posted March 09, 2021 06:19 AM            

I say shouldn’t versus can’t—wherein matters of the devil.

The lesson about boundaries reverberates, when we already betray our own living values, by forcing [the rules of] engagement. It’s a magical maze of an online forum, yet, would you ever wish to talk to AG irl? Consider responding as-guide (holding a mirror) only to those that have light of their own to tend to. Familiars. Or, if called-to serve, that the message delivered can stand alone without reference. Surely you have this discernment that’s meant also to obey.

Please don’t quote me—I don’t know any details of this circumstance (since I’ve been busy away from LL for a moment / refuse to read anything ‘new’ by that member) but upon return and a quick read of latest on this Hello thread, inherently comprehend how you fairly-often step-forth into traps. As well-meaning as you may be, there’s a pattern, in doing so, lays an arrogance. No-one is wrong.

posted March 09, 2021 08:05 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Graham:
http://www.transformationalwriting.co.uk/blog/angerwhy-dont-some-people-get -angry-when-they-need-to

"[b]Internalised Anger
Just because one doesn’t express their anger in an assertive way or in a way that is aggressive or violent, it doesn’t mean that it will simply disappear. It will become internalised and so instead of someone feeling a sense of power through expressing it in some way; they can end up feeling disempowered.

It is often said that depression is a consequence of repressed anger. And this is partly because one will have to carry the emotional weight around with them and this is going to be a burden. One will not be speaking their truth; they will be denying what is true for them.

And when one doesn’t speak up for themselves and say what they need to say, it is inevitable that they will feel a loss of energy and power. It is also possible for one to become emotionally stuck and unable to change how they feel as a result of the internalised anger that has built up. This can then cause one to feel a sense of boredom and to be emