog ;)
>
>Simon,
>
>Yet, they might especially count for more precisely because one has cast
>another in the 'dog' role. One pattern we've seen here is the escalation
>which follows from the denial of several things in succession:
>
>(1) that one intended to harm
>
>(2) that the harm occurred
>
>(3) that the increase in fear or anger in response to the instigator is the
>instigator's responsibility
>
>***
>
>Another way to put it is: to intentionally act to (apparently) ignore the
>impression may have as its intention a desire to see the impression
>magnified.

Agreed on the pattern. How the intention is to be understood is less clear,
though. It may be that the instigator takes conscious (but, of course, not
open) delight in amplifying the harm that he or she is causing, by
disavowing the intent to cause harm (and the intent to amplify it, of
course). In fact, 'secret delight' may be the (conscious) motivation here
as much as the desire to amplify the harm (and this is about power through
withholding, isn't it?).

However, it may be that the instigator really doesn't see himself or
herself as acting wrongfully - in fact, has a great deal invested, on an
unconscious level, in not recognising that they are acting wrongfully, and
so also in not assigning any value to the response which seeks to tell them
otherwise. Someone in this situation might believe, on an unconscious
level, that they are justified in acting in such a way, in fact might have
a need to act in that way, yet at the same time not be able to admit to
themselves on a conscious level that they are capable of such behaviour,
let alone of feeling justified in exhibiting it. As I understand the double
bind situation (conflicting imperatives resulting in paralysis), this is an
example of it.

In this second situation, the instigator may well interpret accusations of
harm levelled against them as being merely and wholly a symptom of
avoidance on the accuser's part - avoidance, that is, of painful truths
that the instigator is delivering.

HooN, does all this fit in with your concept of the reasoningdrama?


Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 04:51:25 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: on  victims and abusers
In-Reply-To:  <19980523183049.AAB28403@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>, on Sat, 23 May 1998 14:30:33
-0400 you wrote:

>I am not going to continue to explain, defend, or talk
>about this whole incident any more than I want to from
>now on.

Your participation has not been voluntary?  Who was forcing you?

>I take responsibility for my part -

What do you consider your responsibility?  Do you blame even your
participation on others?

>but I refuse
>to carry the group guilt or assume the role of scapegoat
>for you. Clearly there are issues quite outside me, and
>predating my advent on the list.

I don't agree.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 05:12:24 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: Harvard & London
In-Reply-To:  <19980522061754.AAA10801@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
> Boston late next week. When does your conference end, and when do you leave
> Boston? Do you know where you will be staying, in case I get up there?
>
> My phone number, if you want to call me, is 973-746-9030.
>
> You can call me collect late at night if you like, and maybe we can arrange
> something.
>
> Enjoy your travels and conferences. :)


Thank you for the good wishes and offer.  I stay at a B&B a block
or 2 away from Harvard & will be there till Saturday morning, 30
May.

As you can see it is hectic, given a chance I will give you a
call.


Walter

__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 05:12:08 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: Group conscience, Here and Now
In-Reply-To:  <v01550102b18a008cc7eb@[207.54.181.108]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Judith

Let me see if I have got you clearly:

You are uncomfortable with my suggestion that we have this thread
as a cool channel:

1.  Because some of the heated discussion took place when you
were not here.  [The matter of JoAnne's removal from Julienne's
list actually happened out of our view altogether ... or are
there other members of Cha*os here?]

2. Because people's intentions and processes are so different and
complex that silence is as good an intervention as can be had?

3.  That shifts in process come from outside the system in
unexpected and ways!  We don't get anywhere with more of the
same, we need to shift into a new dimension.  You don't have much
faith in debate, (you think you are no good at it so it could
just be sour grapes).

4.  What's the point of some structured intervention ... people
will mix it all up anyway.


Have I got that right, or at least in the right direction?


Walter
Working on my laptop over the Pacific, about half way to LA -- 6
hours to go.

And posted a day later from Boston via my nz isp!


__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 02:07:53 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: group conscience
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Thanks Julienne,

>At 08:03 PM 5/23/98 -0400, Judith wrote:
>>Julienne,
>>thanks for your sharing...I thought as I read your post how different some
>>of our life experiences are...and feeling your sense of involvement in the
>>outer reality around ideations which resonnate to you, the passion I sense
>>as you create...so my experience of you through this time is how connected
>>you are to your life...such a direct connection...because I'm about process
>>I think it often takes me out of direct connection with the content...a
>>flaw maybe...tho once I discovered the Tao years ago I found I understood
>>my detatchment a bit in that framing...
>
>Dear Judith,
>
>Hmmmm...??? <grin> I am wondering what on earth I said?
>Nietzsche speaks of the Dionysian and the Appollonian. The Dionysian
>is the creation frenzy - the inspiration, the sweat and spirit of birthing,
>creating something. The Appollonian is the finished product - the statue
>we admire in the town square or in our gallery .
>
>I suppose my post was Appollonian - my description of what was -
>perhaps without the passion of reflection and involvement? Although
>I do feel passionately involved in what I have created.:) I was not really
>describing the process...my process.

What I was alluding to was your creation of- for want of a better word-
organizations around ideas you seem to be passionate about...ie: the
astrological group...my life experience has been around supporting others
in their process of creation, around *their* vision...since my own personal
work was focused on the inner plane, it was never visible...plus I negated
all attempts in my worklife to be put into positions of
responsibility...never interested me...what was interesting to me was that
women around me were fighting to get into these types of positions some
successful some not and the opportunities for me just came...men in
business wereare very comfortable with me because I was raised yes as the
*son* so I knew how the men's world worked...I was more comfortable
there...(I also am blond :-) BTW...
>
>>I'm wondering if the group you spoke of creating is a mixed gender
>>group...(I ask this delicately from an interest in how gender might play
>>out...I did a bit of research in my master's in workplace learning on
>>gender perception of *team*...fun...plus I must reveal that I was raised
>>the oldest son in a family of two girls and have been until recently more
>>comfortable with men)
>
>I am absolutely intrigued by your question! :) What made you ask this?
>And did you mean to say you were raised the eldest "son"? What
>gender are you now?>

yes, raised as the eldest son with all the familial societal pressures the
son has...all boy playmates...I have been and am very much a female...but
one of the fallouts of being raised with a trumpet and not a doll was that
I completely rejected giving birth...my then husband and I adopted...in
fact I wrote a story in 5th grade which would have been in the late 40's I
think about adopting a blond boy...

I asked this because I continue to be intrigued by the interactions between
men and women...so much of my work through the early 90's coaching people
through transformation has been around the generalized assumptions...just
asking to update my perceptions after a few years away from it given all
the focus and learning which is out there in my world...
>
>Of course it is mixed gender - probably five or more genders - I don't
>think there are just two - certainly not according to gender researchers.
my data is most likely obsolete which is why I was curious
>
>I was raised the oldest girl in a family of three younger boys. I have
>usually not been more comfortable with men, because the "golden
>girl" as a man called me last week, is often not popular with men.
>And professionally I found what I created being taken away by men
>frequently - men who "won't work for a woman" and such. And in
>truth, it was not just men who behaved this way, but also women.
>Beyond all that, I love men, and despite the above, have had and
>continue to have many wonderful male associates as well as
>female, and a very romantic and deep and poetic and wonderful
>and magical and profound and and and...love life. :)
>
>Is that what you were asking?

you know it just dawned on me that my questions could be construed to
assume I am a lesbian...better be clear that I am not so that isn't where
my questions came from...
>
>If you are asking if my gender made a difference to my experience -
>and to people's response to me - yes. And my age. I started most
>of this very young. And I am not a "masculine" looking woman - which
>complicated things even more. Long legs and long blonde hair
>confuse people - as does such a person breast-feeding babies
>at board meetings. :)

yes, nor am I...but the complication that occured with me was that the
women were baffled and jeolous and I didn't understand why...I was just
doing my life...and the men were completely open to me which I attributed
to my understanding of how they were...which was why I was successful
selling financial information systems everywhere in my 14 state territory-
except the South ;_)

>
>But I'm not sure what you really want to know - so will wait until
>you tell me if there is more you want to know.:)
>
>Julienne

Your post helped make sense of my *sense* of you...I see one of the
differences is that I rejected the "golden girl" option that kept being
cast on me...preferred being invisible which allowed me to move around and
do my work unnoticed...I played out my golden girl on stage, literally, in
the theatre...

Thanks,
Judith

>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 02:55:11 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: Group conscience, Here and Now
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Thanks Walter for seeking to clarify my uncomfortable sense...multiple
choice:-) is helpful

>Judith
>
>Let me see if I have got you clearly:
>
>You are uncomfortable with my suggestion that we have this thread
>as a cool channel:

no...
>
>1.  Because some of the heated discussion took place when you
>were not here.  [The matter of JoAnne's removal from Julienne's
>list actually happened out of our view altogether ... or are
>there other members of Cha*os here?]

I don't have a sense of the conflict, but I do have a sense that two
intelligent women are out of sinc and that's fine as far as I'm
concerned...I figure if they have a need to resolve the issue they will, if
not, not...

>
>2. Because people's intentions and processes are so different and
>complex that silence is as good an intervention as can be had?

I don't have an expectation of intervention...
>
>3.  That shifts in process come from outside the system in
>unexpected and ways!  We don't get anywhere with more of the
>same, we need to shift into a new dimension.  You don't have much
>faith in debate, (you think you are no good at it so it could
>just be sour grapes).

maybe this is what I was sensing...my experience of uncomfortability has to
do with first, the space here. Often I'm not sure how to address people,
feeling sensative to everyone...on a very simple level it is about
manners...so it is simply a form issue at one level

second, my way of working does not include intervention...so I think what I
was responding to was your intervention, my sense of the conflict between
JoAnne and Juilene led me to just let it be...I didn't sense any desire on
either part to resolve the conflict...it just was...I have had this
experience in decoding my own way of being in relationship to my work...I
don't make any actions to intervene...if someone wants to work thru
something fine, but I make no attempt to intervene...in an oblique way this
is my way of honoring both sides...interestingly I was very comfortable
with whatever conflict was going on, but uncomfortable with the aspect of
intervention...I realize there are issues around your role hereand
experiences which I have not had...

>
>4.  What's the point of some structured intervention ... people
>will mix it all up anyway.

Again, I don't come from a place of intervention...and yes, my experience
has been that there are those that like to mix it up, engage in debate,
vent, whatever...it just isn't my way...no judgment, just a way of being...
>
>
>Have I got that right, or at least in the right direction?
your disecting asked me to clarify the feeling I had... I suppose I could
have said that I felt uncomfortable with the notion of intervention...my
projection into the situation...I have no sense of how JoAnne or Juliene
reacted to your offer...
>
>
>Walter
>Working on my laptop over the Pacific, about half way to LA -- 6
>hours to go.

God speed, and enjoy our space here in the US
Blessings,
Judith
>
>And posted a day later from Boston via my nz isp!
>
>
>__________________________________________________________________
>Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 06:56:00 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: Harvard & London
In-Reply-To:  <3.0.1.32.19980524121835.008da4cc@qed.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

All,

Marie wrote,

> It is strange to think of you here, in my country, sharing my geography and
> season and time zone!  I hope it is a good experience for you.

Thanks, and yes I am!  Thanks too to all the others who have
wished me well in this venture.  It is very nice to get such
encouragement, on top of it alredy being such a buzz!

I'm here in Cambridge after a day in LA  with Charles, Anne and
Emlyn ... it is amazing how quiet it is meeting people in
cyberspace compared with rl.  <grin>  Wonderful hosts and good
conversations.  Interesting to contrast the experience of knowing
someone in two places like that.   Thanks again for the
hospitality Charles and Anne.  Seeing LA was like being on the
CHiPS set ... but what can I expect from an overnight visit?

Arrived in Boston by night and took a taxi to my *wonderful* B&B
place which is within minutes walk of Harvard University and
Harvard Square.  I have only seen it by night but it is beautiful
... tree lined streets, cobbled footpaths, elegant solid old
mansions.  Saw a plaque saying:  that the road was known as Tory
Row because wealthy people, loyal to the Crown lived there before
the Revolution!  Had a very late night snack in the Le Bon Pain
in the square (a vege and feta wrap, not bad) and eyed up
Wordsworth bookshop, the Radio Shack and other places to visit in
the morning, which will be the Memorial Day holiday here.  I have
in the meantime learned that I am not far from MIT and across the
river is the BU, a huge university.  The weather has been warm
and pleasant!

I have tried to phone AOL to see if I can get a temporary address
here ... their 800 827 6364 provided by the directory service did
not work!  Hmmm perhaps it is not worth the trouble.  I will
investigate more ...

Looking forward to the conference ...

Walter

















__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 12:08:57 +0300
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Anita Konkka <anitak@MEGABAUD.FI>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hello Marie,

You  wrote on  void:
>He came here out of nowhere, unknown and without context, and I was an
>(apparently) easy  >target for his barrage of criticism.  He swiftly and
with >glee shifted to
>others.  I never had a feeling it was *about* me, and that made a
>difference.  I would have felt very differently if that same post came from
>someone else, someone I knew here and who knew me.>

At  first I thought that  he was she  - and  someone  who  has been  on the
list, because s/he  attacked   you as if  s/he  had known   your  central ,
dynamical role  as * a group- anima*.  I supposed  that she  was Wilbur's
wife, because she had told, that  she liked  to play with  her identity and
gender on the AOL-lists. The  Psyber-group  rejected  that kind of plays,
and she unsubbed.  So, when  void  came  "out of nowhere", I  thought that
s/he is  the incarnation of   Wilbur's  wife,  she  wants  "a sport and  a
pastime",  let's  take it as a game. At that time  I didn't   think how
dangerous  that kind of  virtual plays and games are.
    Later, when  void  attacked  Wilbur,  I began to suspect that  s/he is
not Wilbur's  wife  but  his shadow. The had so many   common  stylistic
and other features. I remarked that  they  are as like as two peas,  and
then  void  stopped to write on the list.
    To my mind the  void-episode was not  so  destructive  as * the  great
gender war*  followed by  it. Nobody  unsubbed  because of void.

My  warm regards
Anita

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 12:29:00 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v03110700b18e599dbe1b@[195.200.17.214]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>In this second situation, the instigator may well interpret accusations of
>harm levelled against them as being merely and wholly a symptom of
>avoidance on the accuser's part - avoidance, that is, of painful truths
>that the instigator is delivering.
>
>HooN, does all this fit in with your concept of the reasoningdrama?

>Simon,

I think it requires a bit more deconstruction, so that we may learn what
the 'gap' is between the person's own rules, or the doing of the process
that the rule implies.

Example: the rule formulated by the above example is:

<< If my intention is to do deliver the truth no matter how painful it is
for other persons, then I am freed from responsibility for any harm this
truth may cause other persons, "after all it is just the truth I am
delivering".>>

"Delivering the truth alleviates my responsibility for its effects."

(Or, alternately, this is the rationale.)

***

The drama is revealed in examining the implications of this rationale in
terms of *doing*. So, the process here is twofold: one, delivering the
truth; two, taking the standpoint at which one is freed from responsibility
for the effects of this truth.

The drama, the gap, is obvious: one cannot *do this standpoint.* We may
make it our rule, the willingness to deliver truths regardless, (our
reasoning,) but have a great deal of trouble freeing our self from the
'responsibility'. There's the drama, with its attending drama.

Put another way: a person states, "I've told you the truth and I'm freed
from the responsibility of what the truth causes."

The person has stated their rule. Now, to uncover the process, one asks:

What are you doing to be free from responsibility? What does it feel like,
this freedom? Tell me what the standpoint of being freed is like!

rule...process; reasoning...drama.

***

It is important to understand that I'm not trying to sort this out using
psychoid structures, ( as you write "However, it may be that the instigator
really doesn't see himself or herself as acting wrongfully - in fact, has a
great deal invested, on an unconscious level, in not recognising that they
are acting wrongfully, and so also in not assigning any value to the
response which seeks to tell them otherwise.") but instead am trying to
sort out the difference in implications between expressed rules and
processes which, generally, are not fulfilled even as they are implied by
the rules.

There is plenty of paradox in the 'psychology of intention'!

***

If one does the process of 'being freed from responsibility' then,
necessarily, the conceit of the intention is exposed, *none cannot free
ones' self from responsibility; delivering the truth cannot do this...nor
can 'doing the standpoint'.

***

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 12:38:38 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v04011702b18efd560e65@[207.54.160.78]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Let's try it again.

If one does the process of 'being freed from responsibility' then,
necessarily, the conceit of the intention is exposed, *one cannot free
one's self from responsibility; delivering the truth cannot do this...nor
can 'doing the standpoint'.

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 10:31:13 -0600
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Robert Longpre <odyssey@CYBERSURF.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

HooN,

> Let's try it again.
>
> If one does the process of 'being freed from responsibility' then,
> necessarily, the conceit of the intention is exposed, *one cannot free
> one's self from responsibility; delivering the truth cannot do this...nor
> can 'doing the standpoint'.

This I understand.  This rings as authentic within me.  There is no
freedom from responsibility.  One can (and often does) act irresponsibly
by stating that personal responsibility in held by another for the state
of affairs.  A sick planet ... responsible; starving children and street
peoples ... responsible; disparity in the distribution of wealth and
resources ... responsible.  There are no areas of being "freed from
responsibility".  Giving up responsibility is giving up consciousness.
Such is the power of "choice", choosing to be absent.

Robert

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 13:10:38 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <35699CD1.2B7@cybersurf.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Robert, all,

So here's the question:

What do we do when we do *responsibility*?

***

wondering,

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 14:04:42 -0600
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Robert Longpre <odyssey@CYBERSURF.NET>
Subject:      Responsibility
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

HooN, all

HooN, you ask:

> What do we do when we do *responsibility*?

It isn't so much the "what" as it is the "doing".  We make our own
choices.  We are our own judge.

Robert

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 17:12:04 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         VarMan <VarMan@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Subject:      please
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

please don't send me anymore of your funny little stories

Judith Buerkel wrote:

> Thanks Julienne,
>
> >At 08:03 PM 5/23/98 -0400, Judith wrote:
> >>Julienne,
> >>thanks for your sharing...I thought as I read your post how different some
> >>of our life experiences are...and feeling your sense of involvement in the
> >>outer reality around ideations which resonnate to you, the passion I sense
> >>as you create...so my experience of you through this time is how connected
> >>you are to your life...such a direct connection...because I'm about process
> >>I think it often takes me out of direct connection with the content...a
> >>flaw maybe...tho once I discovered the Tao years ago I found I understood
> >>my detatchment a bit in that framing...
> >
> >Dear Judith,
> >
> >Hmmmm...??? <grin> I am wondering what on earth I said?
> >Nietzsche speaks of the Dionysian and the Appollonian. The Dionysian
> >is the creation frenzy - the inspiration, the sweat and spirit of birthing,
> >creating something. The Appollonian is the finished product - the statue
> >we admire in the town square or in our gallery .
> >
> >I suppose my post was Appollonian - my description of what was -
> >perhaps without the passion of reflection and involvement? Although
> >I do feel passionately involved in what I have created.:) I was not really
> >describing the process...my process.
>
> What I was alluding to was your creation of- for want of a better word-
> organizations around ideas you seem to be passionate about...ie: the
> astrological group...my life experience has been around supporting others
> in their process of creation, around *their* vision...since my own personal
> work was focused on the inner plane, it was never visible...plus I negated
> all attempts in my worklife to be put into positions of
> responsibility...never interested me...what was interesting to me was that
> women around me were fighting to get into these types of positions some
> successful some not and the opportunities for me just came...men in
> business wereare very comfortable with me because I was raised yes as the
> *son* so I knew how the men's world worked...I was more comfortable
> there...(I also am blond :-) BTW...
> >
> >>I'm wondering if the group you spoke of creating is a mixed gender
> >>group...(I ask this delicately from an interest in how gender might play
> >>out...I did a bit of research in my master's in workplace learning on
> >>gender perception of *team*...fun...plus I must reveal that I was raised
> >>the oldest son in a family of two girls and have been until recently more
> >>comfortable with men)
> >
> >I am absolutely intrigued by your question! :) What made you ask this?
> >And did you mean to say you were raised the eldest "son"? What
> >gender are you now?>
>
> yes, raised as the eldest son with all the familial societal pressures the
> son has...all boy playmates...I have been and am very much a female...but
> one of the fallouts of being raised with a trumpet and not a doll was that
> I completely rejected giving birth...my then husband and I adopted...in
> fact I wrote a story in 5th grade which would have been in the late 40's I
> think about adopting a blond boy...
>
> I asked this because I continue to be intrigued by the interactions between
> men and women...so much of my work through the early 90's coaching people
> through transformation has been around the generalized assumptions...just
> asking to update my perceptions after a few years away from it given all
> the focus and learning which is out there in my world...
> >
> >Of course it is mixed gender - probably five or more genders - I don't
> >think there are just two - certainly not according to gender researchers.
> my data is most likely obsolete which is why I was curious
> >
> >I was raised the oldest girl in a family of three younger boys. I have
> >usually not been more comfortable with men, because the "golden
> >girl" as a man called me last week, is often not popular with men.
> >And professionally I found what I created being taken away by men
> >frequently - men who "won't work for a woman" and such. And in
> >truth, it was not just men who behaved this way, but also women.
> >Beyond all that, I love men, and despite the above, have had and
> >continue to have many wonderful male associates as well as
> >female, and a very romantic and deep and poetic and wonderful
> >and magical and profound and and and...love life. :)
> >
> >Is that what you were asking?
>
> you know it just dawned on me that my questions could be construed to
> assume I am a lesbian...better be clear that I am not so that isn't where
> my questions came from...
> >
> >If you are asking if my gender made a difference to my experience -
> >and to people's response to me - yes. And my age. I started most
> >of this very young. And I am not a "masculine" looking woman - which
> >complicated things even more. Long legs and long blonde hair
> >confuse people - as does such a person breast-feeding babies
> >at board meetings. :)
>
> yes, nor am I...but the complication that occured with me was that the
> women were baffled and jeolous and I didn't understand why...I was just
> doing my life...and the men were completely open to me which I attributed
> to my understanding of how they were...which was why I was successful
> selling financial information systems everywhere in my 14 state territory-
> except the South ;_)
>
> >
> >But I'm not sure what you really want to know - so will wait until
> >you tell me if there is more you want to know.:)
> >
> >Julienne
>
> Your post helped make sense of my *sense* of you...I see one of the
> differences is that I rejected the "golden girl" option that kept being
> cast on me...preferred being invisible which allowed me to move around and
> do my work unnoticed...I played out my golden girl on stage, literally, in
> the theatre...
>
> Thanks,
> Judith
>
> >
> >_______________________________________________________________
> >For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
> >LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
> LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 17:17:04 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         VarMan <VarMan@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Subject:      me
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I am the victom. Please quit tying-up my mailbox

Julienne wrote:

> At 03:47 PM 5/23/98 +0300, Anita wrote:
> >Hello Julienne,
> >I wonder, who is  a  victim, and who is an abuser.  You are complaining,
> >that Walter didn't   reply to you , when  you were being  abused by the big,
> >bad  Wilbur-male.  Why did  you keep on arguing with Wilbur,  all the more
> >as since your father  was dying at that time - he could have been dead any
> >morning - as you said. How  you  had energy  to write  on the list  at such
> >a trying time?  It is  totally incomprehensible to me.
>
> I didn't have the energy to "argue" - which was why I turned to my son for
> his
> assessment of what was going, and let his words stand for mine. I tried, after
> Wilbur and JoAnne attacked and attacked, to explain, restate, and do all the
> reasonable things one can try to do when one's words have been distorted
> and one has become the brunt of that type of attack. I also withdrew from
> contributing to the List, but the discussion "about" me went on as though
> I were contributing to it.
>
> >    Maybe you are not  quite honest to yourself -    maybe you  want/ fish
> >for  empathy  and sympathy.  It's so human.  When I read some days ago you
> >post  addressed to Walter,  I felt   some discordance.  I recalled  one of
> >your former posts.   To my mind it  was very abusing.   You abused  your
> >son,  i.e.  took unfair  advantage of his words  against Wilbur - see below.
>
> My 25 year old son knew exactly where his words were going, and he
> saw Wilbur's attacks on me as the abuse.  I was more vulnerable
> because my father was dying, and my thinking not as clear as it
> might have been because I was getting 3-4 hours of sleep at night.
>
> I think you need to look, Anita, at why you were so willing to join the mass
> attack on me, to so easily join JoAnne's attack on me when I first appeared
> on the list. You didn't know me at all - but you were willing to join the
> attack
> and add your own embellishments.
>
> >That's  the  indirect aggressive way often used  by  women, and  then  they
> >wonder why  a man hits.  Some women are looking  for it.  So  who is a
> >victim, and who an abuser?  After that post Wilbur  hit you  very hard,
> >because he was  hurt by you so painfully.   That's  my  feeling , an
> >outsider's view, not  necessary right.
>
> It became quite apparent on this list that many of you thought that
> I "asked for it".  And boy you gave it to me. Wilbur didn't hit me
> very hard "after" that post - Wilbur hit me the minute I suggested
> to him that the differences between men and women are not
> that clear - that we are still exploring what is genetic and
> biochemical and what is sociologically programmed. Wilbur
> started prating about how he was a "real" man, and parading
> his stories of how he beat up people and smashed their ribs.
> I hurt my rib soon after - clearly my subconscious reacting to
> Wilbur. This created a real crisis, because I could no longer
> move my immobile father  - and there was no one else here
> very often to do it.
>
> The idea that women, children, anyone, is "looking to be
> hit" is ignorant, and angry, and an excuse used by those
>  who are violent and condone violence. I suggest
> you read some of the literature on battered women and
> children. The excuse "She provoked it", is the most
> common excuse used by wife-and children-batterers.
>
> I am not going to continue to explain, defend, or talk
> about this whole incident any more than I want to from
> now on.  I take responsibility for my part - but I refuse
> to carry the group guilt or assume the role of scapegoat
> for you. Clearly there are issues quite outside me, and
> predating my advent on the list. Deal with it. My father
> has died, I am healing, and I will not be  a part of such
> an event again.
>
> Julienne
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
> LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 17:44:17 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         VarMan <VarMan@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Subject:      Re: please
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I tried your way it did not work

VarMan wrote:

> please don't send me anymore of your funny little stories
>
> Judith Buerkel wrote:
>
> > Thanks Julienne,
> >
> > >At 08:03 PM 5/23/98 -0400, Judith wrote:
> > >>Julienne,
> > >>thanks for your sharing...I thought as I read your post how different some
> > >>of our life experiences are...and feeling your sense of involvement in the
> > >>outer reality around ideations which resonnate to you, the passion I sense
> > >>as you create...so my experience of you through this time is how connected
> > >>you are to your life...such a direct connection...because I'm about process
> > >>I think it often takes me out of direct connection with the content...a
> > >>flaw maybe...tho once I discovered the Tao years ago I found I understood
> > >>my detatchment a bit in that framing...
> > >
> > >Dear Judith,
> > >
> > >Hmmmm...??? <grin> I am wondering what on earth I said?
> > >Nietzsche speaks of the Dionysian and the Appollonian. The Dionysian
> > >is the creation frenzy - the inspiration, the sweat and spirit of birthing,
> > >creating something. The Appollonian is the finished product - the statue
> > >we admire in the town square or in our gallery .
> > >
> > >I suppose my post was Appollonian - my description of what was -
> > >perhaps without the passion of reflection and involvement? Although
> > >I do feel passionately involved in what I have created.:) I was not really
> > >describing the process...my process.
> >
> > What I was alluding to was your creation of- for want of a better word-
> > organizations around ideas you seem to be passionate about...ie: the
> > astrological group...my life experience has been around supporting others
> > in their process of creation, around *their* vision...since my own personal
> > work was focused on the inner plane, it was never visible...plus I negated
> > all attempts in my worklife to be put into positions of
> > responsibility...never interested me...what was interesting to me was that
> > women around me were fighting to get into these types of positions some
> > successful some not and the opportunities for me just came...men in
> > business wereare very comfortable with me because I was raised yes as the
> > *son* so I knew how the men's world worked...I was more comfortable
> > there...(I also am blond :-) BTW...
> > >
> > >>I'm wondering if the group you spoke of creating is a mixed gender
> > >>group...(I ask this delicately from an interest in how gender might play
> > >>out...I did a bit of research in my master's in workplace learning on
> > >>gender perception of *team*...fun...plus I must reveal that I was raised
> > >>the oldest son in a family of two girls and have been until recently more
> > >>comfortable with men)
> > >
> > >I am absolutely intrigued by your question! :) What made you ask this?
> > >And did you mean to say you were raised the eldest "son"? What
> > >gender are you now?>
> >
> > yes, raised as the eldest son with all the familial societal pressures the
> > son has...all boy playmates...I have been and am very much a female...but
> > one of the fallouts of being raised with a trumpet and not a doll was that
> > I completely rejected giving birth...my then husband and I adopted...in
> > fact I wrote a story in 5th grade which would have been in the late 40's I
> > think about adopting a blond boy...
> >
> > I asked this because I continue to be intrigued by the interactions between
> > men and women...so much of my work through the early 90's coaching people
> > through transformation has been around the generalized assumptions...just
> > asking to update my perceptions after a few years away from it given all
> > the focus and learning which is out there in my world...
> > >
> > >Of course it is mixed gender - probably five or more genders - I don't
> > >think there are just two - certainly not according to gender researchers.
> > my data is most likely obsolete which is why I was curious
> > >
> > >I was raised the oldest girl in a family of three younger boys. I have
> > >usually not been more comfortable with men, because the "golden
> > >girl" as a man called me last week, is often not popular with men.
> > >And professionally I found what I created being taken away by men
> > >frequently - men who "won't work for a woman" and such. And in
> > >truth, it was not just men who behaved this way, but also women.
> > >Beyond all that, I love men, and despite the above, have had and
> > >continue to have many wonderful male associates as well as
> > >female, and a very romantic and deep and poetic and wonderful
> > >and magical and profound and and and...love life. :)
> > >
> > >Is that what you were asking?
> >
> > you know it just dawned on me that my questions could be construed to
> > assume I am a lesbian...better be clear that I am not so that isn't where
> > my questions came from...
> > >
> > >If you are asking if my gender made a difference to my experience -
> > >and to people's response to me - yes. And my age. I started most
> > >of this very young. And I am not a "masculine" looking woman - which
> > >complicated things even more. Long legs and long blonde hair
> > >confuse people - as does such a person breast-feeding babies
> > >at board meetings. :)
> >
> > yes, nor am I...but the complication that occured with me was that the
> > women were baffled and jeolous and I didn't understand why...I was just
> > doing my life...and the men were completely open to me which I attributed
> > to my understanding of how they were...which was why I was successful
> > selling financial information systems everywhere in my 14 state territory-
> > except the South ;_)
> >
> > >
> > >But I'm not sure what you really want to know - so will wait until
> > >you tell me if there is more you want to know.:)
> > >
> > >Julienne
> >
> > Your post helped make sense of my *sense* of you...I see one of the
> > differences is that I rejected the "golden girl" option that kept being
> > cast on me...preferred being invisible which allowed me to move around and
> > do my work unnoticed...I played out my golden girl on stage, literally, in
> > the theatre...
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Judith
> >
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________________________
> > >For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
> > >LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________
> > For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
> > LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
> LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 15:51:32 -0600
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Robert Longpre <odyssey@CYBERSURF.NET>
Subject:      Re: please
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

VarMan wrote:
>
> I tried your way it did not work
>
> VarMan wrote:
>
> > please don't send me anymore of your funny little stories

Hello VarMan ...

I'm confused by your three postings which have few words but have
attached long previously posted e-mails.  Can I help you here?

Robert

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 25 May 1998 19:36:48 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: Responsibility
In-Reply-To:  <3569CEDA.22A5@cybersurf.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Robert,

Let's play with this. What do we do when we do *responsibility*.

You reply, (my rephrasing,)

One makes choices.

One judges.

So, what is one doing? What/How does it feel?

What else is going on?

***

HooN


>HooN, you ask:
>
>> What do we do when we do *responsibility*?
>
>It isn't so much the "what" as it is the "doing".  We make our own
>choices.  We are our own judge.
>
>Robert
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 26 May 1998 04:24:58 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: Intro
In-Reply-To:  <a28e201.35663e52@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

John

> I'm realatively new to the Internet and
> sometimes worry that I'll spend too much time at the computer rather than
> livinmg life!  I like to keep it simple.  I tend to be an observer.

Welcome again ... interesting interets!  Just right for here.  Your concern:

Too much time at the computer

Might make a good thread here in its own right.

My comment:  Yeah!  Hi time we could get into psyberspace without the gadgets!


Walter
__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 26 May 1998 04:25:04 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: Group Conscience
In-Reply-To:  <199805232256.KAA14987@cyclops.xtra.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Barry,

Good to see you here again.

> In other subscriber's opinions, does/should he have a therapist role ?  And
> should he provide more support, be more available, than other subscribers ?

I look forward to the discussion!


Walter


__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 26 May 1998 06:22:40 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Moonasylum <moonasylum@QED.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <199805250908.MAA18194@walrus.megabaud.fi>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hello Anita,

Good to hear from you!

At 12:08 PM 5/25/98 +0300, you wrote:
>Hello Marie,
>
>You  wrote on  void:

>At  first I thought that  he was she  - and  someone  who  has been  on the
>list, because s/he  attacked   you as if  s/he  had known   your  central ,
>dynamical role  as * a group- anima*.

I am curious to know what you mean by this!  I have not seen seen myself as
having a "central, dynamical role" here and I am at all sure what you mean
by "a group- anima."  Could you tell me more, please?

***

>    To my mind the  void-episode was not  so  destructive  as * the  great
>gender war*  followed by  it. Nobody  unsubbed  because of void.

Yes, I agree -- but it was more complex than * the great gender war*
implies, I think -- and the fallout continues.  I hope it can be discussed
without reviving the destructive dynamics that fueled it.

>My  warm regards

And mine,

Marie

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 26 May 1998 13:24:04 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: Group conscience, Here and Now
In-Reply-To:  <v01550100b18e8576008f@[207.54.160.168]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Judith,

> Thanks Walter for seeking to clarify my uncomfortable sense...multiple
> choice:-) is helpful

Haha ... (Im chuckling away here to my self ... i don't know how
to type that ... my son Josh goes; hehehe)  It was not intended
as multiple choice!  I was attempting to be as accurate as i
could in grasping you with my (male?) mind.  That is what is
funny ... as long as we get there, all is well.


> I don't have an expectation of intervention...

Ok, but processing in a cool channel is a form of intervention?
that is what i was thinking of.

I wrote, attempting to tune into where you are at:
> >3.  That shifts in process come from outside the system in
> >unexpected and ways!  We don't get anywhere with more of the
> >same, we need to shift into a new dimension.  You don't have much
> >faith in debate, (you think you are no good at it so it could
> >just be sour grapes).


To which you replied:
> maybe this is what I was sensing...my experience of uncomfortability has to
> do with first, the space here. Often I'm not sure how to address people,
> feeling sensative to everyone...on a very simple level it is about
> manners...so it is simply a form issue at one level

Please say more on this.  Which aspects of form are you thinking
of.  I have found some of the many layered posts difficult to
follow ... but that is not what you are thinking of?


> second, my way of working does not include intervention...so I think what I
> was responding to was your intervention ...

Now I am clear in what you are saying.  I am thinking of
intervention from me as participant, as participation more than
intervention.  As such I am not comfortable with the level of
discord ... not that I can't stand it, or delete it, but because
it is going nowhere or if it is going somewhere I can't see it!
Hence i see it as representing something 'stuck' in me too, and
in the list as a whole.  Everything is connected!

On second thoughts i can see there is movement in the discussion
(though I may not be up to date!)  The posts are short and to the
point.  This is a step on from the exchanges six months ago.
Easier on me as participant!

> >4.  What's the point of some structured intervention ... people
> >will mix it all up anyway.
>
> Again, I don't come from a place of intervention...and yes, my experience
> has been that there are those that like to mix it up, engage in debate,
> vent, whatever...it just isn't my way...no judgment, just a way of being...

I experience you as non-jugmental on this.  I am as well, though
i don't think i come across that way as I am saying "I don't like
the feeling tone of the debate.  I don't like the debate format
here:  You did this, No I did not, yes you did, i disagree.  I
don't like that here!"  I say that feeling respect for the people
and distaste for the methods of discourse.  My way of being.

I have a sense that i am writing here in the cool channel.  My
comments are in quote marks, as if i am standing along side what
I have said.  I am utterly reluctant to simply go out there and
say it directly to the antagonists.   I have done that before to
no avail.  Perhaps i haven't found the right tone ... found a way
to do it that feels right and works.

Anecdote:

I recall in  training workshop I was the "client" and regressed
to an incoherent state and in deep despair.  The trainee
therapist was making me feel words with every word they said.
The trainer instructed the trainee to tell me to "pause" in that
state until the trainee with the group had worked out what to do
next.  I think i just went to sleep under a blanket ... for what
seemed like an hour.  I recall them making complex diagrams on
the board.  Then ... the trainee gently woke me and said
something wonderful,  I think it was gently and kindly ...
"Choose someone to be your mother and tell your mother what you
want."  Something like that. What a relief.

OK that is therapy!  This is not therapy, yet we have spoken of
the value of back channel and cool channels and "test shadows" so
i think what we do here is worthwhile.

After all we are here to explore the psyche in psyberspace ...
and not just to do the same thing over and over, but to move into
other levels, realms.  Ooops we are not doing the same thing over
and over ... this is still IMO, a ... shift in the process.

So Judith, is this intervention or simply a discussion of
process?  I think of it as the latter, but I hope that processing
like this has some use ... leads to moments of ahah and shifts
that have impact ... on the current conflicts, other discussions
and the tone of the whole place and ... me.


Walter

Way behind now, so far I can't get on a US ISP,  AOL, with a NZ
credit card!  It has worked all day buying books! <grin>.  The
telephones here don't have many live people, voices keep asking
for more numbers, usually ones that don't make sense or cut me
off!  Grrrr.

I am loving the beautiful city of Cambridge!  A delight to be
here.







__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 01:02:00 +0300
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Anita Konkka <anitak@MEGABAUD.FI>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Marie,

You wrote:

>I am curious to know what you mean by this!  I have not seen myself as
>having a "central, dynamical role" here and I am at all sure what you mean
>by "a group- anima."  Could you tell me more, please?

Okay, I try   to explain shortly in  spite of my  language barrier.  I
simply mean that  that  there is  soulfulness,  or a deeper emotional  i.e.
anima-like  level  in  your writings.  Although you often keep silent, I
feel  that you are not  absent.   Never mind,  it is my  experience, perhaps
a projection! A  group-anima is like  a group-spirit, but more deep, more
feminine. When void attacked you  I felt that   the attack  was  not
personally  directed against you, but   generally towards  the  list's
feeling-side.  I  wondered  what are  her motives, and  supposed that  s/ he
had  some   problem  with  her  femininity, maybe she  is  jealous, or
something like that.  One  cannot ever know  on the  Net, what  words  hit
someone's sore point.

Bon voyage!
Anita

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 03:53:07 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Welcome Carole Gordon
In-Reply-To:  <199805261212.AAA08858@icarus.ihug.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Carole Gordon,

Welcome.  I hope you find this "place" and the people to your
liking.  What brings you here?

Walter

> Tue, 26 May 1998 08:14:15
>
> Carole  Gordon <carole.gordon@ABCOL.AC.UK>  has  just  subscribed to  the
> PSYBER-L list (Psybernet Mailing List).

__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 01:45:09 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <199805250908.MAA18194@walrus.megabaud.fi>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 12:08 PM 5/25/98 +0300, Anita wrote:
>    Later, when  void  attacked  Wilbur,  I began to suspect that  s/he is
>not Wilbur's  wife  but  his shadow. The had so many   common  stylistic
>and other features. I remarked that  they  are as like as two peas,  and
>then  void  stopped to write on the list.
>    To my mind the  void-episode was not  so  destructive  as * the  great
>gender war*  followed by  it. Nobody  unsubbed  because of void.

Void unsubbed. Maybe if those of us who were new and involved in
what you call "the gender war" had unsubbed would you also have
said "nobody unsubbed?"

"The gender wars" is a very inadequate title for that episode.

Also, maybe some of the feelings from the Void episode
carried over and fueled the next event..."gender wars plus".

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 08:32:23 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      New Threads
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

New Threads

There are several new people on the list and I want to mention
that it is of course a good idea to start new threads.  It is
fine too for us to continue our old ones!

~~~

In the Listserv (r) software that we use *thread* is formed when
we use the exact same Subject line.  (The Re: is usually added
automatically.)  Most email programs can sort all the posts in a
folder by "Thread".  By default the archives on the web are
viewed by Thread.

Please follow this convention with some care.  Only use a new
Subject line if you consciously wish to start a new thread.
Knowing when and how to do that is an art in its own right!

~~~

I will put the above information in the Welcome file, it has
never been spelt out clearly, so old and new people here may need
to be *conscious* as we post.

Walter




__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 08:45:53 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Welcome Kate Collie!
In-Reply-To:  <199805262131.JAA18523@icarus.ihug.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Welcome Kate Collie,

I hope you find this a place of good discussion and fruitful
exploration.  Please let us know more about you and your
interests.

Walter


> Tue, 26 May 1998 17:33:05
>
> Kate Collie  <kcollie@UNIXG.UBC.CA> has  just subscribed to  the PSYBER-L
> list (Psybernet Mailing List).

__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 08:46:10 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <19980527054907.AAB7759@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Julienne,

you wrote:

> "The gender wars" is a very inadequate title for that episode.

Do you feel hurt by that title?

I would say there were several episodes or wars intertwined and
inter-related.  I would wish to call them something that feels
accurate to me and to you.  Do you have a title?  When you say
"gender wars plus" it seems you are ok with the title after all
as long as it includes the void episode, is that right?  Perhaps
it needs to exclude the discussion between you and JoAnne?

Did you know that an early announcment that void has unsubbed was
wrong, and that he (she, if Anita's, not my, intuition is right)
was here for some time, months even, after his posts stopped.

I dont like gender wars (as a title or a phenomena!). Insofar as
it involved others here I dont think there was a gender division.
The moment that i saw an abrupt shift in the process *then* was
when Wilbur responded to your post on the promise keepers, and
that raised gender matters on which we had different opinions,
not along gender lines really, I was more sympathetic to your
point of view.  I was certainly of the opinion that your post was
fine to be here.

~~~









__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 09:12:11 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <356ccbc4.7969065@mail.datablast.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

All,

I sent the last post in error  before I had completed.  I was not
through with the meditation on these matters.

I want to say something else really.

Perhaps:

If there are underlying feelings then please make them more
explicit, and address the specific behaviour of a person.

Most of all this applies to VarMan.  I thought Robert's post to
you was right on the mark, and I hope to hear from you.

Welcome to the list BTW, I am afraid the welcoming process is
somewhat haphazard here.  I have only been doing it lately, the
process is under review.


Walter



__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 21:17:40 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Barry Kennedy <kennedy.levy@XTRA.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: Group Conscience
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Marie

Thankyou for your response.

> Walter has always done more than provide this space -- he is a powerful
> presence here, the most consistent and visible one, which in itself gives
> him a "central and complex role."  It is his vision we are engaged in
here,
> and it is not easy to determine what the experiential exploration of
psyche
> in cyberspace means, so his voice and his vision have served as an anchor
> point for me -- an example, an inspiration, a model.  It is not as if
> someone provided a space for the discussion of "Jungian theory and its
> relevance for cyberspace" and said "now, discuss amongst yourselves!"  I
> think we are -- all of us, Walter included -- creating the dimensions of
> the space as we move within it.
>
> Does he or should he have a therapist role?  Not in my mind, altho the
> distinction between facilitator and therapist is easily blurred, and I am
> still not clear about the difference between the role of facilitator and
> listowner.  Walter is not just another subscriber. . .

Poorly phrased by moi.

> . . . one who happens to
> provide the space.  He also maintains the charter of the space, and has
> power over membership (access and "unsubbing") and even the power to
close
> the list down, erase the archives.  In times of confusion and conflict, I
> find myself looking to Walter for clarification of what fits here and
what
> does not -- to recall purpose and parameters -- to keep us on course.
> Perhaps it is not fair to expect this of him, but he is the central
thread,
> the one most committed to this place and this process, and the one most
> intimately knowledgeable about what has gone on here and what helps or
> hinders the process -- sharing this knowledge, sharing his vision for
this
> place (when it is met and when it is not) is something only he *can* be
> expected to do, if others do not or cannot try.
>
> Should he provide more support, be more available than other subscribers?
> He usually is, within the group; perhaps that sets up an expectation for
> more than he ever meant to offer.  I have heard Walter voice many times
his
> belief in bringing it to the list -- whatever *it* might be involved --
so
> that response to Julienne's private post is consistent, for me, with
Walter
> as I know him.  I also find him to be caring and compassionate, so I do
not
> believe that he was cold and callous in his feelings for Julienne and her
> situation -- altho I can understand how she might have felt dismissed and
> abandonned by him.  Did he have a responsibility to support her, to help
> her, to intervene?  Not in a therapeutic sense, this is not therapy -- in
a
> human sense?  Not more than anyone else -- but it was Walter she wrote
to,
> privately, so nobody else *could* respond -- probably eliciting his wish
to
> have her bring it to the list, hoping an honest expression of her
feelings
> would shift the process in some way, without requiring him to step in and
> become the voice of authority.  Delicate situation, this -- I can
> understand Julienne's needs in this, and Walter's response -- I don't
know
> if I see a different and more positive way it might have been handled,
> except that perhaps Walter might have explained the reasons for his
stance
> to Julienne, so it did not feel like a personal rejection.
>
> I think as we become clear about what we are doing here, and why, and
how,
> that Walter's role will diminish in the intensity of its importance and
he
> can become more participant and less central.  He does not have a
> responsibility to do or be anything, in my mind -- except that he then
> loses the possibility of realizing his vision for this place, by default.
>
> Did I answer your question?

Yes, thankyou.

> Or merely stimulate more?

Yes, though not *merely*.

> Either way, it made me think, and I value that.

My questions and your answer make me think too.  Like, why have I joined
the list, what do I want from it.  And I worry a little about jumping right
on in questioning the listowner's role !

When I was a boy, I'd take things apart to see how they worked.  Mostly
they worked when I put them back together, sometimes better than before,
sometimes they went backwards, sometimes they never went again.  Grrrr.
Sometimes my efforts were appreciated, and sometimes not.  Double grrrr.  I
will resist my basic instinct to overanalyse the list and the listowner !

I am tired, and beginning to not make much sense.

Ciao

Barry
____________________________________
Barry Kennedy<kennedy.levy@xtra.co.nz>

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 09:34:05 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Conference!
In-Reply-To:  <356ccbc4.7969065@mail.datablast.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Conference!

Enjoying the process.

Here are some questions, thoughts on my mind from the day.  They
might make for some new threads!

Neal Stephenson thought that it is more difficult to preserve
cultural id in Harvard and society generally than in cyberspace.
In society there is the pressure to be multi cultural in dorms
etc.  Asked how the motto for Harvard, Veritas, might be changed
to reflect this he said:  Whatever!

Is education an industry?

Is race a social construct?

Is cyberspace more suited to older people, as the young need more
f2f in education etc.?

Will there be 'efficient markets for everything?' Including
education?  (psychotherapy?) For example the good news for
teachers (university ones that is), is that they will earn
several billion per year in a few years.  The bad news is that
there will only be about 60 of them.

That was from Larry Ellison, more from him:

There are more English speaking engineers and MBA's in India &
China, and at the rate the USA exports degrees this will increase
exponentially and will change everything.  He has opened branches
in India & China.

Can the USA hold its monopoly on degrees?

Who owns physics 101?

What is the difference between communication, pedagogy education
AND a library.  (This post, may the gods of cyberspace be
willing, will be in the archives before you see it!)

Brand is everything.  (What should I do with the Psybernet
brand?)

1:1 relationship between student and professor is a myth.

~~~

I could go on.  It was a stimulating day.  I think all of the
questions apply here in Psyberspace, in different ways perhaps,
but our psyche lives in this context.  Or is it that this is the
psyche in evolution?


Walter








__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 05:44:08 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <356ccbc4.7969065@mail.datablast.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi Walter,

At 08:46 AM 5/27/98 +0000, you wrote:
>Julienne,
>
>you wrote:
>
>> "The gender wars" is a very inadequate title for that episode.
>
>Do you feel hurt by that title?

Thank you for your concern, Walter, but no. There were two main threads
interwoven.
I suppose you could call the one gender wars, although I hesitate to use
that title
because anything which continues *any* gender wars is disappointing to me.
I made a response to something Wilbur said about gender to the effect that we
don't really know what is genetically gender specific, and what culturally
inculcated,
and Walter responded that *he* knew! - and the "wars" were off and running.
At
almost the same time, I had written ( I think) my first general post to the
list, and
JoAnne jumped in to announce to everyone that I couldn't be trusted - and
that thread
was off and running.

 would say there were several episodes or wars intertwined and
>inter-related.  I would wish to call them something that feels
>accurate to me and to you.  Do you have a title?  When you say
>"gender wars plus" it seems you are ok with the title after all
>as long as it includes the void episode, is that right?  Perhaps
>it needs to exclude the discussion between you and JoAnne?

I wasn't here for the Void episode, Walter. I would hardly call
what happened between JoAnne and me a discussion, but I
would include it because JoAnne and Wilbur jointly discussed
me and posted about me, until the end of it when Wilbur  started
to threaten me, and JoAnne helped him by telling the list that
she had given him information to help him find others who
might not like me and might join him in such an attack, or
provide him with information about helpful to him in his
announced forthcoming attack.

>Did you know that an early announcment that void has unsubbed was
>wrong, and that he (she, if Anita's, not my, intuition is right)
>was here for some time, months even, after his posts stopped.

No, but then I never knew of Void until after, as far as I knew.

>I dont like gender wars (as a title or a phenomena!). Insofar as
>it involved others here I dont think there was a gender division.
>The moment that i saw an abrupt shift in the process *then* was
>when Wilbur responded to your post on the promise keepers, and
>that raised gender matters on which we had different opinions,
>not along gender lines really, I was more sympathetic to your
>point of view.  I was certainly of the opinion that your post was
>fine to be here.

I don't like gnder wars as a title either as I think it really ended
up being more about violence. Also, my whole point had been
that the genders need not be at war because they shared more
in common probably than old stereotypes suggested.

Walter, you didn't bring this up, but I think it was Judith who did,
and I'd just like to comment on it here.

There has been much talk of the "history" JoAnne and I shared.
We had been briefly on a list together which died. As JoAnne and
I disagree on what happened next, or how, I shall just say that
we started a new list together, CHA*OS, with my friend Kris.
Within about 3 weeks, I was informed by someone else that
JoAnne had left to start her own list. She did not discuss doing
this with me - just did it. Our whole "history" then, was a matter
of weeks...maybe a few months - I don't remember the exact
time frame, although that could be found if my crashed files
are ever resurrected. We have never met.

Amen.

I hope you're enjoying Cambridge, Walter. I studied there at
Harvard with Rollo May, among others...and now one of my
sons will be studying there, too. :) It's a place with a lot of
memories for me. :) Is the Wursthaus still there?

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 08:36:46 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: Group conscience, Here and Now
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi Walter,
The trip seems to be going great for you...
Just a couple thots...BTW the explanations assist me in my learning so I am
grateful

>Judith,
>
>> Thanks Walter for seeking to clarify my uncomfortable sense...multiple
>> choice:-) is helpful
>
>Haha ... (Im chuckling away here to my self ... i don't know how
>to type that ... my son Josh goes; hehehe)  It was not intended
>as multiple choice!  I was attempting to be as accurate as i
>could in grasping you with my (male?) mind.  That is what is
>funny ... as long as we get there, all is well.
>
>
>> I don't have an expectation of intervention...
>
>Ok, but processing in a cool channel is a form of intervention?
>that is what i was thinking of.
I get confused about the words and what they mean and I think this has to
do on the one hand with historical list usage, meaning I may not have
experienced the beginning of theusage, on the other hand I know this list
comes from a psychological framing and as I have little formal knowledge of
this area, there are words used which I may have misinterpreted

>
>I wrote, attempting to tune into where you are at:

which I appreciate, of course
>> >3.  That shifts in process come from outside the system in
>> >unexpected and ways!  We don't get anywhere with more of the
>> >same, we need to shift into a new dimension.  You don't have much
>> >faith in debate, (you think you are no good at it so it could
>> >just be sour grapes).
>
>
>To which you replied:
>> maybe this is what I was sensing...my experience of uncomfortability has to
>> do with first, the space here. Often I'm not sure how to address people,
>> feeling sensative to everyone...on a very simple level it is about
>> manners...so it is simply a form issue at one level
>
>Please say more on this.  Which aspects of form are you thinking
>of.  I have found some of the many layered posts difficult to
>follow ... but that is not what you are thinking of?

First in how to address a message from the standpoint of the person making
the posting...I seem to be most comfortable with the *on may 21 Judith
wrote*...this feels like a form which honors the person who wrote but also
acknowledges the others here listening...
and then from the view of all those here listening...I don't want to
apprear Victorian :-) but often I worry that I may be rude
inadvertently...I am always aware of the listeners...
>
>
>> second, my way of working does not include intervention...so I think what I
>> was responding to was your intervention ...
>
>Now I am clear in what you are saying.  I am thinking of
>intervention from me as participant, as participation more than
>intervention.  As such I am not comfortable with the level of
>discord ... not that I can't stand it, or delete it, but because
>it is going nowhere or if it is going somewhere I can't see it!
>Hence i see it as representing something 'stuck' in me too, and
>in the list as a whole.  Everything is connected!
And I too am now clear about your use of the word *intervention*...helpful
to see it from your perspective...
>
>On second thoughts i can see there is movement in the discussion
>(though I may not be up to date!)  The posts are short and to the
>point.  This is a step on from the exchanges six months ago.
>Easier on me as participant!

seems as tho my tumor timing was *good* she says grinning
>
>> >4.  What's the point of some structured intervention ... people
>> >will mix it all up anyway.
>>
>> Again, I don't come from a place of intervention...and yes, my experience
>> has been that there are those that like to mix it up, engage in debate,
>> vent, whatever...it just isn't my way...no judgment, just a way of being...
>
>I experience you as non-jugmental on this.  I am as well, though
>i don't think i come across that way as I am saying "I don't like
>the feeling tone of the debate.  I don't like the debate format
>here:  You did this, No I did not, yes you did, i disagree.  I
>don't like that here!"  I say that feeling respect for the people
>and distaste for the methods of discourse.  My way of being.

I share your feeling of respect *for the people* and I am neutral to the
methods of discourse...some methods I can engage with and others I am not
skillfulinterested in engaging with...my experience with debate is that
those who participate find it great fun and exhilerating...and
constructive...I find I have so many questions around what someone is
positing...that non linear thing again...sort of like what I was
dumbfounded by truefalse exams
>
>I have a sense that i am writing here in the cool channel.  My
>comments are in quote marks, as if i am standing along side what
>I have said.  I am utterly reluctant to simply go out there and
>say it directly to the antagonists.   I have done that before to
>no avail.  Perhaps i haven't found the right tone ... found a way
>to do it that feels right and works.
I think this is the dilemma I feel and was admiring of your post...I
experienced your tone as inclusive...yet I think how a group responds to
conflict between participants is a key issue...for instance the post by
VarMan and Robert's immediate response which I was grateful for...my
response came from first, the name...I wondered at the intention of the
person...and I did consider that the intent was less than constructive...so
as I was considering my response, Robert entered...the interesting part for
me is that his post silenced VarMan at least so far...leaving me to wonder
about the intentions...my sense is that Robert's intervention defined the
boundaries of expected exchange right at the beginning...I don't think your
experience necessarily is about tone, but maybe timing...
>
>Anecdote:
>
>I recall in  training workshop I was the "client" and regressed
>to an incoherent state and in deep despair.  The trainee
>therapist was making me feel words with every word they said.
>The trainer instructed the trainee to tell me to "pause" in that
>state until the trainee with the group had worked out what to do
>next.  I think i just went to sleep under a blanket ... for what
>seemed like an hour.  I recall them making complex diagrams on
>the board.  Then ... the trainee gently woke me and said
>something wonderful,  I think it was gently and kindly ...
>"Choose someone to be your mother and tell your mother what you
>want."  Something like that. What a relief.
>
>OK that is therapy!  This is not therapy, yet we have spoken of
>the value of back channel and cool channels and "test shadows" so
>i think what we do here is worthwhile.

and I too
>
>After all we are here to explore the psyche in psyberspace ...
>and not just to do the same thing over and over, but to move into
>other levels, realms.  Ooops we are not doing the same thing over
>and over ... this is still IMO, a ... shift in the process.

yes, I now have a reality around your intentions and actions which informs
my unexamined assumptions...decoding these assumptions is very helpful to
my ability to participate and attempt to *move into other levels, realms*

>
>So Judith, is this intervention or simply a discussion of
>process?  I think of it as the latter, but I hope that processing
>like this has some use ... leads to moments of ahah and shifts
>that have impact ... on the current conflicts, other discussions
>and the tone of the whole place and ... me.
>
>
>Walter
Yes, Walter, I appreciate your engagement at this moment particularly as
you are having your experience which I know is so exciting for you...

>
>Way behind now, so far I can't get on a US ISP,  AOL, with a NZ
>credit card!  It has worked all day buying books! <grin>.  The
>telephones here don't have many live people, voices keep asking
>for more numbers, usually ones that don't make sense or cut me
>off!  Grrrr.
>
>I am loving the beautiful city of Cambridge!  A delight to be
>here.
Certainly your delight spills over into my day...
Bleassings,
Judith much informed and in gratitude
>
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________________________
>Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 08:37:09 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Julienne,
Just a comment...your conversation with Walter has been helpful in me now
seeing that when I mentioned gender and you asked why I was interested I
wasn't aware of *gender wars*...my interest is not particularly in the
*reason* we are who we are but more to how men and women were interacting
(not very successfully at that time) within self directed work teams and
what that might mean in terms of how each perceived the word *team*...in
the preliminary research there were striking differences in what each group
saw as a *team*...so the research was done to see if this difference in
perception was an unexamined assumption...and if illuminating the
perception, the functioning of the team would improve...the next step in
the research was never taken so no conclusions...

What this continues to point out to me is how my lack of continuity on the
list contributes to my lack of understanding to what is going on...your
post here has helped me considerably on a number of levels...
Thanks,
Judith
>Hi Walter,
>
>At 08:46 AM 5/27/98 +0000, you wrote:
>>Julienne,
>>
>>you wrote:
>>
>>> "The gender wars" is a very inadequate title for that episode.
>>
>>Do you feel hurt by that title?
>
>Thank you for your concern, Walter, but no. There were two main threads
>interwoven.
>I suppose you could call the one gender wars, although I hesitate to use
>that title
>because anything which continues *any* gender wars is disappointing to me.
>I made a response to something Wilbur said about gender to the effect that we
>don't really know what is genetically gender specific, and what culturally
>inculcated,
>and Walter responded that *he* knew! - and the "wars" were off and running.
>At
>almost the same time, I had written ( I think) my first general post to the
>list, and
>JoAnne jumped in to announce to everyone that I couldn't be trusted - and
>that thread
>was off and running.
>
> would say there were several episodes or wars intertwined and
>>inter-related.  I would wish to call them something that feels
>>accurate to me and to you.  Do you have a title?  When you say
>>"gender wars plus" it seems you are ok with the title after all
>>as long as it includes the void episode, is that right?  Perhaps
>>it needs to exclude the discussion between you and JoAnne?
>
>I wasn't here for the Void episode, Walter. I would hardly call
>what happened between JoAnne and me a discussion, but I
>would include it because JoAnne and Wilbur jointly discussed
>me and posted about me, until the end of it when Wilbur  started
>to threaten me, and JoAnne helped him by telling the list that
>she had given him information to help him find others who
>might not like me and might join him in such an attack, or
>provide him with information about helpful to him in his
>announced forthcoming attack.
>
>>Did you know that an early announcment that void has unsubbed was
>>wrong, and that he (she, if Anita's, not my, intuition is right)
>>was here for some time, months even, after his posts stopped.
>
>No, but then I never knew of Void until after, as far as I knew.
>
>>I dont like gender wars (as a title or a phenomena!). Insofar as
>>it involved others here I dont think there was a gender division.
>>The moment that i saw an abrupt shift in the process *then* was
>>when Wilbur responded to your post on the promise keepers, and
>>that raised gender matters on which we had different opinions,
>>not along gender lines really, I was more sympathetic to your
>>point of view.  I was certainly of the opinion that your post was
>>fine to be here.
>
>I don't like gnder wars as a title either as I think it really ended
>up being more about violence. Also, my whole point had been
>that the genders need not be at war because they shared more
>in common probably than old stereotypes suggested.
>
>Walter, you didn't bring this up, but I think it was Judith who did,
>and I'd just like to comment on it here.
>
>There has been much talk of the "history" JoAnne and I shared.
>We had been briefly on a list together which died. As JoAnne and
>I disagree on what happened next, or how, I shall just say that
>we started a new list together, CHA*OS, with my friend Kris.
>Within about 3 weeks, I was informed by someone else that
>JoAnne had left to start her own list. She did not discuss doing
>this with me - just did it. Our whole "history" then, was a matter
>of weeks...maybe a few months - I don't remember the exact
>time frame, although that could be found if my crashed files
>are ever resurrected. We have never met.
>
>Amen.
>
>I hope you're enjoying Cambridge, Walter. I studied there at
>Harvard with Rollo May, among others...and now one of my
>sons will be studying there, too. :) It's a place with a lot of
>memories for me. :) Is the Wursthaus still there?
>
>Julienne
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 15:35:23 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <19980527094409.AAA14943@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Wed, 27 May 1998 05:44:08 -0400, Julienne wrote:

>I wasn't here for the Void episode, Walter. I would hardly call
>what happened between JoAnne and me a discussion, but I
>would include it because JoAnne and Wilbur jointly discussed
>me and posted about me, until the end of it when Wilbur  started
>to threaten me, and JoAnne helped him by telling the list that
>she had given him information to help him find others who
>might not like me and might join him in such an attack, or
>provide him with information about helpful to him in his
>announced forthcoming attack.

I gave Wilbur one address of one person who ran one list, who had
expressed her displeasure with your participation on that list.  The
subject was email list participation and someone who found yours to be
disruptive, it was not a question about your personal enemies.  Though
the post office episode might suggest you have taken that person as
your personal enemy, since you were very willing to decide that she
had committed mail fraud when the evidence was simply not there.

>There has been much talk of the "history" JoAnne and I shared.
>We had been briefly on a list together which died. As JoAnne and
>I disagree on what happened next, or how, I shall just say that
>we started a new list together, CHA*OS, with my friend Kris.
>Within about 3 weeks, I was informed by someone else that

That would be the list system administrator.  He graciously
volunteered to step in and handle the split so that I wouldn't have
to.

If you're looking for closure, if you'd like to know just exactly why
I left, I can send a summary to you here or privately.  But I'm afraid
you'll just re-interpret it to say what you think I mean.  That is
what has happened before.

>JoAnne had left to start her own list. She did not discuss doing
>this with me - just did it. Our whole "history" then, was a matter
>of weeks...maybe a few months - I don't remember the exact
>time frame, although that could be found if my crashed files
>are ever resurrected. We have never met.

I was sick and tired of wrangling with you, and was not interested in
being associated with the kind of list you wanted ChaoS to be.  So I
left to form a different kind of list.

Are you trying to suggest that there is no history between us?  A
couple of months of being on the previous list, a couple of weeks of
getting ready for the list, three weeks of running the list together,
hundreds of emails between us privately and on the list.

Time is not the only measure of history.  You certainly put a lot of
energy into it, and it certainly caused you great distress when I
didn't act as you wished I would.  I put a lot of time into starting
the list, too, and was unhappy that you were not the person I thought
you were.  Hence there is a history.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 12:54:23 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <35702c92.1798734@mail.clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 03:35 PM 5/27/98 +0000, JoAnne wrote:
>On Wed, 27 May 1998 05:44:08 -0400, Julienne wrote:
>
>>I wasn't here for the Void episode, Walter. I would hardly call
>>what happened between JoAnne and me a discussion, but I
>>would include it because JoAnne and Wilbur jointly discussed
>>me and posted about me, until the end of it when Wilbur  started
>>to threaten me, and JoAnne helped him by telling the list that
>>she had given him information to help him find others who
>>might not like me and might join him in such an attack, or
>>provide him with information about helpful to him in his
>>announced forthcoming attack.
>
>I gave Wilbur one address of one person who ran one list, who had
>expressed her displeasure with your participation on that list.  The
>subject was email list participation and someone who found yours to be
>disruptive, it was not a question about your personal enemies.  Though
>the post office episode might suggest you have taken that person as
>your personal enemy, since you were very willing to decide that she
>had committed mail fraud when the evidence was simply not there.

JoAnne,

This is why I don't like to enter into any "discussion" with you.
I don't even know whom you're talking about. You have a way of
taking a raindrop and turning it into a downpour. I was deliberately
as non-confronting and went into as little detail as possible in my
explanation to this list of what happened, but you have once again
turned this into an occasion to paint me with a broad brush and
hint at possibly mysterious events involving me from still other
lists, and accuse me of still more things. All I know, JoAnne, of

what you did is what you described to this list, and then denied.
I didn't even follow up to ask you about it because I think this is
a really nasty way of distressing people's lives and creating
trouble where there need be none.

Just for the record, I have not accused anyone of mail fraud on
any of these lists. I don't remember the details, but someone
else accused someone else (I don't even remember the
participants) and you went to the post office or wherever and
conducted your personl off-list investigation into something
that had nothing to do with you, or I, and posted what you had
found regarding the other peope.

I think your tendency to get involved with people's lives off-list
is scary and invasive.

>>There has been much talk of the "history" JoAnne and I shared.
>>We had been briefly on a list together which died. As JoAnne and
>>I disagree on what happened next, or how, I shall just say that
>>we started a new list together, CHA*OS, with my friend Kris.
>>Within about 3 weeks, I was informed by someone else that
>
>That would be the list system administrator.  He graciously
>volunteered to step in and handle the split so that I wouldn't have
>to.

Oh, JoAnne. He may have been gracious - but you certainly weren't.
There was no indication to me or to Kris that there was even a
thought of any "split".

>If you're looking for closure, if you'd like to know just exactly why
>I left, I can send a summary to you here or privately.  But I'm afraid
>you'll just re-interpret it to say what you think I mean.  That is

>what has happened before.

No, I have closure.

>>JoAnne had left to start her own list. She did not discuss doing
>>this with me - just did it. Our whole "history" then, was a matter
>>of weeks...maybe a few months - I don't remember the exact
>>time frame, although that could be found if my crashed files
>>are ever resurrected. We have never met.

>I was sick and tired of wrangling with you, and was not interested in
>being associated with the kind of list you wanted ChaoS to be.  So I
>left to form a different kind of list.

>Are you trying to suggest that there is no history between us?  A
>couple of months of being on the previous list, a couple of weeks of
>getting ready for the list, three weeks of running the list together,
>hundreds of emails between us privately and on the list.

The previous list had only lasted a matter of months, and you and I
had shared only a few e-mails before the list ended. Any "hundreds"?-
of e-mails were a natural part of trying to put the list together, write up
the rules of the List and the welcome letter. The disagreements as
to content I thought were handled by compromise.

Most of the "wrangling" occurred between Kris and you, when you
attacked some of my very first posts to CHA*OS. Kris asked you
to tone those down as she thought that it was a lousy idea for
one of the list-ops to be attacking another, right in the first weeks
of the list. You then left. We were both really startled and taken
aback when you became so hostile toward me, but it was Kris
who talked to you.

For the record again, Kris came on to this list at the same time
you and I did, and wrote her memory of events, which contradicted
yours. They are in the archives. She then left because she felt that
history would be repeated, and she left this list rather than deal
with you any more.

>Time is not the only measure of history.  You certainly put a lot of
>energy into it, and it certainly caused you great distress when I
>didn't act as you wished I would.

JoAnne, I don't even know where that last sentence of yours
comes from. Apparently you and I were living in parallel
universes.

>I put a lot of time into starting
>the list, too, and was unhappy that you were not the person I thought
>you were.  Hence there is a history.

Well, sorry to be such a disappointment to you. But that doesn't give
you the right to keep assaulting my character and reputation. I can't
and won't continue this discussion with you because for every piece
of explanation I try to offer, I find there is an escalation from you.
So - if you want to tell people that I run naked through the streets,
steal from children, caused WW 2, I can't stop you.

It's too bad you can't just let this go, JoAnne - I don't think there's any
honour for anyone in continuing it.

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 19:35:51 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <19980527165425.AAA26738@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Wed, 27 May 1998 12:54:23 -0400, Julienne wrote:

>At 03:35 PM 5/27/98 +0000, JoAnne wrote:
>>On Wed, 27 May 1998 05:44:08 -0400, Julienne wrote:
>>
>>>I wasn't here for the Void episode, Walter. I would hardly call
>>>what happened between JoAnne and me a discussion, but I
>>>would include it because JoAnne and Wilbur jointly discussed
>>>me and posted about me, until the end of it when Wilbur  started
>>>to threaten me, and JoAnne helped him by telling the list that
>>>she had given him information to help him find others who
>>>might not like me and might join him in such an attack, or
>>>provide him with information about helpful to him in his
>>>announced forthcoming attack.
>>
>>I gave Wilbur one address of one person who ran one list, who had
>>expressed her displeasure with your participation on that list.  The
>>subject was email list participation and someone who found yours to be
>>disruptive, it was not a question about your personal enemies.  Though
>>the post office episode might suggest you have taken that person as
>>your personal enemy, since you were very willing to decide that she
>>had committed mail fraud when the evidence was simply not there.
>
>JoAnne,
>
>This is why I don't like to enter into any "discussion" with you.
>I don't even know whom you're talking about. You have a way of
>taking a raindrop and turning it into a downpour.

You multiply my involvement with Wilbur's "attack", paint it black,
and then accuse me of turning a raindrop into a downpour?

>I was deliberately
>as non-confronting and went into as little detail as possible in my
>explanation to this list of what happened, but you have once again
>turned this into an occasion to paint me with a broad brush and
>hint at possibly mysterious events involving me from still other
>lists, and accuse me of still more things.

You leave out important parts of the events, parts that might not
paint you as the better person.  You state that I helped Wilbur
threaten you.  You state that I told the list that I had given him
information to help him find others who might not like me and might
join him in such an attack.  I'd love to see me quoted saying "I sent
Wilbur information so he can attack Julienne and find others who can
do that too."  I never said that.

I sent him to someone who could give him more information.  If you
don't know who that is, then I guess there are more "enemies" of yours
out there I don't know about.

>All I know, JoAnne, of
>what you did is what you described to this list, and then denied.

What have I denied, that I first described to the list?  That sounds
absurd.

>I didn't even follow up to ask you about it because I think this is
>a really nasty way of distressing people's lives and creating
>trouble where there need be none.

I think that you distress people too.  You distress me when you make
broad statements of how women are so much better than men.  You
distress me when you paint me as a black slimy slavering dog.  You
distress me when you paint yourself as a white shining goddess of
reason and beauty.

>Just for the record, I have not accused anyone of mail fraud on
>any of these lists. I don't remember the details, but someone
>else accused someone else (I don't even remember the
>participants)

You claim not to know who we are talking about?  Why not ask Kris.
She'll certainly know who was accused, if not the accuser.

>and you went to the post office or wherever and
>conducted your personl off-list investigation into something
>that had nothing to do with you, or I, and posted what you had
>found regarding the other peope.

Which CLEARED SOMEONE'S NAME!!!!!!!  Someone you and Kris would rather
see tarred and feathered.  You have a problem with that person and
when she's accused, you stand by and throw eggs at someone who's
trying to discover the truth.  Kris was much worse, I'll admit, but
you made it sound like I was attacking the person, when I was doing
nothing of the kind.

I can't believe you leave that out every time it comes up.  I can't
believe that you don't think it's important, when someone makes an
accusation, to find out if it's true or not!!!!!!!!

I'm just amazed!!!!!!!

I don't even have enough exclamation points for that!!!!!!!

Does anyone else here understand what your reasoning is, and can
explain it rationally to me?  Because I admit I'm totally stumped.

>I think your tendency to get involved with people's lives off-list
>is scary and invasive.

I invaded whose life?  I invaded the life of the person I "checked up
on" and as a result the accusations against her and her company were
cleared?  I'm sure if you ask her you will find out that she was not
at all scared, did not feel invaded by what I did.

Why do you find people asking public officials questions, with the
intent of clearing or confirming some very serious accusations, wrong?
If someone accused you of mail fraud, and you were innocent, would you
want everyone to think you did it because no one bothered to check
into it, just spread the story around?

>>>There has been much talk of the "history" JoAnne and I shared.
>>>We had been briefly on a list together which died. As JoAnne and
>>>I disagree on what happened next, or how, I shall just say that
>>>we started a new list together, CHA*OS, with my friend Kris.
>>>Within about 3 weeks, I was informed by someone else that
>>
>>That would be the list system administrator.  He graciously
>>volunteered to step in and handle the split so that I wouldn't have
>>to.
>
>Oh, JoAnne.

Oh, Julienne.

>He may have been gracious - but you certainly weren't.

I knew that I would be much less gracious than I had been already, if
I were to handle the split at that moment with you, instead of letting
him tell you that I was leaving to start my own list.

You and Kris told me what you thought was going on, and is going on,
that I'm "kicking myself" about the whole affair.

I guess you still don't believe me that I'm glad to be free of
responsibility for the ChaoS list, that my most recent visit there
confirms my memories of it as a place where people just better not
disagree with you or they'll get ten pages of "fuck you" dressed up to
look like, "Oh, JoAnne.  I'm so disappointed in you.  How could you be
so deficient."

>There was no indication to me or to Kris that there was even a
>thought of any "split".

I didn't say I planned it way ahead of time, did I?  It just occurred
to me, probably less than an hour before I did it, that I could split.
And I did it.

>>If you're looking for closure, if you'd like to know just exactly why
>>I left, I can send a summary to you here or privately.  But I'm afraid
>>you'll just re-interpret it to say what you think I mean.  That is
>
>>what has happened before.
>
>No, I have closure.

It doesn't look like it to me, or you wouldn't be so vigorously
defending yourself.

>>>JoAnne had left to start her own list. She did not discuss doing
>>>this with me - just did it. Our whole "history" then, was a matter
>>>of weeks...maybe a few months - I don't remember the exact
>>>time frame, although that could be found if my crashed files
>>>are ever resurrected. We have never met.
>
>>I was sick and tired of wrangling with you, and was not interested in
>>being associated with the kind of list you wanted ChaoS to be.  So I
>>left to form a different kind of list.
>
>>Are you trying to suggest that there is no history between us?  A
>>couple of months of being on the previous list, a couple of weeks of
>>getting ready for the list, three weeks of running the list together,
>>hundreds of emails between us privately and on the list.
>
>The previous list had only lasted a matter of months, and you and I
>had shared only a few e-mails before the list ended. Any "hundreds"?-
>of e-mails were a natural part of trying to put the list together, write up
>the rules of the List and the welcome letter. The disagreements as
>to content I thought were handled by compromise.

You are wrong, then.  Your idea of compromise seems to be not to shut
up until the other party gives in.  And I don't give in.

>Most of the "wrangling" occurred between Kris and you, when you
>attacked some of my very first posts to CHA*OS. Kris asked you
>to tone those down as she thought that it was a lousy idea for
>one of the list-ops to be attacking another, right in the first weeks
>of the list. You then left. We were both really startled and taken
>aback when you became so hostile toward me, but it was Kris
>who talked to you.

You were startled?  I was hostile to your ideas, which I still find
silly.

I agree, I thought it was a lousy idea for one listop to attack
another.  So why didn't YOU stop?  I was attacking your ideas, you two
started attacking me personally.  Are you unable to tell the
difference?

>For the record again, Kris came on to this list at the same time
>you and I did, and wrote her memory of events, which contradicted
>yours. They are in the archives. She then left because she felt that
>history would be repeated, and she left this list rather than deal
>with you any more.

Implying that the unpleasantness of her dealings with me are my fault,
perhaps?  Which one of us called the other evil, do you recall?

>>Time is not the only measure of history.  You certainly put a lot of
>>energy into it, and it certainly caused you great distress when I
>>didn't act as you wished I would.
>
>JoAnne, I don't even know where that last sentence of yours
>comes from. Apparently you and I were living in parallel
>universes.

You didn't put a lot of energy into it?  I did not cause you distress?
I acted as you wished I would?

In what way is _that_ your reality?  I'm really confused.  You were
very shocked when I left ChaoS, but you didn't have energy invested in
it?  In what way is shock not distress?

>>I put a lot of time into starting
>>the list, too, and was unhappy that you were not the person I thought
>>you were.  Hence there is a history.
>
>Well, sorry to be such a disappointment to you. But that doesn't give
>you the right to keep assaulting my character and reputation.

You imply that I have already assaulted your character and reputation.
You use the word "assault" and that conjures pictures of physical
assault.  You enjoy conjuring pictures of physical assault, of other
people physically attacking you, because that's clearly indefensible.
Yet that's not what I'm doing.

I only discuss what you've said and done.  That's plenty.  If it is
not flattering, so be it.  It's hardly assault, physical or otherwise.

>I can't
>and won't continue this discussion with you because for every piece
>of explanation I try to offer, I find there is an escalation from you.

Hahahahahahah.  As if you do not respond by multiplying by 10.

>So - if you want to tell people that I run naked through the streets,
>steal from children, caused WW 2, I can't stop you.

This paints me as someone who makes things up about you.  I don't.

I discuss things that really happened, and that's going to bother you
a great deal more than those silly made-up things, because they're
believable, because they're true.

>It's too bad you can't just let this go, JoAnne - I don't think there's any
>honour for anyone in continuing it.

This labels me dishonorable if I reply to you.  And shuts me up if I
don't.  It would be clever if you were arguing with a ten-year-old,
but I'm not willing to submit to your classifications.

You've tried this particular strategy before.  "I'm gonna tell you
once and then that's the end of it."  Too bad you can't control what
other people say about you and to you after you lay down your own
personal law.

Any ideas yet from your subconscious, or anywhere else, as to why you
continued to stay on this list at the risk of your father's life?  I'm
not the only one wondering about it.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 16:39:28 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re:
In-Reply-To:  <35665ccc.439522756@mail.ihug.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 11:15 AM 5/22/98 +0000, Walter wrote:
>Julienne
>you wrote:
>
>> My whole point in writing to you Walter was to tell you I COULD NOT deal
>> with it at all - on of off the list. I was getting 3-4 hours of sleep a
>> night -
>> and my father could have been dead any morning. It was the saddest
>> and most physically difficult time of my life.
>
>I am sorry that I was not able to be there in the way you needed.
>
>In any future situation I hope I can find a better way.  I don't think
that what
>you went through here was ok and this *processing*  I take part in here is
>exactly to learn how to do that.
>
>Good to hear that you are healing from that time.

Walter,

I can't tell you how much difference this makes to me.
I have not felt I could trust you, and couldn't understand
how this list could have been so hostile in such a
situation.

I understand much myself now of how long the list had been
in existence, how relationships with, for instance, Wilbur,
had been forged. I also now know about the Void episode.
Coming on to the list I felt as though I'd fallen into some
version of Hell, or a really mean Mad Hatter's Tea Party.
Whatever it was, we have explored something we might
just as soon rather not have explored, but having explored it,
we, or at least I, maybe learned something. I'm not feeling
very eloquent because I feel extremely awkward about it all.

But your apology also means, to me, that I can feel safer
with you, I hope. And if I bungled and messed up whatever
I was trying to say at the time, then I too am sorry.

I have been asked why I stayed on the List. The only answer
I have, because I really did think I was out of my mind to be
staying here, is that I needed to see how it would end. I
felt that there had to be something I was missing - that there
had to be a way for things to be healed and to turn out all
right.  I had to look at what on earth I was doing, you were
all doing - while my brain was only half functioning because
of what was happening with my father.

I was also dealing with an insane medical system - where
the help my father needed was not available, where the
medical system was really rotten - where the doctors
didn't know or care...and a lot of other things. So many
places I looked there was so much anger and meanness and
rotten stuff going on, and I needed to know where I fitted into
that - if I were just attracting it, or if it was a common experience,
or, or...and then, if there were a way to heal it. I try to hope for
healing. That doesn't mean we all become perfect human beings
overnight, with nary an unkind nor thoughtless word nor act
uttered or committed - but just that some measure of greater
understanding can be reached.

Well...enough. Thank you, Walter.

I'm glad you are enjoying Boston. :) It's been a key place
in my life...

Love,

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 20:31:48 EDT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         John Gerhart <JGerh50699@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

HooN said:

Robert, all,

So here's the question:

What do we do when we do *responsibility*?


Swedenborg, an 18th century mystic, (and some other mystics whose names are
lost in my grey matter) say our life on earth is to make decisions between
good an evil, so we will be prepared to enter heaven or hell when we pass on
to the next world.  The problem is we have trouble seeing life as black or
white.  I must discipline my daughter to help her on the process of growing
and maturing.  (I believe our lives are a continuing process in this life.)
However if I carry the discipline too far, I am "abusing" my daughter.  Re:
gender, my wife always says I am too tough, I always say she is too easy.
Togehter we get some balance!

HooN, you have raised a good question.

John

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 22:19:32 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions "seeing life as black or white"
In-Reply-To:  <62607ac3.356cb075@aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

John,

This is a reply with a few interesting doors in it, that I see. I have to
admit I know my sensing but cannot presume to comprehend exactly what you
meant, or, alternately, have at least a sense of the open-endedness implied
in your communique.

So, I see two parts.

One (what it) 'is to make decisions between good an evil'"; and your
addition of "The problem is we have trouble seeing life as black or white."


and, two,  "we get some balance!"

***

I'm not sure what you mean by "we have trouble seeing life as black or white".

I'm somewhat biased by my wish to keep what is a somewhat difficult thread
going, given that I've already introduced this idea that it is constructed
to include some, exclude others. Thus, I seize upon this formulation of
yours I don't surely understand. However this doesn't stop me.

***

Decisions, once made, have a binary character, or binary modality. There is
the decision, and there are all those roads not taken!  <<de"cide" , fr.
caedere, to cut; to strike; from the same root caesura, also "caedum"
chisel>>

One, then, cuts away those decisions not effected. The decision is the
*striking of our intent* and I note, like both the sculptor's chisel or the
striking of a bell or drum, all decisions fit into a larger world of
decisions and consequents.

It is human nature to regret a decision, perhaps made to be good, perhaps
intended to cause good consequences, (ah, even decisions tending toward
goodness,) but not regret what went into the making of the decision. In
fact, we might regret severely a decision and not even give a moment to
what went into it.

***

This is another exacting case of the logic(s) of intention, for both
intention and decision-making is, necessarily, built upon some kind of
doing. But, we don't tend to teach, (although we certainly model,) say
children, um our children(!), too much about *doing intention* or *doing
decisions* or *doing responsibility*.

(I'm thinking of big beautiful perplexed jack asses, now.) We might sort
out and use a logics to help us discrimate between good, evil, bad, good,
(heck try to teach it to our kids,) and not understand the logic(s) of
'doing' which are implicated, enfolded, within those 'rules', and, as I've
suggested, offer a process through which the limiting patterns, the
reasoningdrama, of the logics may be transcended.

John, you open this door your self in my estimation, because in my not
knowing what you mean by "we have trouble seeing life as black or white" I
recognize that possibility as a facet. Now, it does seem that in terms of
black and white we cannot expect a comprehensive solution. Which is to
suggest, it ('seeing') is not about having all possible data, or an
absolute 'wholistic' perception, be it black or white.

***

Yet, practically, we tend to make our !striking decisions! in the as/if
mode, and I cannot but note this is a binary mode: the 'white of our
decisions' so-to-speak.

Meanwhile, it is also a practical problem that we don't see gray, either.
Or worse, tend to deprive the grey until it is white, or load all into it
until it is black.

Thanks for indulging me. This take is less about the ethics than it is
about the nature of our nature. I hope you'll clarify what I confused
about. And...

But, then with the idea of 'balance' you'll indulge me, (I'm asking!)  with
what will follows...

***

regards,

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 27 May 1998 22:55:17 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions /*\ balance
In-Reply-To:  <62607ac3.356cb075@aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>Togehter we get some balance!

John,

Ifeel a lifetime could be well devoted to this sentence you brought forth.

***

*Together, we*

This, firstly, strikes me as beautiful.

The affirmation of "together" by your immediatly following *we*. There,
too, I see the action of togetherness, the back-and-forth, and the profound
'solunary' (worth a visit to the archives for all who didn't witness
Charles Cameron bring this key term here,) expressed by this tensile
containment of

two + the unity of we; or, relationship+oneness...

Other intuitions: two+get+there, or, two+get+there !yes!

***

Two, to get there, we (!) get *some* balance.

***

Remember the see-saw? Remember how it works? Recall how hard it is to
see-saw with just your self? (It is a model of the logics of intention,
by-the-way.)

The see-saw rewards *being* (doing intention,) above all. It rewards *doing
responsibility* above all in this sense: the see saw dance is most
dynamically perfect when the two dancers have the most feel, response, and
surrender...the most *balance-in-movement*.

***

Let's feel about our youth, (if you are not youthful). The see saw: a place
two people go *to get some balance; to experience a dynamical *we-ness*.

So...we remember that there are different ways to approach the see-saw. We
can seek the balance of action and response with the person on the other
end, and easily, naturally lose ourselves in a keen sensitivity to
feeling->responding->surrendering, up and down and round and round too as
we move from feeling the other person's response, imparting our (re)action,
*surrendering*, and then again feeling->responding->surrendering.

It is an exquisite balance that *we (two)gether get*!

***

We also might play with other possibilities: deliberately overloading our
responses into the system, or disrupting the other person's anticipated
"feel" for how we respond, even trying to find out what the edge of control
of the entire see-saw dynamical system is...perhaps going beyond it.
Similarly, we understand very well what the problem is in our doing the
see-saw alone.

***

Is it contradictory to wonder if "to do responsibility* has something to do
with *to do balance* with doing balance viewed as a tuned process of
feeling and response and surrender?

Certainly, as speculative :-) as that is, I would suggest more strongly
that "doing responsibility" is surely about feeling and response, or
"valuation and decision".

But, what possibly might intention have to do with that moment when your
partner is getting the system in balance by giving you a free moment on the
momentarily rising end of the pendulum of the see-saw?

together, we get some balance!

***

bal ance (bal=FAns) n.
1. A weighing device, especially one consisting of a rigid beam
horizontally suspended by a low-friction support at its center, with
identical weighing pans hung at either end, one of which holds an unknown
weight while the effective weight in the other is increased by known
amounts until the beam is level and motionless.
2. A state of equilibrium or parity characterized by cancellation of all
forces by equal opposing forces.
3. The power or means to decide.
4. A state of bodily equilibrium.
5. A stable mental or psychological state; emotional stability.
6. A harmonious or satisfying arrangement or proportion of parts or
elements, as in a design.
7. An influence or force tending to produce equilibrium; counterpoise.
8. The difference in magnitude between opposing forces or influences.
9. Accounting. a. Equality of totals in the debit and credit sides of an
account. b. The difference between such totals, either on the credit or the
debit side.
10. Something that is left over; a remainder.
11. Chemistry. Equality of mass and net electric charge of reacting species
on each side of an equation.
12. Mathematics. Equality with respect to the net number of reduced
symbolic quantities on each side of an equation.
13. A balance wheel.


***

(two) we, to get her: some balance ...

Code: for the *her* is mindfulness...what is it to do responsibility?

***

assfully,

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 28 May 1998 00:34:43 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <62607ac3.356cb075@aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 08:31 PM 5/27/98 -0400, John wrote:
>HooN said:
>
>Robert, all,
>
>So here's the question:
>
>What do we do when we do *responsibility*?
>
>Swedenborg, an 18th century mystic, (and some other mystics whose names are
>lost in my grey matter) say our life on earth is to make decisions between
>good an evil, so we will be prepared to enter heaven or hell when we pass on
>to the next world.  The problem is we have trouble seeing life as black or
>white.  I must discipline my daughter to help her on the process of growing
>and maturing.  (I believe our lives are a continuing process in this life.)
>However if I carry the discipline too far, I am "abusing" my daughter.  Re:
>gender, my wife always says I am too tough, I always say she is too easy.
>Togehter we get some balance!

Why do you feel you must discipline your daughter to help her?
There is always the possibility, which I think is much more
effective in the long run, of teaching her self-discipline.

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 28 May 1998 05:19:55 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      internet by Paul Treanor 1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I was sent this from a Brazilian List I am on, and thought it might be of
interest
to us. It is in two parts, so another will follow.

Julienne

Thirty years after Daniel Bell's The End of Ideology, new ideologies
continue to appear. One is 'Net-ism', the aggressive
promotion of the Internet, (cyberspace, interactive telematics, and so on).
It is not entirely new: its basic features are liberal, a nd
its model of an Internet/ cyberspace future is hyper-liberal. The Net (as
it is) should be judged by this ideology and its claims, not
by the internal problems of the 'Internet community'. The political-ethical
question is not how this community should protect and
regulate its members, but: who protects the rest of the world against the
Net and the Net-ists?

This goes beyond the question of 'whose Internet?' Inequality of Internet
access is certainly recognised: users come from the
best-educated, best-paid 2% of the world's population, and their student
children. To use the Net you need money, a terminal, abi
lity to use it, ability to read English or at least Latin script. The
precedent of the telephone suggests universal access will take
generations. And even universal access is not control: that will probably
remain in the hands of the same 2%. However, Net
ideology assumes unrestricted access: the point is that the Net is
defective, even on this assumption. It is important to distinguish
between the real existing Internet, with obvious faults such as unequal
access, and the Net of ideology, the universal e lectronic
community. For the advocates of the Internet, the second justifies the
first. For me, it is precisely the potential Internet which
disqualifies all attempts to construct it.

The present reality of the Net is certainly not a global community, nor
even approaching it yet. For that, either a universal second
language, or automated translation, would be necessary: neither is
imminent. The present status of the Net is like that of CNN ten
years ago. Then, people thought global television had arrived. Since then,
as costs fell, CNN has been followed by among others
French, British, German, and Arabic global channels. In retrospect, CNN was
(and is) a national US channel with global reach -
the same characteristic, in fact, as the so-called 'multi-national'
companies. The present dominance of English on the Internet is
probably temporary. As national-language use extends, national Net usage
will extend, alongside relatively less int ernational use,
and continuing US domestic use. Again, however, Net ideology assumes
universal communication, and that is in itself wrong. The
real problem would be if a global community did emerge.

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 28 May 1998 05:22:29 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      more internet -2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

The Internet is dominated by white, well off, English
                   speaking, educated males, most of whom are USA
                   citizens. This is the same group that dominates most of
                   the First World society.

                   If their ability to form political will, debate issues and
                   influence society is expanded by the Internet, this is no
                   way resembles a truly participative discourse of
                   democracy. This would demand that all parties that might
                   be affect are included in the debate.

                   While there is opportunity for subordinated groups to
                   create communities and conduct debate, the topics raised
                   for discussion in most areas of the Internet reflect the
                   concerns of the dominant group, so that subordinate
                   groups' concerns are not even debated.

                   If the struggle for publicity is equivalent to the
struggle for
                   justice, then the interent puts most subordinated groups at
                   a disadvantage.

                   The dominance of one group has meant that a mode of
                   discourse is already established (called "Netiquette"),
                   which actively discourages other modes. This extends to
                   the language spoken, the way a person expresses
                   thoughts and the amount their ideas are responded to.

                   distance
                   Communities based on mutual interests can form political
                   will, but the changes they agree to are harder to implement
                   in physical reality when members are physically distant, or
                   the member's physically local community has disparate
                   values.

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 28 May 1998 08:09:53 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      collective net psyche 1
In-Reply-To:  <19980528092133.AAA21097@default>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Re: internet by Paul Treanor 1

Thanks; it's not uninteresting, Julienne. But, I sort have to invent
prospects for Treanor's ideas because he over-generalizes.

Anyway...

***

What does it say about the collective psyche beyond the net, and on the
net? Treanor's views aren't addressed in the direction of these matters,
but that would still be my question.

On the other hand much of this sounds to have an amped-up terminology, in
the manner of 'commentary' today. For example: "hyper-liberalism" would
mean something to me if there was a singular thing such as liberalism
somewhere, let alone 'everywhere', but, instead, for example here in the
USA, there are several 'lefts' which might also be lumped into the catagory
of liberalism...if those 'lefts' weren't at odds with each other.

>Inequality of Internet
>access is certainly recognised: users come from the
>best-educated, best-paid 2% of the world's population, and their student
>children.

This user doesn't: high school graduate, yearly income of less than
$22,000, no credit cards. Nor am I 'white'. (I'm a mutt who's lineage is
traced back to the original charcoal black <-I saw in a dream] man.) My
parents fit the bill.

***

>Again, however, Net ideology assumes
>universal communication, and that is in itself wrong.

Huh? Come again? Is there one ideology? Have I missed it? (Damn!) Wrong as
far as the universal language Treanor feels is necessary as a predicate to
his arguement?...there's a conceit I haven't seen before.

Esperanto, anyone? Or: internetnay?

***

There seems to me to be a web of ideology with no possibility of one
arising to dominate and exclude the others. And none of the various
ideologies I myself have noted seem particularly comprehensive, trenchant,
or easily mapped onto the internet-at-large. In fact, I understand ideology
to be, generally, an abstraction given that most individuals aren't
primarily driven by ideology. imo So, I see much more evidence of those
other drives: instinctual, creative, 'religious', plus many other kinds, at
work and play  on the net. And nowhere have I, to my own intellectual or
emotional satisfaction, read anything that successfully has made the
correlation between what has people, as persons!, *multivariously*
enthralled with the internet and the abstract, singular "meta" catagory we
might call an ideology. Even the amerikan white rich boy isn't beholden to
a single ideology, at least the ones I know are not, and even fewer are
driven by their ideologies, 'preferring' serotonin and other drip drops of
biology.

***

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 28 May 1998 08:10:04 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      collective net psyche 2
In-Reply-To:  <19980528092133.AAA21097@default>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Treanor writes:

>real problem would be if a global community did emerge.

Yet, never before, in the privacy of our priviledge have we been able to
meet and commence dialogues with people from around the world. Meanwhile,
most of the 'households' of the world don't even have phones.

***

In the roughest approximation, I wonder about this idea: global community,
global communication, "universal language" ... it is an idea which is
numinous, yes? It may reflect back to some something of the higher order,
or the spiritual. Yet, it's equally large shadow, in part, reflects back
(to me,) this idea of a tower of Babel built to reach the heavens.

The various ideas about "global community" are of great interest to me.
Predating the internet, such stories are *big* stories and strike me as
being in kinship to creation myths in terms of their largeness.

Yet, creation myths, generally, model on different levels *development*
between cycles of death and birth whereas "global community" seems to imply
either a final development, (what community beyond the global?) or is
possibly, in some formulations, the precedent to the point omega, ("cosmic
community") and thus strike me as carrying our collective projection of a
spirit disassociated from the body.

About this, besides that it is an inflation and is perhaps also a bit of
necessary sand in the oyster, is that it is, (I'm speculating of course!)
an effect of the western collective dominant, (which is, imo, the
puer/puella problem) and its archetypal import. So it is, perhaps, that the
internet is enthralling because it does capture some of the collective's
libido, in the archetypal vectors qualified as 'spirited', 'disembodied',
'eternal', (etc.).

But, the collective dominants of the west, (a fascinating field in their
own right if one holds an archetypal view,) are not the only collective
dominants rippling out on the internet. Even if, (to take the leap in a
direction Treanor possibly isn't aware of,) those western dominants, i.e.
the "puer/puella problem", do in a manner of speaking currently dominate
the internet, by definition of their being about psychoid dynamicism, the
push and pull of their domination is "in-process", is a
work-in-development, and, over time, will move in some direction.

The consequent of the pendulum's swing is, in my view and hope (well, a
mutt can have these high hopes, yes?!), eventually to lead to an increased
integration of the feminine in man and woman.

However, (and this is the central conundrum to me of the 'internet',) as a
'puer' I am well aware that the net's most obvious and peculiar feature for
me, personally, is my disembodiment while sitting at my computer. And I
know integration of the feminine, as Judith has so eloquently recounted in
the words of her own experience, cannot happen without full incarnation in
the physical body, and holding it as both a temple and a temporary vehicle.

***

Light and dark...in either direction I see the effect of increased
communication is amping stuff both positive and negative. Because, in my
worldview, psychology trumps the ideological, these matters seem complex as
well as aspected by what is unknown, i.e. *unconscious*.

***

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 28 May 1998 14:50:53 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: more internet -2
In-Reply-To:  <19980528092427.AAA24814@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, 28 May 1998 05:22:29 -0400, you, Julienne
<zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>, wrote:

>                   While there is opportunity for subordinated groups to
>                   create communities and conduct debate, the topics raised
>                   for discussion in most areas of the Internet reflect the
>                   concerns of the dominant group, so that subordinate
>                   groups' concerns are not even debated.

I don't think so.  There are over 20,000 Usenet newsgroups, not just
one.  If you want to discuss something, you can.  And if you want to
bring your issues to a newsgroup you can.

>                   If the struggle for publicity is equivalent to the
>struggle for
>                   justice, then the interent puts most subordinated groups at
>                   a disadvantage.

But they do have the advantage of not being immediately recognized as
subordinated groups.  We didn't know hoon was any particular kind of
person till he told us -- in fact, we still don't know for sure.

>                   The dominance of one group has meant that a mode of
>                   discourse is already established (called "Netiquette"),
>                   which actively discourages other modes. This extends to
>                   the language spoken, the way a person expresses
>                   thoughts and the amount their ideas are responded to.

There is some point to this, because one of the tenets of netiquette
is to stay on the topic of the particular newsgroup you are writing
to.  So bringing up women's rights in a trainspotting newsgroup will
ensure a cool (or hot!) reception.

Still, newsgroups except for the moderated ones really are open, and
so even if something is off-topic, and everyone who reads the
newsgroup writes to the off-topic poster to stop, he or she can
continue and there's really nothing that can be done about it.

I can see virtual protests where people of one particular group (let's
use feminism as an example again) organize to post their views to a
particular popular newsgroup on a particular day or week.  Imagine the
furor over such postings in groups like alt.binaries.erotica.incest!

And if and when people cancel these postings (which is possible) there
will inevitably be a lawsuit claiming infringement of the right of
free speech.  That will take years to straighten out.

Currently posts are canceled on the basis of "spamness", that is, how
many different newsgroups the post was sent to.  Spam-canceling is not
done on the basis of content, and has specific rules, agreed upon by a
small group of dedicated spam-cancelers.  There was a spam-canceler
strike a month or so ago and there was a noticeable increase in junk
in the newsgroups I read.

But wildcatters do cancel articles for content they don't like.

There is also the matter of ISP's.  Most ISP's have a list of rules
which you must follow to remain a customer.  Break these rules and
your account will be yanked.

But some ISP's do not have such rules.  There is a loose organization
called Sites of Honor.  These are ISP's which do not accept the
authority of any rules, and are associated with the anarchist movement
in some cases.  If you complain to one of them about a member, they
generally send the complaint directly to the person you're complaining
about.

In yet another twist, the Sites of Honor are often blacklisted by
other sites; mail and news articles coming from those sites are
automatically bounced.

>                   distance
>                   Communities based on mutual interests can form political
>                   will, but the changes they agree to are harder to implement
>                   in physical reality when members are physically distant, or
>                   the member's physically local community has disparate
>                   values.

Yes, that too is true.  However, a critical mass of people who are
close enough together to meet and act can find each other in such
venues.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 28 May 1998 18:01:11 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: more internet -2
In-Reply-To:  <357173b9.61114265@mail.clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>>                   distance
>>                   Communities based on mutual interests can form political
>>                   will, but the changes they agree to are harder to
>>implement
>>                   in physical reality when members are physically
>>distant, or
>>                   the member's physically local community has disparate
>>                   values.

Distance communities of grassroots activists *can* have a powerful effect
on real-world political issues. Negotiations on the awful MAI (Multilateral
Agreement on Investment) treaty were halted by a loose-knit coalition of
grassroots activist groups from around the world working together via the
Internet. By using the net to organise and educate, to get information out
in an accessible format to a mass of people who otherwise probably wouldn't
even have heard of MAI, let alone understood what the issues were really
about, these groups exposed what were secretive, behind-closed-doors
negotiations to the glare of informed world opinion. And they succeeded in
closing the negotiations down - something that wouldn't have happened
without the Internet!

I can forward an article about this offlist to anyone who is interested -
not wishing to turn the list into a political forum, but the subject was
brought up.

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 28 May 1998 18:34:51 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: internet by Paul Treanor 1
In-Reply-To:  <19980528092133.AAA21097@default>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>This goes beyond the question of 'whose Internet?' Inequality of Internet
>access is certainly recognised: users come from the
>best-educated, best-paid 2% of the world's population, and their student
>children.


Anyone who wants to look into this further should check out the NUA surveys
site referenced below - an excellent source of Internet-related facts and
figures. There's also a mailing list, NUA Internet Surveys, which is well
worth subbing to for access to this sort of information.

Simon

>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 15:40:43 -0400
>From: Vin Crosbie <crosbie@well.com>
>To: online-news@planetarynews.com
>Subject: 1%-3% of the world's population online
>
>-----------> This message was posted to the ONLINE-NEWS list. <-----------
>
>The authoritative NUA Ltd. Internet consultancy in Dublin estimates that
>2.4% of the world's population is now online users.
>
>        http://www.nua.net/surveys/how_many_online/world.html
>
>Yes, you read that correctly -- 2.4% the total human population. Or one out
>of every 42 people worldwide.
>
>That is a stunning estimate in a world where so many people are poor and
>barely subsistent, yet NUA reinforces it with references to similar surveys
>and estimates by Reuters, Intelliquest, MIDAS, and Netree Internet
>Statistics, all of whose figures yield a range between 1.8% and 2.8% of the
>world's population is online.
>
>NUA cites surveys and estimates by country, which range from 45% of
>Iceland's population to 0.001% of The Peoples Republic of China's
>population are online. The compilation of surveys and estimates yields a
>figure of 115.75 million online users worldwide out of a total population
>of 4,823 million humans.

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 28 May 1998 15:31:17 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: more internet -2
In-Reply-To:  <v03110700b193406ceec9@[195.200.19.50]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 06:01 PM 5/28/98 +0100, Simon wrote:
>>> distance
>>>Communities based on mutual interests can form political
>>>will, but the changes they agree to are harder to
>>>implement in physical reality when members are physically
>>>distant, or the member's physically local community has disparate
>>>values.

>Distance communities of grassroots activists *can* have a powerful effect
>on real-world political issues. Negotiations on the awful MAI (Multilateral
>Agreement on Investment) treaty were halted by a loose-knit coalition of
>grassroots activist groups from around the world working together via the
>Internet. By using the net to organise and educate, to get information out
>in an accessible format to a mass of people who otherwise probably wouldn't
>even have heard of MAI, let alone understood what the issues were really
>about, these groups exposed what were secretive, behind-closed-doors
>negotiations to the glare of informed world opinion. And they succeeded in
>closing the negotiations down - something that wouldn't have happened
>without the Internet!
>
>I can forward an article about this offlist to anyone who is interested -
>not wishing to turn the list into a political forum, but the subject was
>brought up.

Hi Simon,

I suppose I could mumble that all is political, but the reason I posted
this was because I thought it covered some of the issues we are
dealing with on this list . Issues to do with communicating in
cyberspace.

I agree a great deal of activism and connection is possible - and
I have sent off lots of e-mails to various politicians, groups, etc.,
protesting or bringing issues to someone's attaention - from the
French testing in the Pacific to whale testing near Hawaii to one
just today about the arrests of Conscientious Objectors in Greece.

I don't know the figures on who has access to the Internet, but
certainly it would seem that those who do would have the capability
to defend/protest their issues more than those who don't.

Julienne

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 29 May 1998 00:55:52 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: more internet -2
In-Reply-To:  <19980528200249.WWR5374@default>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Hi Simon,
>
>I suppose I could mumble that all is political, but the reason I posted
>this was because I thought it covered some of the issues we are
>dealing with on this list . Issues to do with communicating in
>cyberspace.

Hello Julienne,

It's okay, I wasn't taking issue with you posting the piece here (it's not
without relevance and interest), rather wanting to take issue with a
particular observation that the author made in the piece. Like HooN, I
thought the article as a whole was over-generalised; ironic also that the
author was berating a supposed ideology of 'Net-ism', yet his own stance
was ideological, I thought, and his piece less interesting for it.

The political comment re community triggered another 'communication mode'
in me. In another list context I would have forwarded the MAI article; my
not wanting to post it here was because it was, I felt, straightforward
political reporting - hence my "political forum" comment. Hanging out on a
diverse collection of lists as I do, I'm quite sensitive to the 'aura' of
each list - perhaps oversensitive sometimes!

On reflection, there's one extract from the MAI article that might resonate
here (recalling Walter's McLuhan quote about the walls going out - Re:
On-line Psychotherapy: Pros & Cons, 18/5/98):

>By pooling their
>information they have broken through the wall of secrecy that
>traditionally surrounds international negotiations, forcing governments to
>deal with their complaints.
>
>"We are in constant contact with our allies in other countries," said
>Maude Barlow, the Council of Canadians' chairwoman. "If a negotiator says
>something to someone over a glass of wine, we'll have it on the Internet
>within an hour, all over the world."

As the victory over MAI shows, walls going out can alter the balance of
power - an issue also, I imagine, for the therapist/client relationship.


>I agree a great deal of activism and connection is possible - and
>I have sent off lots of e-mails to various politicians, groups, etc.,
>protesting or bringing issues to someone's attaention - from the
>French testing in the Pacific to whale testing near Hawaii to one
>just today about the arrests of Conscientious Objectors in Greece.

Julienne, you do seem to have a need to fight the good fight! My sense of
you also from your presence here. Not a criticism, just an observation.


>I don't know the figures on who has access to the Internet, but
>certainly it would seem that those who do would have the capability
>to defend/protest their issues more than those who don't.
>
>Julienne

It's hard to disagree with this, given the sheer number of people not on
the net - but at the same time it's not that straightfoward an equation.
There are many not on the net who have representation through those who
are. Chiapas is a good example. The anti-MAI battle, also, which was fought
on behalf of a wide range of constituencies.


Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 29 May 1998 04:57:14 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <19980527094409.AAA14943@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Julienne,
you wrote:


> Walter, you didn't bring this up, but I think it was Judith who did,
> and I'd just like to comment on it here.
>
> There has been much talk of the "history" JoAnne and I shared.
> We had been briefly on a list together which died.

When you add here that you would just like to comment ... what is
your purpose?  I sense underlying feelings but I can only guess
and they seem still in a complex knot.  I am more interested in
such process matters than the facts ... it seems that presenting
facts without decaring the undrlying purpose and felings and
intentions, simply provokes a debate with JoAnne who then may
wish to match fact with fact.  This is of no interest to me
without some sort of "dialogue of intentions", and I dont think
it will get very far.

My intention in posting this is to do what I can to prevent just
endless repitition of the same *process*.  In this thread "... a
shift in the process" I stated that I thiught there had been a
shift in the discussion ... I am not so sure now.  It feels on
the edge of an old stylle tit for tat debate.

Hmmm... later
I have received more mail and JoAnne went tat.


Walter





__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 29 May 1998 01:31:01 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <356f3846.1281742@mail.datablast.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 04:57 AM 5/29/98 +0000, Walter wrote:
>Julienne,
>you wrote:

>> Walter, you didn't bring this up, but I think it was Judith who did,
>> and I'd just like to comment on it here.
>>
>> There has been much talk of the "history" JoAnne and I shared.
>> We had been briefly on a list together which died.
>
>When you add here that you would just like to comment ... what is
>your purpose?  I sense underlying feelings but I can only guess
>and they seem still in a complex knot.  I am more interested in
>such process matters than the facts ... it seems that presenting
>facts without decaring the undrlying purpose and felings and
>intentions, simply provokes a debate with JoAnne who then may
>wish to match fact with fact.  This is of no interest to me
>without some sort of "dialogue of intentions", and I dont think
>it will get very far.
>
>My intention in posting this is to do what I can to prevent just
>endless repitition of the same *process*.  In this thread "... a
>shift in the process" I stated that I thiught there had been a
>shift in the discussion ... I am not so sure now.  It feels on
>the edge of an old stylle tit for tat debate.
>
>Hmmm... later
>I have received more mail and JoAnne went tat.

My purpose in bringing this up, Walter, was that it has been referred to
several times by others on this list in the last week or so, and going back
to last year. There was an assumption, because of JoAnne's comments, that
JoAnne and I knew each other well, and that her judgements of me were based
on long-term experience with me. I didn't feel like writing a whole post on
it, so I just added it in here. I was responding to others' reference to
that relationship. My attempts to play it down instead of writing a whole
post about it apparently evoked absolutely the opposite reaction in you.

It would seem that my previous determination not to speak at all about
anything to do with JoAnne was my best decision. Once again I am simply
finding myself on the defensive.  I did not begin this round with JoAnne,
just as I didn't begin the last one. But I can end it, and so I will. Now.

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 29 May 1998 06:12:35 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <19980529053137.LFQJ5374@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Julienne,

> My purpose in bringing this up, Walter, was that it has been referred to
> several times by others on this list in the last week or so, and going back
> to last year. ...

This is not what i meant by purpose or intentions.  The sort of
thing I suggest would be along the lines of:

"I feel scared that others here will feel ill of me ... or see me
in a bad light ... I'd like to hear from others what impression
they have of me after what JoAnne wrote .... "

This may not be your intention ... it is still not clear to me.

~~~

I am afraid that this sounds patronising ...

I don't really wish to go into teacher mode ... I guess i have
done that before and referred you back to the old post, which you
did not wish to read.  I am annoyed about.  It seems you want
assistance from me at times and them reject it as well ...
perhaps because it does sound patronising.

My intentions remain that I am valuing the shift in process and
this exchange seems futile.

However your decision that you stop, now, as you say simply
leaves matters unfinished.  Just where they were.

~~~

All,
This is not a  "test shadow" ...

how to face the shadow when we wish to walk away from... which
is what i am doing here ... (I am not referring to any one person
here ... I think of a phenomena which is collective and includes
my own shadow ... when I want to withdraw ... )  Is the thread on
net-ism as interesting as it is, a form of withdrawal from this
nitty gritty stuff?  Unconscious ... ?

It is certainly easier to process fires once they are ashes,
worth while if it can assist with the now!  I think this would be
a good time for some processing in the "group Conscience" thread.


~~~

So when i suggest you don't simply stop Julienne is not to throw
oil on the fire.  I'd suggest you use a new tack! really.
Perhaps ask others what they might do.


Walter















__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 29 May 1998 03:35:52 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <35734ae4.6047839@mail.datablast.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 06:12 AM 5/29/98 +0000, Walter wrote:
>Julienne,
>
>> My purpose in bringing this up, Walter, was that it has been referred to
>> several times by others on this list in the last week or so, and going back
>> to last year. ...
>
>This is not what i meant by purpose or intentions.  The sort of
>thing I suggest would be along the lines of:
>
>"I feel scared that others here will feel ill of me ... or see me
>in a bad light ... I'd like to hear from others what impression
>they have of me after what JoAnne wrote .... "

"I feel scared that others here will think ill of me"? You're
kidding, Walter. How could they possibly think more ill
of me than they expressed last year?

>This may not be your intention ... it is still not clear to me.

Walter, I think this is nuts!!  If someone says that I have four heads
and green hair and burn down houses, why on earth would I want
to know what  people think of me based on a lot of junk?

I am not an experiment for you and this list! I am a human being, and
I am tired of feeling like part of your Internet experiment.

>I am afraid that this sounds patronising ...

Sounds dehumanizing.

>I don't really wish to go into teacher mode ... I guess i have
>done that before and referred you back to the old post, which you
>did not wish to read.  I am annoyed about.  It seems you want
>assistance from me at times and them reject it as well ...
>perhaps because it does sound patronising.

What old post? I have never been able to get back to the achives -
so please don't keep asking me to do so. When I click on
the sites you mention, they lead me nowhere. It is very

apparent that you are annoyed, apparently because I have
not done something you think I should have done, but which
I am unable to do.

I didn't ask for your help this time - just last time. Apparently
help is only offered when one is not needy.

>My intentions remain that I am valuing the shift in process and
>this exchange seems futile.

I am not a process, and I feel as though process is valued here
more than people.

You have all discussed me before without any input from me.
You have discussed what I am like with only JoAnne's
statements. Go ahead and do it again - I can't stop you.

>However your decision that you stop, now, as you say simply
>leaves matters unfinished.  Just where they were.

My experience is that there is not a "finish" for this matter.
If you want to discuss my green hair and four heads, go ahead.
You apparently need no information from me about my feelings
or experience to deal with me. Let JoAnne fantasize my beliefs
and attitudes and actions, and you can go right ahead and
discuss her constructions without my input.

>All,
>This is not a  "test shadow" ...

What is it Freud said about negatives?

>how to face the shadow when we wish to walk away from... which
>is what i am doing here ... (I am not referring to any one person
>here ... I think of a phenomena which is collective and includes
>my own shadow ... when I want to withdraw ... )  Is the thread on
>net-ism as interesting as it is, a form of withdrawal from this
>nitty gritty stuff?  Unconscious ... ?

>It is certainly easier to process fires once they are ashes,
>worth while if it can assist with the now!  I think this would be
>a good time for some processing in the "group Conscience" thread.

>So when i suggest you don't simply stop Julienne is not to throw
>oil on the fire.  I'd suggest you use a new tack! really.
>Perhaps ask others what they might do.

Walter, please listen to me. I do not want to deal with this any
morehere. I don't care what others would do. I am still raw from
what occurred last year, and I will not put myself through it again. Nor
will I allow you to use me as a group experiment. I cannot believe
you have become so angry with me - but I am back where I was
before with you. I don't feel I can trust you. Maybe it is your turn
to use a new tack.

Let JoAnne tell you she knows me well, and then have a good
discussion again about me based on her stories. Walter - the
head is nothing without the heart - even reason doesn't work
well when the emotions are disassociated.  When we lose
the human being we've lost everything.

Why are you still up at this hour of the night in Boston?
This is usually when you write from New Zealand.

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 29 May 1998 08:10:25 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: Group conscience, Here and Now
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

All,
Since I was brought into the fray, here's my two cents for whatever it is
worth...
*history*-my assumption in the use of the word meant that there were events
that preceded my experience...I didn't assume any length of time, meaning a
long or short time span...in fact it could have been one event...

so in my communication I used a word that has a different assumption to you
Juliene...my misspeak...I therefore ended tied up in my socks...

Underlying any exchange between people are assumptions and we get in
trouble when we, first, assume we both are assuming the same things and
therefore make no attempt to check the alignment, and second, when the
assumptions are not in alignment and we act from a place assuming they are
aligned which leads to distortions...
snip
>>> Walter, you didn't bring this up, but I think it was Judith who did,
>>> and I'd just like to comment on it here.
>>>
>>> There has been much talk of the "history" JoAnne and I shared.
>>> We had been briefly on a list together which died.

Judith

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 29 May 1998 08:55:42 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Julienne,
I suppose I have a choice in being silent, but I find I have an issue with
your generalization that people are not valued here, your feelings are
certainly valid, and I'm not negating you in any way...I can only speak for
myself, but I value you and all the participants here on the list...I
acknowledge that the experience gets confusing sometimes and I often have a
real sense of being part of the experiment...I grappled with this when I
first came to the list...but that is part of the intention as I understand
it when Walter began the list...so I worked thru my response...maybe
returning here after my near death experience has altered my way of being
here, but I am comfortable for the most part as we experience Walter's
vision...

>I am not a process, and I feel as though process is valued here
>more than people.
>
>You have all discussed me before without any input from me.
>You have discussed what I am like with only JoAnne's
>statements. Go ahead and do it again - I can't stop you.
>
>>However your decision that you stop, now, as you say simply
>>leaves matters unfinished.  Just where they were.
>
>My experience is that there is not a "finish" for this matter.
>If you want to discuss my green hair and four heads, go ahead.
>You apparently need no information from me about my feelings
>or experience to deal with me. Let JoAnne fantasize my beliefs
>and attitudes and actions, and you can go right ahead and
>discuss her constructions without my input.

I know you were addressing this to Walter, however, I feel a need to
comment...your choice is always to take what I say or not...hopefully I
will be clear

I have *no* investment in entering into yours and JoAnne's experience...my
assumption is that there is no interest on your part (I don't have a sense
of JoAnne's) to resolve the issues between you..but I am assuming you have
no interest, keeping in mind I've never asked you what your interest
is...my experience of reading the posts is that you are a very passionate
person about life which I admire...and I think this medium filters out who
we each are in a wholistic sense, leaving me at least with a less than
complete picture of who we each are...therefore, I come from as assumption
that there is always an incomplete picture

what I hear in your posts is that the needle was set when you entered here
and in a highly emotional time you have been left with assumptions of you
which are not true to you and these keep being played out...I may be
projecting but my experience of not being *seen* use to be very unpleasant
to me...because I am so excentric my life has been about resolvingaccepting
that I am not seen...a very different place to have one's stake planted in
the ground...because I come from an assumption based on my life experience
that I am not seen, I often seek to be *seen* meaning in my way of
communicating I have to surface assumptions or else there are
misunderstandings...I had a lovely exchange with my ex husband driving to
our son's birthday...for some reason now he sees me...and this released
barriers which had been there for 30 years...

I am offering this not as process, yet with an intention of self reflection
as to my own experience, and admittedly as an olive branch to you,
Julienne...I sense you particularly in part because of our brief exchange
where I learned a a bit about you and your life which comes from a very
deep place of engagement...which I commented on...I also learned and
enjoyed my exchange with JoAnne...but I want to be very clear lest I leave
room for interpretation, I am not trying to *intervene* between the two of
you, and I for one would just as soon put it aside...

Very human-ly she says hopefully :-)
Judith going out to be with my paper

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 29 May 1998 12:31:01 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <v01550106b1941d5113a9@[207.54.160.168]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 08:55 AM 5/29/98 -0400, Judith wrote:
>Julienne,
>I suppose I have a choice in being silent, but I find I have an issue with
>your generalization that people are not valued here, your feelings are
>certainly valid, and I'm not negating you in any way...I can only speak for
>myself, but I value you and all the participants here on the list...I
>acknowledge that the experience gets confusing sometimes and I often have a
>real sense of being part of the experiment...I grappled with this when I
>first came to the list...but that is part of the intention as I understand
>it when Walter began the list...so I worked thru my response...maybe
>returning here after my near death experience has altered my way of being
>here, but I am comfortable for the most part as we experience Walter's
>vision...

Hi Judith,

Well, Judith, I admit I overgeneralized in my response to Walter last night -
but I was reallly shocked at his response to me. I had tried to be so
careful not to escalate the situation with JoAnne again - and to only
refute a few glaring misunderstandings. Walter called me on my
response to JoAnne - accusing me of setting JoAnne up to need to respond
to me - whereas he hadn't said boo to JoAnne about provoking me. I felt as
though JoAnne had once again provoked me, and then when I responded,
Walter started with my response rather than JoAnne's provocation. JoAnne
has, for several weeks, been mentioning her departure from my list - and
I let her comments go. When I finally responded as calmly as I could -
Walter became very angry at me.


Suddenly, as Walter did last year, this was made an issue where *I*
became the focus, rather than JoAnne.

>>I am not a process, and I feel as though process is valued here
>>more than people.

>>You have all discussed me before without any input from me.
>>You have discussed what I am like with only JoAnne's
>>statements. Go ahead and do it again - I can't stop you.
>>
>>>However your decision that you stop, now, as you say simply
>>>leaves matters unfinished.  Just where they were.
>>
>>My experience is that there is not a "finish" for this matter.
>>If you want to discuss my green hair and four heads, go ahead.
>>You apparently need no information from me about my feelings
>>or experience to deal with me. Let JoAnne fantasize my beliefs
>>and attitudes and actions, and you can go right ahead and
>>discuss her constructions without my input.
>
>I know you were addressing this to Walter, however, I feel a need to
>comment...your choice is always to take what I say or not...hopefully I
>will be clear

>I have *no* investment in entering into yours and JoAnne's experience...my
>assumption is that there is no interest on your part (I don't have a sense
>of JoAnne's) to resolve the issues between you..but I am assuming you have
>no interest, keeping in mind I've never asked you what your interest
>is...my experience of reading the posts is that you are a very passionate
>person about life which I admire...and I think this medium filters out who
>we each are in a wholistic sense, leaving me at least with a less than
>complete picture of who we each are...therefore, I come from as assumption
>that there is always an incomplete picture

I don't know why you don't have a sense of JoAnne's, when it is she who
brings up her issues with me - not I who brings them up.

I always have an interest in healing wounds, but I have come to the
conclusion that this is not always possible. I can't even say what I would
like to say, because it just gives JoAnne more fuel, and now will clearly
leave me open to another episode of Walter's telling me how I should
handle it all. This is like telling the battered woman how she should
handle her batterer - instead of looking to the batterer. And yes, I do
see JoAnne as a verbal batterer.

>what I hear in your posts is that the needle was set when you entered here

Yes. After my introductory post, which contained no reference to JoAnne
whatsoever, JoAnne began her tales of how I am not to be trusted,
accusing me of attacking her in my introduction. The foundation was
set.

>and in a highly emotional time you have been left with assumptions of you
>which are not true to you and these keep being played out...I may be
>projecting but my experience of not being *seen* use to be very unpleasant
>to me...because I am so excentric my life has been about resolvingaccepting
>that I am not seen...a very different place to have one's stake planted in
>the ground...because I come from an assumption based on my life experience
>that I am not seen, I often seek to be *seen* meaning in my way of
>communicating I have to surface assumptions or else there are
>misunderstandings...I had a lovely exchange with my ex husband driving to
>our son's birthday...for some reason now he sees me...and this released

>barriers which had been there for 30 years...

My issue is not that I'm not seen - but that whatever I say and do is
interpreted
through JoAnne's eyes. Lest that sound like I don't want to take
responsibility
for my own actions, let me say that I do. However, when one is accused of
being
an ax murderer, the people with whom one interacts are going to be very
nervous
any time they see one with an axe. No matter if I explain I am about to
chop down
a dead tree, there is going to be a nervousness and maybe a call to 911 to get
the police out to protect the community just in case.

*I* am not seen - but JoAnne's invention. Perhaps you see me more clearly
than others here, but even you didn't meet me without JoAnne's tales
of me. Her last post about me contained so much information which
was totally false - but where was Walter's reaction to her? He just
indicated that I had asked for it because I denied JoAnne's
previous misstatements.

>I am offering this not as process, yet with an intention of self reflection
>as to my own experience, and admittedly as an olive branch to you,
>Julienne...I sense you particularly in part because of our brief exchange
>where I learned a a bit about you and your life which comes from a very
>deep place of engagement...which I commented on...I also learned and
>enjoyed my exchange with JoAnne...but I want to be very clear lest I leave
>room for interpretation, I am not trying to *intervene* between the two of
>you, and I for one would just as soon put it aside...

I am happy to talk to you, because I sense a fairness. However, my experience

with JoAnne is that nothing good is to be gained in dealing with her - not
for me.

>Very human-ly she says hopefully :-)
>Judith going out to be with my paper

I have nothing wise and wonderful to say - just a deep disappointment
that this has all boiled up again and that it seems to be easier for
people to ask me to handle it than to ask JoAnne to. So be it - if I say
nothing then there is only JoAnne to deal with.

But thank you for trying, Judith. :)

Before she died last year, my boys and I had lunch with my
mother one day, and we taped her as she shared with us
some family history, and such. I asked her, at the end, what
she would like us most to know. If she had one piece of
advice to hand down to the generations to come, what
would it be? My mother said that we should never tell
anyone anything that we wouldn't feel comfortable
having the whole world know. I was really disappointed
and sad for her that these were her last words of advice,
so to speak. I also realized that this was part of an
ongoing issue between us, because I have always been
friendly and outgoing since I was tiny and she'd have to
come after me where I'd gone out to cheer up a homeless
person (or that period in history's version of a homeless
person), or to visit a neighbour. She felt I was not
self-protective enough. My feeling is that in protecting
oneself one is also isolating oneself, and cutting off
communication or potential connection with others -
so I struggle with this. But on this list I have found
repeatedly that I am not safe ( not that I'm really
safe anywhere - and nor is anyone totally safe
anywhere) - that speaking about myself or my feelings
leads to a trampling of them. Not from everyone,
obviously. But one person is enough.

Walter has wondered for many months why there
is so little posting and sharing on this list. I nearly
wrote at the time to say I didn't post because my
experience here was that JoAnne would be all over
me, invalidating what I had to say, making fun of
what I had to say as she did over my grief when my
parents died, and inventing the next chapter of my
life.  I am sad for whatever JoAnne is going through,
but I will not be her scapegoat. I am not going to share
my heart where the accusation has been made that I
don't have one. If that means I have to be quiet - then
I will be quiet. Maybe my Mum's advice is right this
time, as sad as I think her advice is. And maybe,
ironically,  that is also allowing myself to be
JoAnne's scapegoat. But that is the best way I
know how to handle this, at least for the moment.

Amen,

Julienne


Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 29 May 1998 17:55:20 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      no shift in the process, I guess
In-Reply-To:  <Version.32.19980529113601.01062f00@postoffice.att.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Julienne,

I think that you dare not point out these "errors" I keep making
because you cannot refute what I have to say.  If you could you'd be
dancing all over the list with proof instead of making noises about
how everyone is picking on you.

The archives are available to everyone.  If your browser isn't working
ask someone you trust for technical support.  How about Kris, she got
to the archives without trouble!  Everyone can see everything you or I
have said to each other on this list via those archives.  Making up
stories about me and what I've said on this list just makes you less
and less believable.

You feel sorry for what I am going through?  I'm not going through
anything to be sorry for, except maybe another round of Juliennities.

Judith asked what I want out of this interaction.  I'd like you to be
honest, whether that means admitting the truth or just not lying any
more.  Fairly simple, isn't it?  You don't even have to admit to
anything.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 08:21:44 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Barry Kennedy <kennedy.levy@XTRA.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

All

A past mentor once told me "Get involved!".  Which is why I joined the
list.  BTW I hereby choose (for myself) not to 'backchannel', and I don't
regard the list or the people in it as a cyberspace experiment.

I have followed this thread, and wrestle with myself about venturing to
post, or choosing to remain a silent reader/onlooker (lurker).  The former
has got the better of me.  Why my reluctance ?  I don't want to get
involved, risk being clumsy, take sides (or be thought to take sides),
rescue, or trivialise (or be thought to trivialise) JoAnne's, Julienne's,
or Walter's flesh and blood
and real feelings.

Walter said:

> My intentions remain that I am valuing the shift in process and
> this exchange seems futile.

I don't think so.  Julienne hasn't let you off the hook, and you have now
responded honestly, confronting her, and forcing you to confront your own
shadow.

> how to face the shadow when we wish to walk away from... which
> is what i am doing here ...
>
> It is certainly easier to process fires once they are ashes,
> worth while if it can assist with the now!  I think this would be
> a good time for some processing in the "group Conscience" thread.

Or would that be "to walk away from. . ." ?
What I do like is that you haven't (as far as I'm aware) moderated or
cooled this thread.


JoAnne said:

> I gave Wilbur one address of one person who ran one list, who had
> expressed her displeasure with your participation on that list.

Ouch !  Not ok, I think, JoAnne.  Kinda like when someone trusts us with a
confidence, and we "only tell one person. . . " (who tells only one person,
who tells only one person. .)
I have found your posts to Julienne frank and tenacious.


Julienne said:

> You have all discussed me before without any input from me.
> You have discussed what I am like with only JoAnne's
> statements. Go ahead and do it again - I can't stop you.

You're right - you can't stop people talking about you, here or rl or
wherever.
My observation is that you express yourself in a full way, and with heart.
I think both you and JoAnne want the last word.
Do you want Walter to get JoAnne off your back ?

> Why are you still up at this hour of the night in Boston?
> This is usually when you write from New Zealand.

10 pm any night, and I'm looking for my bed.  10 pm, Walter is just waking
up, ready to cyberparty.  An inveterate night owl fuelled by short black
coffees.


Barry
____________________________________
Barry Kennedy<kennedy.levy@xtra.co.nz>

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 29 May 1998 16:51:47 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <199805292025.IAA06586@cyclops.xtra.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 08:21 AM 5/30/98 +1200, Barry wrote:

>Julienne said:
>
>> You have all discussed me before without any input from me.
>> You have discussed what I am like with only JoAnne's
>> statements. Go ahead and do it again - I can't stop you.

>You're right - you can't stop people talking about you, here or rl or
>wherever.
>My observation is that you express yourself in a full way, and with heart.

Hi Barry,

I don't actually express myself fully on this list, nor with my whole
heart. I hold back because I don't want to fuel the fire. When I feel
the other person comes from a place of integrity, I am more
fully revealing. How could I reveal information where someone
might carry it to person/people s/he feels might like to use it
against me - as JoAnne did?

>I think both you and JoAnne want the last word.

Well, she may have it.

>Do you want Walter to get JoAnne off your back ?

How? She chases me from list to list. Maybe she'll
win a free trip round the world. :)

No. Last year I needed his help. This year I am not
asking for his help. I assume responsibility for
getting JoAnne off my back myself. I realize that
will probably not happen - but I'll just deal with it.

>> Why are you still up at this hour of the night in Boston?
>> This is usually when you write from New Zealand.

Walter's post seemed to come in very late last night
from Boston.

>10 pm any night, and I'm looking for my bed.  10 pm, Walter is just waking
>up, ready to cyberparty.  An inveterate night owl fuelled by short black
>coffees.

I, too...minus the coffee. Guava or mango or some such juice.:)

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 29 May 1998 16:31:18 -0700
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         kate collie <kcollie@UNIXG.UBC.CA>
Subject:      hello
In-Reply-To:  <356ed234.9617642@mail.datablast.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

I joined this list a few days ago, and would like to introduce myself.
It's not clear to me yet what this list is, but what brought me to it is
my interest in Internet counselling--specifically Internet art therapy,
the subject of my current research project here at the University of
British Columbia (in Vancouver, Canada). I have been thinking about
Internet communication, gender differences in attitudes to
computer-mediated communication...

Kate Collie

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 03:25:27 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: no shift in the process, I guess
In-Reply-To:  <3577f618.13812218@mail.clark.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

JoAnne,
you wrote:

> Judith asked what I want out of this interaction.  I'd like you to be
> honest, whether that means admitting the truth or just not lying any
> more.  Fairly simple, isn't it?  You don't even have to admit to
> anything.

What is your intention one level ... or even a couple <grin> on
from that ... what is motivating you to want Julienne to be
honest.

Also.  To say Julienne is lying will no doubt go against whatever
deeper intention you have.  It is also very close if not right on
the mark of being an ad hominem attack which it not wanted here
as mentioned in the welcome file.

It takes two to do a tit for tat.

~~~

My intentions?  I want to see a resolution ...  ok, to take my
own prompting ... what is behind that?  I don't want people to
leave ... i want us to have a sense of achievement.  Which would
be to achieve what is in our description and charter ... to learn
about leadership in cs, to learn about the psyche in cs, to form
collegial relationship around our net psychological interests.
To learn from this experience.  To feel some pride in (us) making
a *transformation* happen.  Ok, beyond that:  I want us to
collaborate on that so that we learn how to do that.  Why do i
want that...

I should write a full report on my experience in the Conference
on the Internet & Society ...  but let me say this.  There was a
lot of talk about education, commerce, community, governance,
politics, but very little about psychology, and what there was
mostly some results of telephone interviews about peoples
feelings about the net.

I found it a lonely place to be, though i met nice people and
generous good hearted people, and some who may even turn up here,
I felt we were doing something unique here.

The question of flames on lists and how some forums were
destroyed by flames etc. came up several times, and the universal
answer the "gurus" provided from experience was:

~~~

Dictatorship.

One rule:

Dont be an arsshole.

I decide who is an ass hole.

~~~

That is ok really.  I would advocte that for, say, a list on
sharing information about town planning.  However I want to go a
level deeper.  At the deepest level i am attempting to see the
exchanges between JoAnne and Juliennne as my psyche on the
screen!  In a place to explore psyche we cant just filter it all
out like net-nanny.

~~~

In that sense it is an aspect of my multiplicity rat rages out of
control ... at least that is how this enity perceives it!

Can any one understand me?


Walter















__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 03:25:31 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Experiential learning.
In-Reply-To:  <199805292025.IAA06586@cyclops.xtra.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

All,


Barry you wrote, in another thread, in response to Julienne:

> regard the list or the people in it as a cyberspace experiment.

The word experiment is in the description of the list ...  from
memory it is:

:: for each of us to experiment with ways of being in cs

that is the intention at least ... this notion has its roots in
one of the several stated branches of the tree of ideas that
Psybernet draws on;  Moreno.  Every person is able to be their
own researcher and experimenter.  I find this a deeply profound
idea.  We do not phone up people to learn about cs.  Nor do we
have participant observers.  We derive our knowing from
experience, and then we ... as it said in the charter *voice that
learning*.

I understand fully that many of us have had enough of the old
style sociology and psychology and social science.  I think this
is different ... and not *Walter's* experiment any more than any
one else's.

I think a separate *Thread* on this is worth having ... as it is
a complex I idea that.  It probably requires some good links to
various papers on the subject.

How does that sound now Barry?  Julienne?

Just because it is in the charter does not mean it cant be
discussed or altered ... but it is worth attending to the overall
stated purpose.

~~~

I think what i am doing here is acting as List owner, host,
stating what the ethos is here.  I see this as important as some
people now or in the future might be here for this very aspect of
the charter.  To not honour it would be to be without boundaries,
containment.

I'm really pleased that you both raise the matter as it is
something that needs to come out clearly.

It will also be good to be able to refer someone to this thread
so we do not perpetually need to reinvent the wheel.




Walter



__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 03:25:34 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <199805292025.IAA06586@cyclops.xtra.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Barry,

> Julienne hasn't let you off the hook, and you have now responded
> honestly, confronting her, and forcing you to confront your own
> shadow.

Ah, thank you.  You understand me.  I take it from what you say
that you think i should do it again, as i am still not off the
hook!

~~~

Barry, you ask if some processing, as i suggested, in the "cool
channel" would be "to walk away from. . ." my shadow.

Hmmm, perhaps.  I see you as processing this with me here and
this is the sort of thing i meant ... ok, it is not under that
Subject heading ... but this is all I need.  I was unsure of the
value of "responding honestly, confronting her" as you put it.  I
was certainly unsure of doing it again.  I still am but stating
it like this here puts a cooler light on my own heat.  Why i
think that is 'processing' is that there is some collaborative
supervision, meta stuff here ... to throw words at it from our
recent discourse.

~~~

> 10 pm any night, and I'm looking for my bed.  10 pm, Walter is just waking
> up, ready to cyberparty.  An inveterate night owl fuelled by short black
> coffees.

Now you are talking about me!  Fine by me but i rarely drink
coffee after about 8.00pm.  That keeps me going all night anyway.

Still here in Cambridge.  Tired.  So tired, as they say, i have
to go straight to the computer.  Flying in the AM.

Wheeee


Walter

__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 03:25:37 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: hello
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.GSO.3.95q.980529162455.9024C-100000@netinfo3.ubc.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

kate collie
you wrote:

> what brought me to it is
> my interest in Internet counselling--specifically Internet art therapy,
> the subject of my current research project here at the University of
> British Columbia

Wow.  Oh dear, I have just been saying nasty things about some
forms of research ... please do not take that personally.  I
think this is an excellent match for the purposes you describe.
One of the aims here, is to *form relationships around our
professional net psychological interests.*  from memory.  I would
love to participate in art therapy on the net!  What a wonderful
thought.  (perhaps i will need a later coffee!)

I am personally motivated to create an environment where depth
psychological work can be done for a fee on the net.  I have, to
date, not felt that i knew enough about the contours and rhythms
of cyberspace to do that.  I have a sense i am closer to that
after many years exploring the nooks and crannies *off* the
super-hiway.  The recent Harvard conference, was very
stimulating, and has also helped.

I have avoided the word *therapy* here as it could give the
impression of some sort of medical or health benefit, which I
think is entirely possible, however not everyone might see their
experience in a group or individually, in that light!

Did you get the Description of this forum as you Joined?  In my
sig is the web page for Psybernet, if you go to the Psyber-L page
all the files are there.

I hope you find it fruitful here, and that any difficult times
will stand you in good stead, lead to transformations, that will
be of benefit to your future clients!


Walter





__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 03:42:53 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
Organization: psybernet
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <19980529205403.XINL5374@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Julienne

We are not in alignment Julienne, and it seems you have assumed
bad intentions, rather than misunderstanding  on my part.  I
think we misunderstand each other and you miss my intentions, we
have one of those talking past each other situations.  I
attempted to be empathic and it felt dehumanising to you.  I am
happy to get to the bottom of that ith you.  How is that for you?


~~~

I am happy to forward you privately any post I quote if that is
needed.  I was annoyed, not because you could not do it, but
because you dismiss casually the effort i go to write such a
post and then to find it several months later, and then to.

~~~

I focus on process so that i can value you as a person.  I think
the process of the exchanges have been unproductive.  I
understand process to be broad ... to include us all and the
structure of the list as well!  Good people in a messy situation,
stemming back to some structural factors i think in addition to
out personalities.

The other reason i focus on the process is that the content is
not the problem.  I have not judged you on the basis of the
content of JoAnne's words.  I see the opening words of the
sentences which are provocative.  (Only if the other person is
susceptible to being provoked in this way!) My judgment is about
the process not you, and i do trust my knowledge of process, ie I
have good judgment of it.

I wrote to you on this occasion, not JoAnne because I was in a
dialogue with you.  I judge the process to be symmetrical and
escalating through its symmetry.

The discussion about how to attend to flames in a list is
important.  I understand that it might not be for you.  It is
within your power to not post.  Do you have a request or a
specific person that might help you?

When i post, you feel dehumanised, and I think you
do not see the human in me.  Do you feel dehumanised in this
post?  Is not continuing the discussion with JoAnne include this
as well.


Walter
__________________________________________________________________
Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 00:18:50 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: no shift in the process, I guess
In-Reply-To:  <357653ba.13189700@mail.datablast.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 03:25 AM 5/30/98 +0000, Walter wrote:
>JoAnne,
> >you wrote:
>
>> Judith asked what I want out of this interaction.  I'd like you to be
>> honest, whether that means admitting the truth or just not lying any
>> more.  Fairly simple, isn't it?  You don't even have to admit to
>> anything.
>
>What is your intention one level ... or even a couple <grin> on
>from that ... what is motivating you to want Julienne to be
>honest.
>
>Also.  To say Julienne is lying will no doubt go against whatever
>deeper intention you have.  It is also very close if not right on
>the mark of being an ad hominem attack which it not wanted here
>as mentioned in the welcome file.
>
>It takes two to do a tit for tat.
>
>~~~
>
>My intentions?  I want to see a resolution ...  ok, to take my
>own prompting ... what is behind that?  I don't want people to
>leave ... i want us to have a sense of achievement.  Which would
>be to achieve what is in our description and charter ... to learn
>about leadership in cs, to learn about the psyche in cs, to form
>collegial relationship around our net psychological interests.
>To learn from this experience.  To feel some pride in (us) making
>a *transformation* happen.  Ok, beyond that:  I want us to
>collaborate on that so that we learn how to do that.  Why do i
>want that...

>I decide who is an ass hole.
>
>~~~
>
>That is ok really.  I would advocte that for, say, a list on
>sharing information about town planning.  However I want to go a
>level deeper.  At the deepest level i am attempting to see the
>exchanges between JoAnne and Juliennne as my psyche on the
>screen!  In a place to explore psyche we cant just filter it all
>out like net-nanny.
>
>~~~
>
>In that sense it is an aspect of my multiplicity rat rages out of
>control ... at least that is how this enity perceives it!
>
>Can any one understand me?

I think I understand you, Walter. I see you as wanting harmony
and healing and an intact list and one big whole healthy
"family", where conflicts are healed.

That may be my projection, because it is certainly what I
usually try for in my own life.

My problem, Walter, is that I feel subsumed to your process.
I feel that you want me to make you happy instead of doing
what is also right for me. If I could do both, I would try to.
But I do not want to expose myself any more to JoAnne.

When one keeps talking about how s/he wants everyone else to be
"honest" - and this is a real issue with JoAnne, and not just in her
interaction with me, then one has to ask what is his/her difficulty
with honesty?

I have difficulty discussing this, because I feel that whatever I
say, it just gives JoAnne a chance to escalate and increase
her list of accusations and tales about me.

Also, this is not my whole life. I have a lot of other serious
things happening, and I don't want to take my energy and
time away from what is most important.

I feel, Walter, that my finding a satisfactory resolution
with JoAnne is important to you, whether or not it is
equally important to me.

I also feel that you ignore, or dismiss, the very real
pain this ongoing attack from JoAnne and the joining
in of many list members, caused me. I don't want to
open myself to that again just to make you feel better.

Your thoughts?

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 00:42:34 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: no shift in the process, I guess
In-Reply-To:  <357653ba.13189700@mail.datablast.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>
>Can any one understand me?
>
>
>Walter,

Walter,

It's late here in Cleveland...12:03am to be as exact as my tweaked computer
clock (set to be slightly fast on purpose!) allows for.

Yes, I understand, to some extent...

***

How could we ever summarize how Psyber-L got *here*?

***

Or: learning of and about newcomers here, how might they appreciate this
moment without a feel for the moments that preceded it?

***

As for the psyche, psychology, and the aspects of the interpersonal it is a
bit of a muddle given that there are numerous frameworks, disciplines,
philosophies, rationales, psychologies, terminologies, catagories,
therapies, sciences, etc.

then there is the multiplicity of the individual and personal which is the
moment-to-ment entirety which is both made disntinct as a partial sharing
of our self into this space but is also an expression of the group as well
as the group's expression through each of us.

***

It gets curiouser.

As I write this a.m. I am 'intimate' in my participation here, and on
NETDYNAM, but also observe and not often participate in jung-psych, jung,
and jung-circle, while sustaining a peripheral interest in about a half
dozen other lists having to do with music.

Each is different as far as the feel goes. More 'heady' or more 'hearty',
prone or not so prone to primitive acting out, circumspected by limited or
not so limited notions of mutuality, recreation tending toward
(re)creation, intellectual novelty allowed here, not allowed (and
desert-dry,) elsewhere...

(you get my drift...)

all the lists are performance space and performative spaces. Wow!

***

On NETDYNAM sometimes we will subject the group's dynamic to analysis using
both the basic assumptions of Bion and Melanie Klein's catagories. There we
have both the shared experience of taking ourselves too seriously,
(understanding that most 'psychological' professionals do not hang around
long once they encounter our group's navel gazing excluding an extension of
general knowledge,) and the numerous 'a-ha's' of sharing together the
survivable flood of intolerant splitting which has lead NETDYNAM into the
'depressive' or, (as I personally term it,) the *learning* position.

Oddly, the Jung lists don't now, and historically have not, tended to
observe their own dynamics introspectively at all. Instead they are spaces
for leaping intellects, clarifications, strange replays, and outbursts of
soul which recede. Yet, they differ from each other, also.

PSYBER-L remains my list home, but it is the list not only that I am most
attached to, but also the list with the greatest tendency to evoke, to
descend, to ascend, to know it's self

to not know it's self.

***

It is a rare opportunity. If we aren't ourselves intermixed in this
Psyber-L space, (the medium is us!,) then what part of us is here?

***

If I might shrink the consideration intuitively, with apologies to all
newcomers, (my soul is oblique :-) :

we, again, wonder about the necessity of civility; then there is necessary
engagement; we wonder about intention; and then there is the inevitable
collision with interpretation and history...Psyber-L soulspace...the shadow
is cast.

***

How important is the conundrum about dialogue here?

What is all this stuff: process, experiment, engagement...honesty...trust?

And, why, do we sometimes follow the very first commands which come into
our head? <g>

***

Ha! We are here because what is hidden and even shunned wants to be known,

wants to be creative,

wants to create.

***

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 00:30:49 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Julienne,
I want to respond in a timely way to your posting, however, I am in
coughing fairly violently...a condition left over from the tumor where I
have no immune system so when a bug gets me I have only prayer...
>At 08:55 AM 5/29/98 -0400, Judith wrote:
>>Julienne,
>>I suppose I have a choice in being silent, but I find I have an issue with
>>your generalization that people are not valued here, your feelings are
>>certainly valid, and I'm not negating you in any way...I can only speak for
>>myself, but I value you and all the participants here on the list...I
>>acknowledge that the experience gets confusing sometimes and I often have a
>>real sense of being part of the experiment...I grappled with this when I
>>first came to the list...but that is part of the intention as I understand
>>it when Walter began the list...so I worked thru my response...maybe
>>returning here after my near death experience has altered my way of being
>>here, but I am comfortable for the most part as we experience Walter's
>>vision...
>
>Hi Judith,
>
>Well, Judith, I admit I overgeneralized in my response to Walter last night -
>but I was reallly shocked at his response to me. I had tried to be so
>careful not to escalate the situation with JoAnne again - and to only
>refute a few glaring misunderstandings. Walter called me on my
>response to JoAnne - accusing me of setting JoAnne up to need to respond
>to me - whereas he hadn't said boo to JoAnne about provoking me. I felt as
>though JoAnne had once again provoked me, and then when I responded,
>Walter started with my response rather than JoAnne's provocation. JoAnne
>has, for several weeks, been mentioning her departure from my list - and
>I let her comments go. When I finally responded as calmly as I could -
>Walter became very angry at me.
>
>
>Suddenly, as Walter did last year, this was made an issue where *I*
>became the focus, rather than JoAnne.

This is your truth Julienne...I acknowledge this...however, I view it
collectively and experience the focus as the *issue* between you and
JoAnne...
>
>>>I am not a process, and I feel as though process is valued here
>>>more than people.
>
>>>You have all discussed me before without any input from me.
>>>You have discussed what I am like with only JoAnne's
>>>statements. Go ahead and do it again - I can't stop you.
>>>
>>>>However your decision that you stop, now, as you say simply
>>>>leaves matters unfinished.  Just where they were.
>>>
>>>My experience is that there is not a "finish" for this matter.
>>>If you want to discuss my green hair and four heads, go ahead.
>>>You apparently need no information from me about my feelings
>>>or experience to deal with me. Let JoAnne fantasize my beliefs
>>>and attitudes and actions, and you can go right ahead and
>>>discuss her constructions without my input.
>>
>>I know you were addressing this to Walter, however, I feel a need to
>>comment...your choice is always to take what I say or not...hopefully I
>>will be clear
>
>>I have *no* investment in entering into yours and JoAnne's experience...my
>>assumption is that there is no interest on your part (I don't have a sense
>>of JoAnne's) to resolve the issues between you..but I am assuming you have
>>no interest, keeping in mind I've never asked you what your interest
>>is...my experience of reading the posts is that you are a very passionate
>>person about life which I admire...and I think this medium filters out who
>>we each are in a wholistic sense, leaving me at least with a less than
>>complete picture of who we each are...therefore, I come from as assumption
>>that there is always an incomplete picture
>
>I don't know why you don't have a sense of JoAnne's, when it is she who
>brings up her issues with me - not I who brings them up.

Yes, I didn't take the time to assess deeply in the moment of writing with
you, so you are correct is calling me on it...

>I always have an interest in healing wounds, but I have come to the
>conclusion that this is not always possible. I can't even say what I would
>like to say, because it just gives JoAnne more fuel, and now will clearly
>leave me open to another episode of Walter's telling me how I should
>handle it all. This is like telling the battered woman how she should
>handle her batterer - instead of looking to the batterer. And yes, I do
>see JoAnne as a verbal batterer.
>
>>what I hear in your posts is that the needle was set when you entered here
>
>Yes. After my introductory post, which contained no reference to JoAnne
>whatsoever, JoAnne began her tales of how I am not to be trusted,
>accusing me of attacking her in my introduction. The foundation was
>set.

I wasn't back on the list at this point so I didn't experience the beginning...
>
>>and in a highly emotional time you have been left with assumptions of you
>>which are not true to you and these keep being played out...I may be
>>projecting but my experience of not being *seen* use to be very unpleasant
>>to me...because I am so excentric my life has been about resolvingaccepting
>>that I am not seen...a very different place to have one's stake planted in
>>the ground...because I come from an assumption based on my life experience
>>that I am not seen, I often seek to be *seen* meaning in my way of
>>communicating I have to surface assumptions or else there are
>>misunderstandings...I had a lovely exchange with my ex husband driving to
>>our son's birthday...for some reason now he sees me...and this released
>
>>barriers which had been there for 30 years...
>
>My issue is not that I'm not seen - but that whatever I say and do is
>interpreted
>through JoAnne's eyes. Lest that sound like I don't want to take
>responsibility
>for my own actions, let me say that I do. However, when one is accused of
>being
>an ax murderer, the people with whom one interacts are going to be very
>nervous
>any time they see one with an axe. No matter if I explain I am about to
>chop down
>a dead tree, there is going to be a nervousness and maybe a call to 911 to get
>the police out to protect the community just in case.

This is your assumption which I take exception with...I for one draw my
conclusions about someone from *my* experience with that person...Axe or
not :-)
I do acknowledge that we have a culture in the US which uses hearsay and
gossip...and I have experienced women particularly who have used this to my
detriment...however, I don't feel that there was malevolent intent on your
or JoAnne's part prior to the spit...my assumption
>
>*I* am not seen - but JoAnne's invention. Perhaps you see me more clearly
>than others here, but even you didn't meet me without JoAnne's tales
>of me. Her last post about me contained so much information which
>was totally false - but where was Walter's reaction to her? He just
>indicated that I had asked for it because I denied JoAnne's
>previous misstatements.
But you will remember I engaged you directly and began a conversation where
you responded and I began to have my sense of you begin...I must confess
that I have not attempted to follow all the accusations because there is no
way for me to tell what is going on except at the very least two very
different versions of an experience...

what I did engage Walter over was my uncomfortableness with hia
*intervention* because in my view it had a very low opportunity for success
and a very high opportunity for escallation...
>
>>I am offering this not as process, yet with an intention of self reflection
>>as to my own experience, and admittedly as an olive branch to you,
>>Julienne...I sense you particularly in part because of our brief exchange
>>where I learned a a bit about you and your life which comes from a very
>>deep place of engagement...which I commented on...I also learned and
>>enjoyed my exchange with JoAnne...but I want to be very clear lest I leave
>>room for interpretation, I am not trying to *intervene* between the two of
>>you, and I for one would just as soon put it aside...
>
>I am happy to talk to you, because I sense a fairness.

I certainly continue to hold open to you as well as JoAnne for I'm enjoying
being here, Julienne. What I value is relationship and experiencing the
mulideminsionality of people...such surprising, interesting opportunities
here

However, my experience
>
>with JoAnne is that nothing good is to be gained in dealing with her - not
>for me.
>
>>Very human-ly she says hopefully :-)
>>Judith going out to be with my paper
>
>I have nothing wise and wonderful to say - just a deep disappointment
>that this has all boiled up again and that it seems to be easier for
>people to ask me to handle it than to ask JoAnne to. So be it - if I say
>nothing then there is only JoAnne to deal with.
>
>But thank you for trying, Judith. :)
>
>Before she died last year, my boys and I had lunch with my
>mother one day, and we taped her as she shared with us
>some family history, and such. I asked her, at the end, what
>she would like us most to know. If she had one piece of
>advice to hand down to the generations to come, what
>would it be? My mother said that we should never tell
>anyone anything that we wouldn't feel comfortable
>having the whole world know. I was really disappointed
>and sad for her that these were her last words of advice,
>so to speak. I also realized that this was part of an
>ongoing issue between us, because I have always been
>friendly and outgoing since I was tiny and she'd have to
>come after me where I'd gone out to cheer up a homeless
>person (or that period in history's version of a homeless
>person), or to visit a neighbour. She felt I was not
>self-protective enough. My feeling is that in protecting
>oneself one is also isolating oneself, and cutting off
>communication or potential connection with others -
>so I struggle with this. But on this list I have found
>repeatedly that I am not safe ( not that I'm really
>safe anywhere - and nor is anyone totally safe
>anywhere) - that speaking about myself or my feelings
>leads to a trampling of them. Not from everyone,
>obviously. But one person is enough.
>
>Walter has wondered for many months why there
>is so little posting and sharing on this list. I nearly
>wrote at the time to say I didn't post because my
>experience here was that JoAnne would be all over
>me, invalidating what I had to say, making fun of
>what I had to say as she did over my grief when my
>parents died, and inventing the next chapter of my
>life.  I am sad for whatever JoAnne is going through,
>but I will not be her scapegoat. I am not going to share
>my heart where the accusation has been made that I
>don't have one.
On the contrary, Julienne, I feel your heart and it is hurting...just as I
feel JoAnne's...

 If that means I have to be quiet - then
>I will be quiet. Maybe my Mum's advice is right this
>time, as sad as I think her advice is. And maybe,
>ironically,  that is also allowing myself to be
>JoAnne's scapegoat. But that is the best way I
>know how to handle this, at least for the moment.
>
And life will undoubtedly continue to bring each of us ways to learn
more...I don't have any answers just a deep sense of sadness

Judith coughing away


>Amen,
>
>Julienne
>
>
>Julienne
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 00:43:49 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: no shift in the process, I guess
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Sorry Walter, I was sensing a deflation in your experience...I'm following
some of what you are asking JoAnne...all of what your intention for
Psyber-L, however, I lost you completely when you got to:
>In that sense it is an aspect of my *multiplicity rat rages out of
>control* ...:-) egad.
Judith

>JoAnne,
>you wrote:
>
>> Judith asked what I want out of this interaction.  I'd like you to be
>> honest, whether that means admitting the truth or just not lying any
>> more.  Fairly simple, isn't it?  You don't even have to admit to
>> anything.
>
>What is your intention one level ... or even a couple <grin> on
>from that ... what is motivating you to want Julienne to be
>honest.
>
>Also.  To say Julienne is lying will no doubt go against whatever
>deeper intention you have.  It is also very close if not right on
>the mark of being an ad hominem attack which it not wanted here
>as mentioned in the welcome file.
>
>It takes two to do a tit for tat.
>
>~~~
>
>My intentions?  I want to see a resolution ...  ok, to take my
>own prompting ... what is behind that?  I don't want people to
>leave ... i want us to have a sense of achievement.  Which would
>be to achieve what is in our description and charter ... to learn
>about leadership in cs, to learn about the psyche in cs, to form
>collegial relationship around our net psychological interests.
>To learn from this experience.  To feel some pride in (us) making
>a *transformation* happen.  Ok, beyond that:  I want us to
>collaborate on that so that we learn how to do that.  Why do i
>want that...
>
>I should write a full report on my experience in the Conference
>on the Internet & Society ...  but let me say this.  There was a
>lot of talk about education, commerce, community, governance,
>politics, but very little about psychology, and what there was
>mostly some results of telephone interviews about peoples
>feelings about the net.
>
>I found it a lonely place to be, though i met nice people and
>generous good hearted people, and some who may even turn up here,
>I felt we were doing something unique here.
>
>The question of flames on lists and how some forums were
>destroyed by flames etc. came up several times, and the universal
>answer the "gurus" provided from experience was:
>
>~~~
>
>Dictatorship.
>
>One rule:
>
>Dont be an arsshole.
>
>I decide who is an ass hole.
>
>~~~
>
>That is ok really.  I would advocte that for, say, a list on
>sharing information about town planning.  However I want to go a
>level deeper.  At the deepest level i am attempting to see the
>exchanges between JoAnne and Juliennne as my psyche on the
>screen!  In a place to explore psyche we cant just filter it all
>out like net-nanny.
>
>~~~
>
>In that sense it is an aspect of my multiplicity rat rages out of
>control ... at least that is how this enity perceives it!
>
>Can any one understand me?
>
>
>Walter
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________________________
>Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 00:53:05 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: Experiential learning.
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Walter, thanks for this... I'm not familiar with Moreno...?need more data
Thanks,
Judith
>All,
>
>
>Barry you wrote, in another thread, in response to Julienne:
>
>> regard the list or the people in it as a cyberspace experiment.
>
>The word experiment is in the description of the list ...  from
>memory it is:
>
>:: for each of us to experiment with ways of being in cs
>
>that is the intention at least ... this notion has its roots in
>one of the several stated branches of the tree of ideas that
>Psybernet draws on;  Moreno.  Every person is able to be their
>own researcher and experimenter.  I find this a deeply profound
>idea.  We do not phone up people to learn about cs.  Nor do we
>have participant observers.  We derive our knowing from
>experience, and then we ... as it said in the charter *voice that
>learning*.

This is confusing to me...how is deriving our knowing from experience
different than participant observers...I suspect a use of terms here that
are different than how I use them...and I sense a very real opportunity for
me to learn something powerful here because I experience my knowing from
participant observer...could be my actor's training

my use of participant observer comes out of Action Reflection Learning
which has its lineage from Reg Revans in England and then exported to US to
Columbia Teacher's college and the folks there...
>
>I understand fully that many of us have had enough of the old
>style sociology and psychology and social science.  I think this
>is different ... and not *Walter's* experiment any more than any
>one else's.
>
>I think a separate *Thread* on this is worth having ... as it is
>a complex I idea that.  It probably requires some good links to
>various papers on the subject.
>
>How does that sound now Barry?  Julienne?
>
>Just because it is in the charter does not mean it cant be
>discussed or altered ... but it is worth attending to the overall
>stated purpose.
>
>~~~
>
>I think what i am doing here is acting as List owner, host,
>stating what the ethos is here.  I see this as important as some
>people now or in the future might be here for this very aspect of
>the charter.  To not honour it would be to be without boundaries,
>containment.
>
>I'm really pleased that you both raise the matter as it is
>something that needs to come out clearly.
>
>It will also be good to be able to refer someone to this thread
>so we do not perpetually need to reinvent the wheel.
>
>
>
>
>Walter
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________________________
>Walter Logeman  walter@psybernet.co.nz  http://www.psybernet.co.nz
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 01:10:56 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      a sheep in the process
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

It was very surprising to learn one day something simple. In a conversation
provoked to feel about this idea, "As above, so below," my teacher at the
time suddenly stopped the fantastic speculation about the chain of being
and furrowed his brow and asked me,

"Really, as far as this world goes, it's probably better to understand what
is meant when the formulation goes like this: "As below, so above".

(ouch!)

***

There's in my mind a woman
of innocence, unadorned but

fair-featured, and smelling of
apples or grass. She wears

a utopian smock or shift, her hair
is light brown and smooth, and she

is kind and very clean
without ostentation -

but she has
no imagination.
And there's a girl

or old woman, or both,
dressed in opals and rags, feathers,

and torn taffeta,
who knows strange songs-

but she is not kind.


[Denise Levertov]

***

"For one should realize that one risks an unusual loneliness in controlling
the animus or anima. This is because a participation mystique is created by
not controlling them; when one allows a piece of one's self to wander about
and be projected into other people, it gives one a feeling of being
connected, And most connections in the world are of this sort.
Participation mystique provides this appearance of connection, but it is
never a real connection, it is never a relationship; it only gives one the
feeling of being a sheep in the flock. And that is, of course, something;
for if you disqualify yourself as a sheep, then you are necessarily out of
the flock, and you have to suffer a certain loneliness. Yet then you have a
chance to reestablish a connection, and this time it can be a conscious
relationship which is far more satisfactory." (C.G.Jung)

***

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 13:24:30 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Barry Kennedy <kennedy.levy@XTRA.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: hello
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Kate

I am merely a subscriber.  Welcome to the list.

Barry
____________________________________
Barry Kennedy<kennedy.levy@xtra.co.nz>

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 00:54:37 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <35727d69.1014585@mail.datablast.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 03:42 AM 5/30/98 +0000, Walter wrote:
>We are not in alignment Julienne, and it seems you have assumed
>bad intentions, rather than misunderstanding  on my part.  I
>think we misunderstand each other and you miss my intentions, we
>have one of those talking past each other situations.  I
>attempted to be empathic and it felt dehumanising to you.  I am
>happy to get to the bottom of that ith you.  How is that for you?

Fine. However I feel totally lost in your statement above.
When were you empathic and I missed it?

>I am happy to forward you privately any post I quote if that is
>needed.  I was annoyed, not because you could not do it, but
>because you dismiss casually the effort i go to write such a
>post and then to find it several months later, and then to.

Walter, please don't accuse mein this way. I don't know what
post you're referring to. And if it were several months ago,
please remember that at that time I was in deep grief, and
not doing much of anything. I was still wondering if I could
even find any sort of way to go on with my life.

I told you I am healing, but let me tell you how I feel. I
read an article recently about how more women than
men die after a heart attack because they are expected
to resume a normal life immediately. Husbands come
home from a heart attack, and their wives take care of
them. Wives come home, and are expected to cook the
meals and do the laundry within a few days. When I
have tried to tell you how I feel about what has been
happening in my life, I feel as though you expect me,
as JoAnne suggested, to get over it or get off onto the
sidewalk. If I'm here, then I have to be whole again.

I am healing, but I am not yet whole, and whether
you think that is a plea for sympathy or whatever
you might think of it, it is something I need you to
pay attention to because it is a very real part of my
life now. I am not going to push myself to be "over
it all" because I am not sure how much I can deal
with.

>I focus on process so that i can value you as a person.  I think
>the process of the exchanges have been unproductive.  I
>understand process to be broad ... to include us all and the
>structure of the list as well!  Good people in a messy situation,
>stemming back to some structural factors i think in addition to
>out personalities.

>The other reason i focus on the process is that the content is
>not the problem.  I have not judged you on the basis of the
>content of JoAnne's words.  I see the opening words of the
>sentences which are provocative.  (Only if the other person is
>susceptible to being provoked in this way!) My judgment is about
>the process not you, and i do trust my knowledge of process, ie I
>have good judgment of it.

Walter, I feel as though you are intellectualizing all this. if someone
were standing over you with a sword to your neck, how would you
feel if someone criticized you for yelling? And then criticized you for
using inappropriate words (in your view), or provocative, when
calling for help? That's how I feel. JoAnne invents stories about me,
asks me to defend myself and "tell the truth" against her charges,
and  you are offended by or critical of my attempts to handle this,
as though it were all an intellectual exercise. It's NOT! I, a human
being, am being accused of everything from being a liar to a
manhater to whatever else JoAnne wants to cook up in this
go-round, and while I sit there wounded by these attacks, you
grumble at me for the way I cry out.

>I wrote to you on this occasion, not JoAnne because I was in a
>dialogue with you.  I judge the process to be symmetrical and
>escalating through its symmetry.

But your writing occurs en groupe. What you write becomes
a public rebuke.

>The discussion about how to attend to flames in a list is
>important.  I understand that it might not be for you.  It is
>within your power to not post.  Do you have a request or a
>specific person that might help you?

How to attend to flames is of concern to me because I have
 3 e-mail lists of my own. Why do you ask if I need help?
Help with what? I am confused by your question.

>When i post, you feel dehumanised, and I think you
>do not see the human in me.  Do you feel dehumanised in this
>post?  Is not continuing the discussion with JoAnne include this
>as well.

I don't understand your last sentence, Walter.

You are also not taking account what we have just been through
with JoAnne on one of my lists. We lost 52 members within
16 days, and had to deal with a list in uproar. I was physically
exhausted by that, as people were even phoning me to try
to find ways to handle the situation with JoAnne.  I received
hundreds of e-mails and messages via ICQ needing to be
attended to. I am bloody exhausted by all this.

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 01:51:48 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      If we were the last ones left...
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I was fantasizing about the group today, and wondering what it would be
like of the world
ended and we were the last ones left on earth. (I would also want my
children joining us, however.)

I was thinking of my sense of people here...and how to relate to them.

Hoon came to mind first. I see Hoon as a sort of magical creature - fluid,
fantastical... I would just love to watch him as though I could see his psyche
working through my eyes. It feels as though that would be a wonderful
experience - one that would make me laugh with pleasure and wonder.

And Robert....I would want to reassure him...walk along the beach with him,
help him
understand whatever I could of the workings of the universe so he would
feel safer
with it. I realize how silly this would be when the world would have just
been wiped out - but this is
my fantasy. Maybe bring him many flowers and show him baby animals
playing...signs of life
and continuity.

And Susan and Judith - feel like sisters/friends - people to talk easily
and comfortably with.
We could talk about whatever needed to be discussed - such as how to take
care of our lives now, what it all meant, what was going on among all of
us...feelings, thoughts, what was happening to everyone and what
to do next.

Dolores - maybe we could smoke cigars together and have a good swear about
everything.
I don't smoke cigars - but it feels like the thing to do with Dolores. I
could just not inhale. We
could do tough stuff together - like haul logs for the fires.

Peter - I think Peter asked me about my journey at the beginning. I could
talk to him about
my journey - and listen to his.

Anita - I don't know. Play ping pong? Or I guess it's called table tennis
nowadays.

Walter - try to get him to talk about how he really feels instead of
discussing process. :)
As it wouldn't be *his* list, or his place - there would be a shift in
relationships - an
equalizing which might make it easier to see each other. Are you an oldest
child, Walter?

Meeseo - one to go to for comfort, and for times of heavy emotion and
poetry. Perhaps
meditation as well, along with Robert.

And there are others...and we could gradually learn about each other.

What a strange world it could be...

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 13:43:07 +0300
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Anita Konkka <anitak@MEGABAUD.FI>
Subject:      Re: If we were the last ones left...
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hello Julienne,

I like your fantasy about  Psyber-group, and  how to relate its members.
You wrote:
>Anita - I don't know. Play ping pong? Or I guess it's called table tennis
>nowadays.

I'm not good  at  competitive arts,  better to relate me via  dreams.  You
can tell me  your nightly dreams, and I listen to you.  I'm  a good listener.
   Btw, some nights ago I dreamt about  the list, or  I associated  the
dream with the list, because  on  my front-door there was  a text: " The
Dictionary editorial staff  I.M.R.I".  Below  the text there was  a big
photograph of Robert as a baby. I  don't know what it means. Expect that I
ought to use  a dictionary,  because so  many words are beyond my
comprehension.
      But the  following words are quite  clear to me. You wrote about JoAnne:
> She chases me from list to list. Maybe she'll
>win a free trip round the world. :)
     Aha, I  thought, you know unconsciously, that JoAnne is your shadow,
because  no else but the shadow  could chase a person round the world.   And
you're JoAnne's shadow. That's good,   both  of you  have began  to  connect
to your  shadow-side.
    According to  Marie- Louise von Franz, "the  word shadow is simply a
name we use for the fact that most people are not fully  aware of all their
personality traits. We like to imagine ourselves as being intelligent, or
generous or good-natured or practically gifted, and what not. But we have
other qualities in our complete personality, inferior qualities that we are
not so aware of. Our relationship to our  surroundings tells us about them,
and in quarrels they come out... Whenever we are tired or under pressure,
another personality often breaks through...."   To  Franz's mind  the shadow
is really our best social function." It  integrates us into the group. With
our  good qualities we  are above the group. With our shadow we are man
among men and human, all-too human."

Best regards
Anita

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 08:50:20 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: no shift in the process, I guess
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

JoAnne,
I woke this morning deep in the logics incomplete logics illogics of what
has been written here...I must have been busy in the dream state...not much
sleep 4 hours interrupted by bouts of coughing...however, feel as if I'm
back as that computer programmer when they filled rooms and I was learning
the language with a hardware manual and a memory dump following the
logic...and often ending up totally lost somewhere in the binary off and
ons having to backtrack to find out where I missed the turn in the
code...:-)

This is to say I have a resonnance with your logical proficiency, meaning
how your experience is clear to you and held together...it is also to say I
have continued to remain in a state of logical suspense without going to
any easy place for me of resolution or drawing a conclusion yet...I've been
ruminating about where my experience of you and Julienne revealed the train
wreck coming toward each other...forgive the snippets and I have not
snipped out of context except to look at the possible logical incongruities

working backwards there is the intertwining of fascets of the experience
seems to me
1) you keeping the focus on what happened to you from your logic of experience

2) Julienne's focus on your post to the list about her...

I have not made an attempt to find that post which I realize leaves me with
inexact data
Logically this is a double bind...or chinese knot...you pull on one loop
and the other loop tightens, and Julienne pulls on one loop and the other
tightens...

So thus you continue with your logic set and she hers and I experience this
as the computer being in a loop...the program has no logic available to
move the computer out of the loop...so it continues to crash...

I find in our conversation you made mention of how you hold your
interaction with people which if I understood correctly, is from a place of
guardedness and you work toward trust...I think we commented on my medical
experience

You said in our conversation:
<I tend to look for inconsistencies, things that don't make sense, things
that don't fit the pattern, and when I want to know, I ask.  I sometimes
don't believe what people say, either; another impoliteness, but it seems
necessary.

It's not infallible, but it's worked enough times to make me use this
approach when there's something I want to know.  Usually I'm not
disappointed, though often enough it's not because someone gave me an
answer, it's because they refuse to, that gives me my answer.>

This is a very clear statement to me about how part of your mind works...I
experience everyone as being logically incomplete...myself included...but
my communication intention comes from an openhearted place...I would
suspect that if you and I were in a situation and you called me on my
inconsistencies given your acknowledged communication style, I might on a
bad cough day feel I've taken a hit...I admit to not being inscrutably
logical...

In any event your statement here again taken from our conversation,

>I tend to look for inconsistencies, things that don't make sense, things
>that don't fit the pattern, and when I want to know, I ask.  I sometimes
>don't believe what people say, either; another impoliteness, but it seems
>necessary.

My way of communicating wants to insert *to me* in your words...necessary
to me...And I might not find it *necessary to me* At the time I didn't ask
but the question was *why does it seem necessary*...without asking this
question at the time I now am left with lapses in logic...
And *things that don't make sense* is another aspect of how you come from
logic...This assumes there is one sense to be made which is illogical to
me...another question unasked at the time, do you think there is *one
sense*...if you start out with the assumption there is *one sense* to be
made, there is another assumption that everyone is a clone processing every
life experience exactly the same way, maybe an expectation but given the
complexities I don't hold this... again didn't I understand you to say to
me something about truth, I can't find the exact words, but my rememberance
is that you come from a place that assumes *truth* and I think I said that
I don't come from that same place...which would immediately dump us out the
computer code in different places...or else the computer would be flashing
*one sense* *one sense* I can't compute...this is played with in a sense of
fun BTW...
so given the potential for my incomplete logic, I come to this place in my
experience of you from your logic...and mine is simply different...

Now from my perspective here is an snip from Julienne and my conversation...
Julienne in a post with me recently said in speaking about her mother's
words said she comes from a place of trust (my interpretation and I must
reveal this is my basic nature)
her words snipped from her message and I have deliberately snipped out parts...
" ...I have always been friendly and outgoing...She (her mother)felt I was not
self-protective enough."

Logic collision course between the two of you...and my experience in the
world says the two of you are locked into an illogical battle, two
completely unaligned world views, which is not solveable at the logical
level it was created...

Thus you keep calling for *the* inconsistencies in logic to be addressed
and Julienne counters with how emotionally whelmed she is...(I didn't say
overwhelmed because this is logically redundant given the dictionary
definition of whelmed but then again maybe overwhelmed is correct :-)

Well, this is as far as my dream evidentally took me...maybe not concise
and complete but when I got to my logically created sense of each of your
world views have for the moment, given the data, conclude an inevitable
train wreck...and my world view assumes we each are hear as teacherstudents
to each other...
Anita in her post speaks of shadows which is a different view and one I am
seeking to learn about here (and am)
she says to Julienne:

>      But the  following words are quite  clear to me. You wrote about JoAnne:
>> She chases me from list to list. Maybe she'll
>>win a free trip round the world. :)
>     Aha, I  thought, you know unconsciously, that JoAnne is your shadow,
>because  no else but the shadow  could chase a person round the world.   And
>you're JoAnne's shadow. That's good,   both  of you  have began  to  connect
>to your  shadow-side.
>    According to  Marie- Louise von Franz, "the  word shadow is simply a
>name we use for the fact that most people are not fully  aware of all their
>personality traits. We like to imagine ourselves as being intelligent, or
>generous or good-natured or practically gifted, and what not. But we have
>other qualities in our complete personality, inferior qualities that we are
>not so aware of. Our relationship to our  surroundings tells us about them,
>and in quarrels they come out... Whenever we are tired or under pressure,
>another personality often breaks through...."   To  Franz's mind  the shadow
>is really our best social function." It  integrates us into the group. With
>our  good qualities we  are above the group. With our shadow we are man
>among men and human, all-too human."

And I add to this my Mayan Shaman's teachings
"We are not humans seeking to be spirits
But spirits seeking to be more human"

Maybe in the illogics we find our humanity and thus compassion

Judith off for a healing treatment...should help my spelling errors which
are caused by my coughing ;-)




>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 09:03:34 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: If we were the last ones left...
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Julienne,
I enjoyed your post
>
>And Susan and Judith - feel like sisters/friends - people to talk easily
>and comfortably with.
>We could talk about whatever needed to be discussed - such as how to take
>care of our lives now, what it all meant, what was going on among all of
>us...feelings, thoughts, what was happening to everyone and what
>to do next.

And I as your sister/friend would venture this to you...take the time you
need to heal from your loses...and suggest deep rhythmic breathing...

Judith inhaling and exhaling inhaling and...

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 15:06:45 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

On 25/5/98, HooN wrote:
>The drama is revealed in examining the implications of this rationale in
>terms of *doing*. So, the process here is twofold: one, delivering the
>truth; two, taking the standpoint at which one is freed from responsibility
>for the effects of this truth.
>
>The drama, the gap, is obvious: one cannot *do this standpoint.* We may
>make it our rule, the willingness to deliver truths regardless, (our
>reasoning,) but have a great deal of trouble freeing our self from the
>'responsibility'. There's the drama, with its attending drama.


"Now, I can't tell you the right answers - in fact, I'm not sure I would if
I could, because, you see, to tell you the real answers, to know the real
answers, is always to switch them over to that left brain, to the
manipulative side. And once they're switched over, no matter how right they
were poetically and aesthetically, they go dead, and become manipulative
techniques."

(Gregory Bateson, quoted in Douglas G. Flemons, 'Completing Distinctions')

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 11:54:05 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: If we were the last ones left...
In-Reply-To:  <199805301043.NAA09657@walrus.megabaud.fi>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 01:43 PM 5/30/98 +0300, Anita wrote:
>Hello Julienne,
>
>I like your fantasy about  Psyber-group, and  how to relate its members.
>You wrote:
>>Anita - I don't know. Play ping pong? Or I guess it's called table tennis
>>nowadays.
>
>I'm not good  at  competitive arts,  better to relate me via  dreams.  You
>can tell me  your nightly dreams, and I listen to you.  I'm  a good listener.

<laugh>


That's nice. My experience of you has been that you're usually yelling at
me, (in the
more distant past), so I thought playing a game might be a good way to get
to know each other.. Table tennis is a good game to play where one can get
rid of
aggression without really hurting anyone. If you want to smash the balls at
me
you can, and the balls are more likely to be smashed bfore anyone is hurt.

But I like the dream idea much better, and am glad we have moved to that
place. :)

>   Btw, some nights ago I dreamt about  the list, or  I associated  the
>dream with the list, because  on  my front-door there was  a text: " The
>Dictionary editorial staff  I.M.R.I".  Below  the text there was  a big
>photograph of Robert as a baby. I  don't know what it means. Expect that I
>ought to use  a dictionary,  because so  many words are beyond my
>comprehension.
>      But the  following words are quite  clear to me. You wrote about
JoAnne:
>> She chases me from list to list. Maybe she'll
>>win a free trip round the world. :)
>     Aha, I  thought, you know unconsciously, that JoAnne is your shadow,
>because  no else but the shadow  could chase a person round the world.   And
>you're JoAnne's shadow. That's good,   both  of you  have began  to  connect
>to your  shadow-side.
>    According to  Marie- Louise von Franz, "the  word shadow is simply a
>name we use for the fact that most people are not fully  aware of all their
>personality traits. We like to imagine ourselves as being intelligent, or
>generous or good-natured or practically gifted, and what not. But we have
>other qualities in our complete personality, inferior qualities that we are
>not so aware of. Our relationship to our  surroundings tells us about them,
>and in quarrels they come out... Whenever we are tired or under pressure,
>another personality often breaks through...."   To  Franz's mind  the shadow
>is really our best social function." It  integrates us into the group. With
>our  good qualities we  are above the group. With our shadow we are man
>among men and human, all-too human."

Well, that has been pretty obvious to me for some time. JoAnne complains
that I am too sweet, too good-looking, too unbelievable and dishonest,
and a whole pile of descriptions which are, as I see it, anathema for
someone like JoAnne who (as I see it) sees herself as a toughie who
tells it like it is and let the chips (and bodies) fall where they might.
She makes it clear that she thinks I'm really a giant fake who can't be
trusted to be as nice as she thinks I'm pretending to be.

And I freak out at what I see as her meanness and desire to stir
things up. Like Hoon, I see myself capable of doing that, but I try not to.
I don't want to be like JoAnne. I see her "honesty" as an attempt to

hurt others, and as quite dishonest anyway - barbs thrown out as
weapons to injure. Am I capable of that? Like Hoon, -sure. I would
love to see JoAnne tortured in burning oil and put in the stocks in
the center of town and humiliated publically because that's what I
feel she has tried to do to me. But I try to let that go - because I
don't want to be like that. It's one thing to have an urge to slaughter
someone, another to do so. I don't really want to slaughter JoAnne - I
just want her to shut up and go away until she wants to play nice.
Put her in a reformatory - make her write essays on why she should
be nice to people...:) Wash out her mouth with soap. And put her
into counseling until she deals with who hurt her so much that
she has to be hurtful. And while she's undergoing all this which
would be very satsfactory to my sweet self, I can be exchanging
dreams and being very spiritual with you, Anita, and Robert. :)

Okay, Anita, dreams it is...:)

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 17:29:59 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         "Simon G. Trask" <simon@SIMBIOSIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v04011702b18efd560e65@[207.54.160.78]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>>In this second situation, the instigator may well interpret accusations of
>>harm levelled against them as being merely and wholly a symptom of
>>avoidance on the accuser's part - avoidance, that is, of painful truths
>>that the instigator is delivering.
>>
>>HooN, does all this fit in with your concept of the reasoningdrama?
>
>>Simon,
>
>I think it requires a bit more deconstruction, so that we may learn what
>the 'gap' is between the person's own rules, or the doing of the process
>that the rule implies.
>
>Example: the rule formulated by the above example is:
>
><< If my intention is to do deliver the truth no matter how painful it is
>for other persons, then I am freed from responsibility for any harm this
>truth may cause other persons, "after all it is just the truth I am
>delivering".>>
>
>"Delivering the truth alleviates my responsibility for its effects."
>
>(Or, alternately, this is the rationale.)
>
>***
>
>The drama is revealed in examining the implications of this rationale in
>terms of *doing*. So, the process here is twofold: one, delivering the
>truth; two, taking the standpoint at which one is freed from responsibility
>for the effects of this truth.
>
>The drama, the gap, is obvious: one cannot *do this standpoint.* We may
>make it our rule, the willingness to deliver truths regardless, (our
>reasoning,) but have a great deal of trouble freeing our self from the
>'responsibility'. There's the drama, with its attending drama.

HooN,

The purpose of the drama that follows intention and rationale seems worth
considering, as a way of deciding/decoding its value. Is the purpose to
avoid the drama that *preceded* the intention/rationale? Or to shed light
on it?

In the former case we tend to justify ourselves as we are, in the latter to
question ourselves as we are.

Simon

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 12:52:21 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: no shift in the process, I guess
In-Reply-To:  <v0155010ab19565608543@[207.54.160.168]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 08:50 AM 5/30/98 -0400, Judith wrote:
>JoAnne,
>I woke this morning deep in the logics incomplete logics illogics of what
>has been written here...I must have been busy in the dream state...not much
>sleep 4 hours interrupted by bouts of coughing...however, feel as if I'm
>back as that computer programmer when they filled rooms and I was learning
>the language with a hardware manual and a memory dump following the
>logic...and often ending up totally lost somewhere in the binary off and
>ons having to backtrack to find out where I missed the turn in the
>code...:-)
>
>This is to say I have a resonnance with your logical proficiency, meaning
>how your experience is clear to you and held together...it is also to say I
>have continued to remain in a state of logical suspense without going to
>any easy place for me of resolution or drawing a conclusion yet...I've been
>ruminating about where my experience of you and Julienne revealed the train
>wreck coming toward each other...forgive the snippets and I have not
>snipped out of context except to look at the possible logical incongruities

I like that - "train wreck" :) That's how it bloody feels. So I keep trying to
get my own train derailed - or to derail JoAnne's, so there need be no
great wreck.

>working backwards there is the intertwining of fascets of the experience
>seems to me
>1) you keeping the focus on what happened to you from your logic of
experience
>
>2) Julienne's focus on your post to the list about her...
>
>I have not made an attempt to find that post which I realize leaves me with

>inexact data
>Logically this is a double bind...or chinese knot...you pull on one loop
>and the other loop tightens, and Julienne pulls on one loop and the other
>tightens...

How about when I back away from the loops - is that just a delaying tactic?

>So thus you continue with your logic set and she hers and I experience this
>as the computer being in a loop...the program has no logic available to
>move the computer out of the loop...so it continues to crash...

Well, of course I don't feel this - I feel that I try to shift the ground
to find
a way to meet. But then that may be part of my being the reasonable and
feeling one. Whoops! - I just coopted BOTH sets of traits, didn't I? <g>

>I find in our conversation you made mention of how you hold your
>interaction with people which if I understood correctly, is from a place of
>guardedness and you work toward trust...I think we commented on my medical
>experience

To me this feels like eeek! - my mother????? Cynical and guarded. Ouch.
Dealing with people only on her terms - very rigid about telephone or
at home visits... Although in other ways she and JoAnne are quite different.
Oh my...here it all comes: my mother was always the "nice" one - no anger -
and I was the angry and dishonest one - according to her. Throw in
selfish, also. Here's how I became selfish:

When I was 2, and my brother 1, I wanted my mother one day. My brother
woke up from his nap at the same time. My mother tells the story of how
I was so selfish and demanding that she had to go to my brother's crib
and tell him she would make it up to him later in life, but for that moment
she had to attend to me. So - from that moment on, I became the "selfish"
one...and so, of course, in an effort to prove how unselfish I am, went on
to become a counselor taking care of others all my life, becoming a step-
parent bringing up someone else's children, fighting on my radio and TV
shows for everyone else's rights, form children to old people, to whomever.

>You said in our conversation:
><I tend to look for inconsistencies, things that don't make sense, things
>that don't fit the pattern, and when I want to know, I ask.  I sometimes
>don't believe what people say, either; another impoliteness, but it seems
>necessary.

To me this feels like the Gestapo, or the Grand Inquisitor. And I
wonder where she gets the information to decide where the one
and only truth lies? I want to say to JoAnne, "lighten up!" - don't
be so hard on people!

>It's not infallible, but it's worked enough times to make me use this
>approach when there's something I want to know.  Usually I'm not
>disappointed, though often enough it's not because someone gave me an
>answer, it's because they refuse to, that gives me my answer.>

And my response to this is that JoAnne is notthe C.I.A. , but seems
to assume a right to all the information she wants about others - like
a grand invasion of privacy. Then, when she gets some information,
she judges it like a one-woman Supreme Court.

>This is a very clear statement to me about how part of your mind works...I
>experience everyone as being logically incomplete...myself included...but
>my communication intention comes from an openhearted place...I would
>suspect that if you and I were in a situation and you called me on my
>inconsistencies given your acknowledged communication style, I might on a
>bad cough day feel I've taken a hit...I admit to not being inscrutably
>logical...

Yes - a hit in the solar plexus. Have you tried HYOSCYAMUS for your cough?
It's an herbal thing which my naturopath gives me.

>In any event your statement here again taken from our conversation,


>>I tend to look for inconsistencies, things that don't make sense, things
>>that don't fit the pattern, and when I want to know, I ask.  I sometimes
>>don't believe what people say, either; another impoliteness, but it seems
>>necessary.

The C.I.A - F.B.I. again.

>My way of communicating wants to insert *to me* in your words...necessary
>to me...

What I used to say to my parents...:)

And I might not find it *necessary to me* At the time I didn't ask
>but the question was *why does it seem necessary*...without asking this
>question at the time I now am left with lapses in logic...
>And *things that don't make sense* is another aspect of how you come from
>logic...This assumes there is one sense to be made which is illogical to
>me...another question unasked at the time, do you think there is *one
>sense*...if you start out with the assumption there is *one sense* to be
>made, there is another assumption that everyone is a clone processing every
>life experience exactly the same way,

When things don't make sense, it may be a lack of understanding in the
listener, also (JoAnne in this case) - rather than any witholding in the
speaker.

>maybe an expectation but given the
>complexities I don't hold this... again didn't I understand you to say to
>me something about truth, I can't find the exact words, but my rememberance
>is that you come from a place that assumes *truth* and I think I said that
>I don't come from that same place...which would immediately dump us out the
>computer code in different places...or else the computer would be flashing
>*one sense* *one sense* I can't compute...this is played with in a sense of

>fun BTW...
>so given the potential for my incomplete logic, I come to this place in my
>experience of you from your logic...and mine is simply different...

>Now from my perspective here is an snip from Julienne and my conversation...
>Julienne in a post with me recently said in speaking about her mother's
>words said she comes from a place of trust (my interpretation and I must
>reveal this is my basic nature)
>her words snipped from her message and I have deliberately snipped out
parts...
>" ...I have always been friendly and outgoing...She (her mother)felt I was
not
>self-protective enough."

>Logic collision course between the two of you...and my experience in the
>world says the two of you are locked into an illogical battle, two
>completely unaligned world views, which is not solveable at the logical
>level it was created...

Yup.

>Thus you keep calling for *the* inconsistencies in logic to be addressed
>and Julienne counters with how emotionally whelmed she is...(I didn't say
>overwhelmed because this is logically redundant given the dictionary
>definition of whelmed but then again maybe overwhelmed is correct :-)

Well, I am not always overwhelmed, but right now I am proud of myself
if I get up and work on my computer. If I get through a day without
something reminding me of my parents and flooding me again with
grief, that;s a good day - or I'm repressing. :)

However, even if I weren't going through what I'm going through now
(And there is more I haven't shared because it's all too much anyway,
and I know JoAnne would only trample all over it anyway...and tell me
to get on the sidewalk and stop disturbing "normal" people...) - if I
weren't going through all this right now there would still be a clash
because we are such different trains.

I feel as though I am drowning. Have any of you ever nearly drowned?
I have - 3 times. When one is drowning there isn't space to consider
anything else but how to stay alive. If the love of one's life were to say
at that moment, "Will you marry me?" - the impulse would be to just
keep kicking frantically to get to the shore or across the undercurrent.
Who cares about marriage at that moment? My brain doesn't work
for a lot of things right now - it's flooded - my heart hurts, everything
is on overload - and there comes JoAnne's train barrelling down on
me with "Okay! Just what secrets are you hiding today?! I have PROOF
that you stole a field full of pumpkins because you haven't told the
whole truth ( which she assumes she has a right to invade me to know)
and so I just know you must be the pumpkin thief. And if you're not -
prove it! I am the Sagittarian judge and jury! Joanne is a double
Sagittarius - the sign of the law and the judge. What that means,
of course, is that she is not here to demand truth of others, but
to learn to be honest herself. However, she's giving me her job.

Well, I may have lost you all on that bit - but it was significant for my
own reverie.

>Well, this is as far as my dream evidentally took me...maybe not concise
>and complete but when I got to my logically created sense of each of your
>world views have for the moment, given the data, conclude an inevitable
>train wreck...and my world view assumes we each are hear as teacherstudents
>to each other...

I like that, we are "hear" - to listen to each other, to hear other...as
well as
being "here" as I assumed you meant to say.

>Anita in her post speaks of shadows which is a different view and one I am
>seeking to learn about here (and am)
>she says to Julienne:
>
>>      But the  following words are quite  clear to me. You wrote about
JoAnne:
>>> She chases me from list to list. Maybe she'll

>>>win a free trip round the world. :)
>>     Aha, I  thought, you know unconsciously, that JoAnne is your shadow,
>>because  no else but the shadow  could chase a person round the world.   And
>>you're JoAnne's shadow. That's good,   both  of you  have began  to  connect
>>to your  shadow-side.
>>    According to  Marie- Louise von Franz, "the  word shadow is simply a
>>name we use for the fact that most people are not fully  aware of all their
>>personality traits. We like to imagine ourselves as being intelligent, or
>>generous or good-natured or practically gifted, and what not. But we have
>>other qualities in our complete personality, inferior qualities that we are
>>not so aware of. Our relationship to our  surroundings tells us about them,
>>and in quarrels they come out... Whenever we are tired or under pressure,
>>another personality often breaks through...."   To  Franz's mind  the shadow
>>is really our best social function." It  integrates us into the group. With
>>our  good qualities we  are above the group. With our shadow we are man
>>among men and human, all-too human."

Well, I'm woman among man and woman - and very human. Further, I
lik being human - and also goddessly as well. :)

>And I add to this my Mayan Shaman's teachings
>"We are not humans seeking to be spirits
>But spirits seeking to be more human"

Yes! But in truth there is no separation...

>Maybe in the illogics we find our humanity and thus compassion

Empathy...

"The heart hath reasons that reason knows not of..." Pascal...

>Judith off for a healing treatment...should help my spelling errors which
>are caused by my coughing ;-)

Or your shadow trying to signal you? A coughing shadow...

Try the Hyoscyamous...

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 31 May 1998 06:43:14 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Barry Kennedy <kennedy.levy@XTRA.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: Experiential learning.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Walter said:

> Barry you wrote, in another thread, in response to Julienne:
>
> > regard the list or the people in it as a cyberspace experiment.
>
> The word experiment is in the description of the list ...  from
> memory it is:
>
> :: for each of us to experiment with ways of being in cs

Understood.  In my apprehension in becoming involved in a fairly heated
thread, I wanted to obviate possible assumptions (by any reader) about *my*
assumptions or intentions.  I want to experiment in cs, use and explore
this medium.  That's why I'm here.  Julienne had a sense of
being experimented with, and being lost sight of as a real person, and I
wanted to make it clear that I was not contributing to the thread lightly.

> I understand fully that many of us have had enough of the old
> style sociology and psychology and social science.  I think this
> is different ... and not *Walter's* experiment any more than any
> one else's.

Hmmm.  Not so sure.  As Marie said in another thread, you are not just
another subscriber.  If this is your experiment, people are the richer for
it from what I read.  Experiment is not a dirty word.

> I think a separate *Thread* on this is worth having ... as it is
> a complex I idea that.  It probably requires some good links to
> various papers on the subject.
>
> How does that sound now Barry?  Julienne?

OK to me.

> I think what i am doing here is acting as List owner, host,
> stating what the ethos is here.  I see this as important as some
> people now or in the future might be here for this very aspect of
> the charter.  To not honour it would be to be without boundaries,
> containment.
>
> I'm really pleased that you both raise the matter as it is
> something that needs to come out clearly.
>
> It will also be good to be able to refer someone to this thread
> so we do not perpetually need to reinvent the wheel.


I agree.

Barry
____________________________________
Barry Kennedy<kennedy.levy@xtra.co.nz>

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 19:28:40 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <v01550106b1941d5113a9@[207.54.160.168]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>, on Fri, 29 May 1998 08:55:42 -0400
you wrote:

>I may be
>projecting but my experience of not being *seen* use to be very unpleasant
>to me...because I am so excentric my life has been about resolvingaccepting
>that I am not seen...a very different place to have one's stake planted in
>the ground...because I come from an assumption based on my life experience
>that I am not seen, I often seek to be *seen* meaning in my way of
>communicating I have to surface assumptions or else there are
>misunderstandings...I had a lovely exchange with my ex husband driving to
>our son's birthday...for some reason now he sees me...and this released
>barriers which had been there for 30 years...

In reading this over, it strikes a chord in me.  I don't feel seen by
Julienne.  I think she sees me as vicious, power-mad, perpetually angry,
lying, shitty.

Because people I know and trust don't share this view, in fact no one I
know personally in rl seems to share this view, I'm not comfortable
accepting it.  Whether I should or not, I don't know.  I don't think so.  I
feel that Julienne is seeing something that isn't me.

Tenacious, unrelenting, not backing down, yes.  Vicious, no.

Thanks, Judith.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 19:28:51 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: no shift in the process, I guess
In-Reply-To:  <357653ba.13189700@mail.datablast.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>, on Sat, 30 May 1998 03:25:27
GMT you wrote:

>JoAnne,
>you wrote:
>
>> Judith asked what I want out of this interaction.  I'd like you to be
>> honest, whether that means admitting the truth or just not lying any
>> more.  Fairly simple, isn't it?  You don't even have to admit to
>> anything.
>
>What is your intention one level ... or even a couple <grin> on
>from that ... what is motivating you to want Julienne to be
>honest.

Perhaps, to be seen without Julienne's interpretation of me.  To not read
selective interpretations of what happened in the past.

>Also.  To say Julienne is lying will no doubt go against whatever
>deeper intention you have.  It is also very close if not right on
>the mark of being an ad hominem attack which it not wanted here
>as mentioned in the welcome file.

Okay.  I'd like her to be honest from now on.  Regardless of whatever may
have been said in the past.

We tried this before, maybe it will work this time.  We tried agreeing not
to discuss the past, because it always becomes this tit for tat.  Maybe
that should be part of the new experiment too.  To find out, not what we
did that we didn't like about each other, but what we are now, and how that
feels to each other.

But I'm also thinking that divorcing that past will not work, because
that's a part of each of us.  It's like the old joke, aside from that, Mrs.
Lincoln, how did you like the play?

>It takes two to do a tit for tat.

But any number can play.

>~~~
>
>My intentions?  I want to see a resolution ...  ok, to take my
>own prompting ... what is behind that?  I don't want people to
>leave ... i want us to have a sense of achievement.  Which would
>be to achieve what is in our description and charter ... to learn
>about leadership in cs, to learn about the psyche in cs, to form
>collegial relationship around our net psychological interests.
>To learn from this experience.  To feel some pride in (us) making
>a *transformation* happen.  Ok, beyond that:  I want us to
>collaborate on that so that we learn how to do that.  Why do i
>want that...

Sounds like a need for achievement.  If Julienne and I resolve all our
problems, and come away friendly, how much would be yours, and how much
would be ours?  Could you get enough out of it by being a professional
observer?  Would you want to have some of the laurels too?  I'm not asking
you this in a hostile way, please understand.

>I should write a full report on my experience in the Conference
>on the Internet & Society ...  but let me say this.  There was a
>lot of talk about education, commerce, community, governance,
>politics, but very little about psychology, and what there was
>mostly some results of telephone interviews about peoples
>feelings about the net.

This is endemic among 'net discussions and conferences, from what I
understand.  People who don't know much about it talking about it, sharing
theories developed from a small sample instead of massive research or
immersion.  The anthropologist effect.

>I found it a lonely place to be, though i met nice people and
>generous good hearted people, and some who may even turn up here,
>I felt we were doing something unique here.
>
>The question of flames on lists and how some forums were
>destroyed by flames etc. came up several times, and the universal
>answer the "gurus" provided from experience was:
>
>~~~
>
>Dictatorship.
>
>One rule:
>
>Dont be an arsshole.
>
>I decide who is an ass hole.
>
>~~~

That's the general rule, for lists.  For usenet groups it's very different.
You're running the list more like a list, but with some usenet/open list
aspects.

It's interesting to note that a list-moderators list I am on is
unmoderated.

>That is ok really.  I would advocte that for, say, a list on
>sharing information about town planning.  However I want to go a
>level deeper.  At the deepest level i am attempting to see the
>exchanges between JoAnne and Juliennne as my psyche on the
>screen!  In a place to explore psyche we cant just filter it all
>out like net-nanny.

A usenet group I'm on had a discussion about its nature.  It's about urban
folklore.  Now, the questions were, do we encourage absolute raw newbie
beginners to post their urban legends they just found?  We've seen each
legend usually dozens of times.

I was in favor of this, because variations abound and we can just ignore
the ones we don't care about.  At least they're not trolls (intentionally
"stupid" messages posted to make lots of people reply, for example, saying
that some particular movie star is dead when he/she is very much alive, in
a newsgroup about movie stars).

Others only wanted to discuss the legends and not see them sent in by the
amateurs.  Sort of a "teacher's lounge" definition of the group.

It sounds like a similar thing is going on here.  Do we discuss e.g.
projection in the second or third person, or allow it to emerge in the
first person?

>~~~
>
>In that sense it is an aspect of my multiplicity rat rages out of
>control ... at least that is how this enity perceives it!

I love the picture of a mulitiplicity rat.  I guess that was a typo but
mom, it followed us home, can we keep it?  I can see multiplicity rat
pressing numerous levers, getting into numerous crevices, jumping from
trash can to trash can looking for goodies.  Leaping rats are full of life
and energy, they're an almost primal symbol.

>Can any one understand me?

You're the only one who can answer that, and even so, probably can't quite
answer that.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 19:28:59 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: no shift in the process, I guess
In-Reply-To:  <Version.32.19980529233803.01070100@postoffice.att.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>, on Sat, 30 May 1998 00:18:50
-0400 you wrote:

>When one keeps talking about how s/he wants everyone else to be
>"honest" - and this is a real issue with JoAnne, and not just in her
>interaction with me, then one has to ask what is his/her difficulty
>with honesty?

When I feel that honesty is not being practiced, I say so.  If you hear
about honesty a lot, the obvious conclusion applies.  I don't hear that
complaint from others.  Maybe I believe them.

I mean, why presume there is a problem?  When someone asks for justice in
an injust world, do we ask them what problems they have with justice?  When
someone asks for food, and is hungry, do we ask them what eating disorders
they have?

>I have difficulty discussing this, because I feel that whatever I
>say, it just gives JoAnne a chance to escalate and increase
>her list of accusations and tales about me.

I'm not listing accusations or tales about you.  You're the one who brought
up most every single story.  The postoffice incident.  My leaving ChaoS.
My being thrown off chaos is something I mentioned, but you "described" it
as you saw fit.  I only said you decided to do it.  You still haven't taken
responsibility, saying it was "the list" that did it.

Your endless long "corrections," larded with indignation, anger, and
pleading, are not at all affecting to me.  They don't seem to engage much
sympathy in others here either, from what I've seen this go-round.

Perhaps you need another list to complain to.  Why not start a
joannesucks@badweb.com?  You could state without fear of contradiction
every complaint you have against me, and maybe even collect a few
co-complainers to help you.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 19:29:05 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <199805292025.IAA06586@cyclops.xtra.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Barry Kennedy <kennedy.levy@XTRA.CO.NZ>, on Sat, 30 May 1998 08:21:44
+1200 you wrote:

>JoAnne said:
>
>> I gave Wilbur one address of one person who ran one list, who had
>> expressed her displeasure with your participation on that list.
>
>Ouch !  Not ok, I think, JoAnne.  Kinda like when someone trusts us with a
>confidence, and we "only tell one person. . . " (who tells only one person,
>who tells only one person. .)

Since it wasn't a confidence, this all happened on a public list, I didn't
think it was the same thing.  But YMMV, as we say.

>I have found your posts to Julienne frank and tenacious.

I take that as a compliment.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 19:29:10 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <19980529205403.XINL5374@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>, on Fri, 29 May 1998 16:51:47
-0400 you wrote:

>>Do you want Walter to get JoAnne off your back ?
>
>How? She chases me from list to list. Maybe she'll
>win a free trip round the world. :)

Chase you?  Here you are making a flimsy case for some kind of
cyber-stalking again.  Since it won't hang with Wilbur, you're going to try
to accuse me?

>No. Last year I needed his help. This year I am not
>asking for his help. I assume responsibility for
>getting JoAnne off my back myself. I realize that
>will probably not happen - but I'll just deal with it.

Is that some kind of threat?

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 19:29:13 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <19980530050448.GCUE5374@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>, on Sat, 30 May 1998 00:54:37
-0400 you wrote:

>JoAnne invents stories about me

This is not true.

>asks me to defend myself and "tell the truth" against her charges,
>and  you are offended by or critical of my attempts to handle this,
>as though it were all an intellectual exercise. It's NOT! I, a human
>being, am being accused of everything from being a liar to a
>manhater to whatever else JoAnne wants to cook up in this
>go-round,

I have not called you manhater, please stick to the truth.  I've discussed
things that I think you have misrepresented and asked for explanations.  I
have not been satisfied with those explanations.

>You are also not taking account what we have just been through
>with JoAnne on one of my lists. We lost 52 members within
>16 days, and had to deal with a list in uproar. I was physically
>exhausted by that, as people were even phoning me to try
>to find ways to handle the situation with JoAnne.  I received
>hundreds of e-mails and messages via ICQ needing to be
>attended to. I am bloody exhausted by all this.

Your problems in managing your list are your responsibility, not mine.

If I'm the monster you seem to think I am, why did you not protect the list
from me sooner?

If I'm not, why couldn't you handle my questions on that list?

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 19:29:17 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <357c6a82.19021951@mail.datablast.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>, on Sat, 30 May 1998 03:25:34
GMT you wrote:

>Barry, you ask if some processing, as i suggested, in the "cool
>channel" would be "to walk away from. . ." my shadow.
>
>Hmmm, perhaps.  I see you as processing this with me here and
>this is the sort of thing i meant ... ok, it is not under that
>Subject heading ... but this is all I need.  I was unsure of the
>value of "responding honestly, confronting her" as you put it.  I
>was certainly unsure of doing it again.

What do you have to say that you don't want to say?  What's the hidden
stuff under your facilitation?  What do you, as list participant, think?
You may not want to say, but I'm interested, if you will say.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 19:29:24 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: no shift in the process, I guess
In-Reply-To:  <v0155010ab19565608543@[207.54.160.168]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>, on Sat, 30 May 1998 08:50:20 -0400
you wrote:

>JoAnne,
>I woke this morning deep in the logics incomplete logics illogics of what
>has been written here...I must have been busy in the dream state...not much
>sleep 4 hours interrupted by bouts of coughing...

I hope you are over that soon, I am worried for you.

>however, feel as if I'm
>back as that computer programmer when they filled rooms and I was learning
>the language with a hardware manual and a memory dump following the
>logic...and often ending up totally lost somewhere in the binary off and
>ons having to backtrack to find out where I missed the turn in the
>code...:-)

I've been there, and you're right, it feels that way.

>This is to say I have a resonnance with your logical proficiency, meaning
>how your experience is clear to you and held together...it is also to say I
>have continued to remain in a state of logical suspense without going to
>any easy place for me of resolution or drawing a conclusion yet...I've been
>ruminating about where my experience of you and Julienne revealed the train
>wreck coming toward each other...forgive the snippets and I have not
>snipped out of context except to look at the possible logical incongruities

The snippets seem reasonable representations to me, of me.

>working backwards there is the intertwining of fascets of the experience
>seems to me
>1) you keeping the focus on what happened to you from your logic of experience
>
>2) Julienne's focus on your post to the list about her...
>
>I have not made an attempt to find that post which I realize leaves me with
>inexact data
>Logically this is a double bind...or chinese knot...you pull on one loop
>and the other loop tightens, and Julienne pulls on one loop and the other
>tightens...
>
>So thus you continue with your logic set and she hers and I experience this
>as the computer being in a loop...the program has no logic available to
>move the computer out of the loop...so it continues to crash...

There is a loop exit, which I describe below.

>I find in our conversation you made mention of how you hold your
>interaction with people which if I understood correctly, is from a place of
>guardedness and you work toward trust...I think we commented on my medical
>experience
>
>You said in our conversation:
><I tend to look for inconsistencies, things that don't make sense, things
>that don't fit the pattern, and when I want to know, I ask.  I sometimes
>don't believe what people say, either; another impoliteness, but it seems
>necessary.
>
>It's not infallible, but it's worked enough times to make me use this
>approach when there's something I want to know.  Usually I'm not
>disappointed, though often enough it's not because someone gave me an
>answer, it's because they refuse to, that gives me my answer.>
>
>This is a very clear statement to me about how part of your mind works...I
>experience everyone as being logically incomplete...myself included...but
>my communication intention comes from an openhearted place...I would
>suspect that if you and I were in a situation and you called me on my
>inconsistencies given your acknowledged communication style, I might on a
>bad cough day feel I've taken a hit...I admit to not being inscrutably
>logical...

It would depend on your reaction to my "calling you" on an inconsistency.
If someone says, yeah, I guess that's inconsistent, or "I don't know why I
hold those obviously conflicting ideas," or, "that's just my philosophy,"
then I accept it.  I may ask again, working towards a logical whole that
can be shared, but I'm not usually confrontational unless it seems the
person is saying, no, they're not contradictory, refuses to explain why,
and gets angry.

The problem deepens, of course, when I see a red bird fly by, someone says,
how blue that bird was.  If the bird is inconsequential, who cares.  If the
bird is the bird of happiness, and our salvation depends on the answer to
the question of the bird's color, we both care.

>In any event your statement here again taken from our conversation,
>
>>I tend to look for inconsistencies, things that don't make sense, things
>>that don't fit the pattern, and when I want to know, I ask.  I sometimes
>>don't believe what people say, either; another impoliteness, but it seems
>>necessary.
>
>My way of communicating wants to insert *to me* in your words...necessary
>to me...And I might not find it *necessary to me* At the time I didn't ask
>but the question was *why does it seem necessary*...without asking this
>question at the time I now am left with lapses in logic...

Okay, I agree with your thought.  It seems necessary to me.  I know it's
not necessary for many, maybe most, people.  I have a need to see things as
a cohesive whole, a compatible system.  I want to know everything, that is
my idea of heaven.

Paradoxically that can allow for entire categories of incompatibility if it
is acknowledged, a spoken duality (or triality or whatever).  For example,
we're all people, but there are multiple genders.  I don't demand that the
genders be identical.  Combinations of things only when necessary (to me).
I learn by pattern and not by rote, but exceptions must be acknowledged,
they are simply more complex patterns, another level down.

>And *things that don't make sense* is another aspect of how you come from
>logic...This assumes there is one sense to be made which is illogical to
>me...another question unasked at the time, do you think there is *one
>sense*...if you start out with the assumption there is *one sense* to be
>made, there is another assumption that everyone is a clone processing every
>life experience exactly the same way, maybe an expectation but given the
>complexities I don't hold this... again didn't I understand you to say to
>me something about truth, I can't find the exact words, but my rememberance
>is that you come from a place that assumes *truth* and I think I said that
>I don't come from that same place...which would immediately dump us out the
>computer code in different places...or else the computer would be flashing
>*one sense* *one sense* I can't compute...this is played with in a sense of
>fun BTW...

It is a fun picture.  My computer can make exceptions.  When it hits the
debug point, "not making sense," I stop, look at the code, decide whether
to continue and ignore the not-sense, program in an exception for it,
realize that there is a missing part of code and reprogram,

This is somewhat recursive!  I feel here I am responding as the program or
computer or situation would to me -- that you see an inconsistency or
deficiency, have a question, and I respond with a clarification or addition
or admission of imperfection.

And maybe greater recognition of that particular function, so that next
time I use it I may be more conscious of it, or next time I'm deciding what
to do with the program (life), I am more likely to think of the exception.

However, to someone whose mental process is different, my answers will be
totally insufficient and perhaps maddening.  I'm flashing on my response to
Julienne about the postal fraud accusations and my use of multiple
exclamation points to signal my frustration at her mental picture of it,
which seems so wrong to me.

>so given the potential for my incomplete logic, I come to this place in my
>experience of you from your logic...and mine is simply different...

I don't expect that everyone must be the same kind of logical that I am, or
logical at all.  But ... I do not find a great interest in things that
don't hold promise of a logic or sense or system or shape to them, and
people whose lives, stories, discussions, are centered exclusively on the
extra-logical are usually not interesting to me.

>Now from my perspective here is an snip from Julienne and my conversation...

>Julienne in a post with me recently said in speaking about her mother's
>words said she comes from a place of trust (my interpretation and I must
>reveal this is my basic nature)
>her words snipped from her message and I have deliberately snipped out parts...
>" ...I have always been friendly and outgoing...She (her mother)felt I was not
>self-protective enough."
>
>Logic collision course between the two of you...and my experience in the
>world says the two of you are locked into an illogical battle, two
>completely unaligned world views, which is not solveable at the logical
>level it was created...

When I saw that same story, before and now, I have seen it differently from
the way Julienne saw it.  To say you don't want to tell anyone anything you
wouldn't want repeated is, to me, to say that you shouldn't gossip,
shouldn't make a habit of talking behind people's backs, should be honest
and aboveboard in your dealings with other people, and that this does not
speak so much of distrust in others, because after all everyone is human,
and may let something slip even accidentally, but to life your life as if
it were in public, to not be ashamed of anything you do or say.

Since this is the kind of think my parents taught me, perhaps I'm
projecting onto her mother what my mother might say.  It holds no less
meaning to me if that's true.  I'm willing to accept that I will never know
what her mother meant.  I am interested in Julienne's reaction to what I
consider to be a good way to live life, as one full of fear and distrust.
I think it's a life of realism and certainly allows one to retain optimism
because it admits human mistakes (gossip getting out) as normal and
natural.  If one wears warm clothing, one need not be troubled by cool
weather.

>Thus you keep calling for *the* inconsistencies in logic to be addressed
>and Julienne counters with how emotionally whelmed she is...(I didn't say
>overwhelmed because this is logically redundant given the dictionary
>definition of whelmed but then again maybe overwhelmed is correct :-)

I think that's a fair assessment, from my point of view.  I think also that
Julienne presents herself as logical but eventually always uses the
emotional argument instead, and I don't like that path.  I feel led into
the muck.

>Well, this is as far as my dream evidentally took me...maybe not concise
>and complete but when I got to my logically created sense of each of your
>world views have for the moment, given the data, conclude an inevitable
>train wreck...and my world view assumes we each are hear as teacherstudents
>to each other...

I have that view also.  We sometimes don't like the way we learn things.

>Judith off for a healing treatment...should help my spelling errors which
>are caused by my coughing ;-)

I hope your treatment is fruitful.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 31 May 1998 07:04:15 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Barry Kennedy <kennedy.levy@XTRA.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: If we were the last ones left...
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

All

We *are* the last ones left.

Barry
____________________________________
Barry Kennedy<kennedy.levy@xtra.co.nz>

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 16:33:24 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Judith Buerkel <judithb@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Simon,
Thanks for the Bateson...
judith

>On 25/5/98, HooN wrote:
>>The drama is revealed in examining the implications of this rationale in
>>terms of *doing*. So, the process here is twofold: one, delivering the
>>truth; two, taking the standpoint at which one is freed from responsibility
>>for the effects of this truth.
>>
>>The drama, the gap, is obvious: one cannot *do this standpoint.* We may
>>make it our rule, the willingness to deliver truths regardless, (our
>>reasoning,) but have a great deal of trouble freeing our self from the
>>'responsibility'. There's the drama, with its attending drama.
>
>
>"Now, I can't tell you the right answers - in fact, I'm not sure I would if
>I could, because, you see, to tell you the real answers, to know the real
>answers, is always to switch them over to that left brain, to the
>manipulative side. And once they're switched over, no matter how right they
>were poetically and aesthetically, they go dead, and become manipulative
>techniques."
>
>(Gregory Bateson, quoted in Douglas G. Flemons, 'Completing Distinctions')
>
>Simon
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
>LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 16:54:10 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: If we were the last ones left...
In-Reply-To:  <199805302021.IAA10945@cyclops.xtra.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 07:04 AM 5/31/98 +1200, Barry wrote:
>All
>
>We *are* the last ones left.

Oh boy, Barry, then we're in trouble. :)

But there *is* life off the Internet...:)

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 31 May 1998 09:20:52 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Barry Kennedy <kennedy.levy@XTRA.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Barry
____________________________________
Barry Kennedy<kennedy.levy@xtra.co.nz>

----------
> From: Walter Logeman <walter@PSYBERNET.CO.NZ>
> To: PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM
> Subject: Re: [P] ... a shift in the process
> Date: Saturday, May 30, 1998 3:25 PM
>
> Barry,
>
> > Julienne hasn't let you off the hook, and you have now responded
> > honestly, confronting her, and forcing you to confront your own
> > shadow.
>
> Ah, thank you.  You understand me.  I take it from what you say
> that you think i should do it again, as i am still not off the
> hook!
>
> ~~~
>
> Barry, you ask if some processing, as i suggested, in the "cool
> channel" would be "to walk away from. . ." my shadow.

You said:
> how to face the shadow when we wish to walk away from... which
> is what i am doing here ...
>
> Hmmm, perhaps.  I see you as processing this with me here and
> this is the sort of thing i meant ... ok, it is not under that
> Subject heading ... but this is all I need.  I was unsure of the
> value of "responding honestly, confronting her" as you put it.  I
> was certainly unsure of doing it again.

You did it in this instance, a brave and honest move, and fraught with the
risk of uncertain consequence.   I don't know if you will need to do so
again.

I like these snippets of your feedback to Julienne:

> Good people in a messy situation

> So when i suggest you don't simply stop Julienne is not to throw
> oil on the fire.  I'd suggest you use a new tack!

Barry
____________________________________
Barry Kennedy<kennedy.levy@xtra.co.nz>

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 31 May 1998 09:38:04 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Barry Kennedy <kennedy.levy@XTRA.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Julienne

Walter wrote:

> So when i suggest you don't simply stop Julienne is not to throw
> oil on the fire.  I'd suggest you use a new tack! really.
> Perhaps ask others what they might do.
>
>
> Walter

He's right.  I'd like to see you stay on the list but let go of the tit for
tat.  That's not to assign blame.

Let go.

Barry
____________________________________
Barry Kennedy<kennedy.levy@xtra.co.nz>

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 18:11:25 -0400
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
In-Reply-To:  <199805302142.JAA15962@cyclops.xtra.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 09:38 AM 5/31/98 +1200, Barry wrote:
>Julienne
>
>Walter wrote:
>
>> So when i suggest you don't simply stop Julienne is not to throw
>> oil on the fire.  I'd suggest you use a new tack! really.
>> Perhaps ask others what they might do.
>>
>>
>> Walter
>
>He's right.  I'd like to see you stay on the list but let go of the tit for
>tat.  That's not to assign blame.
>
>Let go.

This is fascinating.

Who mentioned my leaving the List? Not I.

However, as I didn't start this, and as I have withdrawn from
it a number of times, why is this directed at me rather than JoAnne?

This feels like - "Let JoAnne keep going after you...but don't be quiet
because we want to hear more.
But if you say something finally, we will accuse you of not being quiet."

What is this about for you?

What is it you want me to let go of?

Why is it easier for you to say this to me rather than to JoAnne?

And as I have tried several tacks - why am I not allowed to just leave it
alone?
Why do some of you, such as Walter, indicate they don't want me to leave it
alone?

Just as I was beginning to be a little more comfortable with this, suddenly
I feel like
I am in the lion's den for everyone's amusement.

When two people say they don't want me to leave, when I have not even
suggested leaving, what am I to think?

Julienne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 22:51:12 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v03110702b195bcc80d4d@[195.200.17.234]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

This is fairly terrific, no...inspired bit of discontinuity which turns
around either a proof of the logics or disproof. (Bateson was the second
intellect which truly startled me. I was seventeen. Shakespeare was the
first, read in the year prior to my picking up "Steps to An Ecdology of the
Mind"; kind of an odd pair of bookends even for an autodidactass.)

Always my impression of Bateson is of an infinite shell game of context.
The quote is apt in this respect.

>I could, because, you see, to tell you the real answers, to know the real
>answers, is always to switch them over to that left brain, to the
>manipulative side. And once they're switched over, no matter how right they
>were poetically and aesthetically, they go dead, and become manipulative
>techniques."
>
>(Gregory Bateson, quoted in Douglas G. Flemons, 'Completing Distinctions')
>
>Simon

If you don't mind, I'll misuse the above for my own purposes, even as it is
allowed it to resonate.

Proved of course in that we are ourselves manipulated by our own rules,
reasoning, reasoningdrama. Disproved by the obvious limitation that the
process of "living the knowing" transcends telling, aesthetics, cognitive
frames, technique and, finally, finality.

Process itself becomes more tuned: *tuning being the answer to incapability
as it arises*; the veils become finer!

***

This is why, too, we may delightfully extrude a description out of those
same logics, (understood at all times to be an idiosyncratic use of the
term, ummm, a "braying" <g>) but they are only learned and understood
through the sudden recognition that some *doing* pierces the habituated
manipulation.

Perhaps it may be understood also that the point is not answers but
answering...

***

HooN

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 23:02:13 +0100
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         sc <hoon@APK.NET>
Subject:      Re: dialogue of intentions
In-Reply-To:  <v03110704b195d00c94bf@[195.200.19.14]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>HooN,
>
>The purpose of the drama that follows intention and rationale seems worth
>considering, as a way of deciding/decoding its value. Is the purpose to
>avoid the drama that *preceded* the intention/rationale? Or to shed light
>on it?
>
>In the former case we tend to justify ourselves as we are, in the latter to
>question ourselves as we are.
>
>Simon,

Simon, I opt, ummm, on *good days* for the latter. How about you?

***

There's something refreshing about, for example, two antagonists suddenly
each declaring, "Wait, this is hilarious, I've been subjecting my self to
my self again!" A powerful bit of doing in the gap...often enough to carry
one out of, beyond a pattern, a 'manipulation', into whatever may be next.

Another pattern? Sure, speaking from my own experience. (Bateson's
*difference*!)

***

One technique is to: induce novelty into the reasoningdrama...purposely
disrupt the code, break it!

***<--- jeez I'm enamoured of these...

HooN



=============================================

                                 hoon@apk.net

                                 ===================================
Getrude Stein to Henry James

                                 But if you have vitality enough of
                                knowing enough of what you
                               mean, somebody and sometime
                              and sometimes a great many will
                             have to realize that you know
                            what you mean and so they will
                           agree that you mean what you
                          know, what you know you mean,
                         which is as near as anybody can
                        come to understand anyone.

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 30 May 1998 19:56:07 -0700
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         meeseo Paik <ingul@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: hello
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

---kate collie <kcollie@UNIXG.UBC.CA> wrote:
>
> I joined this list a few days ago, and would like to introduce myself.
> It's not clear to me yet what this list is, but what brought me to
it is
> my interest in Internet counselling--specifically Internet art
therapy,
> the subject of my current research project here at the University of
> British Columbia (in Vancouver, Canada). I have been thinking about
> Internet communication, gender differences in attitudes to
> computer-mediated communication...
>

Hi.

..Nice to know about your concerns.
Of course, It seems that this place is not a proper place to discuss
"art"
Further, my concern is not a counselling(My major is Aesthetics).

But, I have been thinking about the change of the mind through art.
So to speak, the change of the sensibility.

Specifically, I am interest in mind's interaction through internet.
But, today, art has has a broad meaning.
What is "Art"?  ....and .what kind of art?
And, in internet, how can we ask someone to continue
 to concentrate his/her attention on artistic experience?

The confrontation with pc's monitor itself is too painful.
....too colorful and too noisy(of fan)...too stimulative..
Do you know VR(virtual reality)?
What do you think about it?

Recently, I often think, that we disconnect internet is more good to
our spirit and body.
Of course, my thoughts are too pessimistic.

But, while I am noticing the tenacious hatred and stubbornness, here,
 I suspect the possibility of the change in mind through art theraphy
in internet.
In fact, in these days, I don't read many emails from Psyber-L
They are nearly spam to me.
......same hates.same disputes.. ...etc...
Despite of it, because I am still expecting something else, I am still
here.

I am sorry to tell you about my feelings.

Meeseo

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 31 May 1998 15:33:26 +1200
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         Barry Kennedy <kennedy.levy@XTRA.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: ... a shift in the process
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Julienne

> And as I have tried several tacks - why am I not allowed to just leave it
> alone?



You are.



Barry
____________________________________
Barry Kennedy<kennedy.levy@xtra.co.nz>

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 31 May 1998 05:02:45 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: no shift in the process, I guess
In-Reply-To:  <19980530165335.MTGZ22850@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>, on Sat, 30 May 1998 12:52:21
-0400 you wrote:

>I like that - "train wreck" :) That's how it bloody feels. So I keep trying to
>get my own train derailed - or to derail JoAnne's, so there need be no
>great wreck.

I don't want my train derailed.  You don't either, really.

>How about when I back away from the loops - is that just a delaying tactic?

I don't see you backing away too often, except for your six-week (ten-day)
sabbatical.

>Well, of course I don't feel this - I feel that I try to shift the ground
>to find
>a way to meet. But then that may be part of my being the reasonable and
>feeling one. Whoops! - I just coopted BOTH sets of traits, didn't I? <g>

You say:  you are the reasonable and feeling one.  I am the unreasonable
and unfeeling one.  <g> means <grin>  you grin at the idea of usurping all
the "good" roles?  How interesting.

>To me this feels like eeek! - my mother????? Cynical and guarded. Ouch.
>Dealing with people only on her terms - very rigid about telephone or
>at home visits... Although in other ways she and JoAnne are quite different.

Oh my.  I'm your mother.  What a surprise.

>Oh my...here it all comes: my mother was always the "nice" one - no anger -
>and I was the angry and dishonest one - according to her. Throw in
>selfish, also. Here's how I became selfish:

Maybe she told this story to you as an example, not as the entire story.
We'll never know, of course, since she's now gone.  But if you didn't
understand her, and didn't understand me, this opens a whole new picture.

>>You said in our conversation:
>><I tend to look for inconsistencies, things that don't make sense, things
>>that don't fit the pattern, and when I want to know, I ask.  I sometimes
>>don't believe what people say, either; another impoliteness, but it seems
>>necessary.
>
>To me this feels like the Gestapo, or the Grand Inquisitor. And I
>wonder where she gets the information to decide where the one
>and only truth lies? I want to say to JoAnne, "lighten up!" - don't
>be so hard on people!

Lighten up?  You think the truth is to be played with?  You think it
doesn't matter, that we should pretend it's of no account?  That you can
call me names and I will just sit here and go, yah boss?

>>It's not infallible, but it's worked enough times to make me use this
>>approach when there's something I want to know.  Usually I'm not
>>disappointed, though often enough it's not because someone gave me an
>>answer, it's because they refuse to, that gives me my answer.>
>
>And my response to this is that JoAnne is notthe C.I.A. , but seems
>to assume a right to all the information she wants about others - like
>a grand invasion of privacy. Then, when she gets some information,
>she judges it like a one-woman Supreme Court.

As if no one else does.  You've made some heavy judgments on me, Julienne,
and this is not as the result of any kind of fact-finding, just some
feelings of yours.

>And I might not find it *necessary to me* At the time I didn't ask
>>but the question was *why does it seem necessary*...without asking this
>>question at the time I now am left with lapses in logic...
>>And *things that don't make sense* is another aspect of how you come from
>>logic...This assumes there is one sense to be made which is illogical to
>>me...another question unasked at the time, do you think there is *one
>>sense*...if you start out with the assumption there is *one sense* to be
>>made, there is another assumption that everyone is a clone processing every
>>life experience exactly the same way,
>
>When things don't make sense, it may be a lack of understanding in the
>listener, also (JoAnne in this case) - rather than any witholding in the
>speaker.

I don't understand you, that is correct.  You perceive this as a problem of
mine.  That's an assumption.

>However, even if I weren't going through what I'm going through now
>(And there is more I haven't shared because it's all too much anyway,
>and I know JoAnne would only trample all over it anyway...and tell me
>to get on the sidewalk and stop disturbing "normal" people...) -

If you can't handle the traffic, get on the sidewalk.  If a child gets on
the street, and a truck is coming, do we berate the truck for being a
truck, or get the child off the street?

>if I
>weren't going through all this right now there would still be a clash
>because we are such different trains.

>I feel as though I am drowning. Have any of you ever nearly drowned?
>I have - 3 times.

I learned to swim long ago.  I swim in the ocean.

>When one is drowning there isn't space to consider
>anything else but how to stay alive. If the love of one's life were to say
>at that moment, "Will you marry me?" - the impulse would be to just
>keep kicking frantically to get to the shore or across the undercurrent.
>Who cares about marriage at that moment? My brain doesn't work
>for a lot of things right now - it's flooded - my heart hurts, everything
>is on overload - and there comes JoAnne's train barrelling down on
>me with "Okay! Just what secrets are you hiding today?! I have PROOF
>that you stole a field full of pumpkins because you haven't told the
>whole truth ( which she assumes she has a right to invade me to know)
>and so I just know you must be the pumpkin thief.

I don't discuss pumpkins, or green hair, or stealing from children -- you
do.  Your assertions are absurd.  You discuss things that are obviously
false.  You can't discuss the things that I say, because you can't show
they aren't true.

You represent my questions as absurd.  I do not ask you absurd questions.
You avoid what I have asked you.

For example.  Did you or did you not say that I was trying to sic the
authorities on someone, and it turned out that I called the Post Office to
clear someone's name?  Can you ever make sense out of that?  Or do you only
hang onto the "JoAnne called the authorities" segment of that whole
incident?

>And if you're not -
>prove it! I am the Sagittarian judge and jury! Joanne is a double
>Sagittarius - the sign of the law and the judge. What that means,
>of course, is that she is not here to demand truth of others, but
>to learn to be honest herself. However, she's giving me her job.

I am a triple Sag, quadruple if you count MC.  I am not giving you my job,
I'm doing mine.

Do you suggest your job, as Scorpio, is to have secrets and lie to people?
Control everything?

>Well, I may have lost you all on that bit - but it was significant for my
>own reverie.

The reverie, that's the most important thing to you, not the truth, is what
that sounds like to me.

-JoAnne

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L



=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 31 May 1998 05:02:48 GMT
Reply-To:     Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender:       Psybernet Mailing List <PSYBER-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From:         JoAnne Schmitz <jschmitz@QIS.NET>
Subject:      Re: If we were the last ones left...
In-Reply-To:  <19980530155412.LXRQ22850@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Julienne <zjulienne@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>, on Sat, 30 May 1998 11:54:05
-0400 you wrote:

>Well, that has been pretty obvious to me for some time. JoAnne complains
>that I am too sweet, too good-looking,

When did I say that?  Your imagination is working overtime.  Who was it who
was really jealous of your looks?  Your mother?

>too unbelievable and dishonest,
>and a whole pile of descriptions which are, as I see it, anathema for
>someone like JoAnne who (as I see it) sees herself as a toughie who
>tells it like it is and let the chips (and bodies) fall where they might.
>She makes it clear that she thinks I'm really a giant fake who can't be
>trusted to be as nice as she thinks I'm pretending to be.

Your actions don't seem very nice to me.  I'm not guessing, I'm going by
personal experience.

>And I freak out at what I see as her meanness and desire to stir
>things up. Like Hoon, I see myself capable of doing that, but I try not to.
>I don't want to be like JoAnne. I see her "honesty" as an attempt to
>hurt others, and as quite dishonest anyway - barbs thrown out as
>weapons to injure. Am I capable of that? Like Hoon, -sure. I would
>love to see JoAnne tortured in burning oil and put in the stocks in
>the center of town and humiliated publically because that's what I
>feel she has tried to do to me.

Now we get down to what you think of me.

Let me tell you, I have no interest in torturing you.  I'd like to see you
truthful, but I don't care to use any kind of torture or coercion, because
then you would not be truthful in your heart.  And I have no stomach for
torture, I put bugs outside instead of squishing them.

I want you to be real with me, instead of defensive, instead of attributing
these scary things to me.  How do you get these ideas, I wonder.

It's been very interesting reading your posts tonight.  You see me as your
mother, and as a physical torturer.

I'm hoping I can be detached from the scary physical torturer for you,
because that has made any other relationship impossible.

>But I try to let that go - because I
>don't want to be like that. It's one thing to have an urge to slaughter
>someone, another to do so. I don't really want to slaughter JoAnne - I
>just want her to shut up and go away until she wants to play nice.

But I don't want to "play nice" the way you want to, so that will not be
likely to happen.

>Put her in a reformatory - make her write essays on why she should
>be nice to people...:) Wash out her mouth with soap. And put her
>into counseling until she deals with who hurt her so much that
>she has to be hurtful. And while she's undergoing all this which
>would be very satsfactory to my sweet self, I can be exchanging
>dreams and being very spiritual with you, Anita, and Robert. :)

Your sweet self wanted to attack me in the shower before, now it wants to
boil me in oil and wash my mouth out with soap.  What other ideas do you
have for me?

I tell you honestly, I have never thought of anything physical against you.
I'm almost shocked at the extent of your fantasies about attacking me.  But
that explains your feelings about my words.  I guess that you think these
violent fantasies must be behind my words too.  No wonder you feel upset.

My only thoughts on the shower/tub fantasy of yours with slippery skin was
that maybe that would feel nice, warm soapy suds and another person.

JoAnne, confused but perhaps understanding more than before.

_______________________________________________________________
For list options & how to leave PSYBER-L list, send an email to
LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM   in the text write: HELP PSYBER-L





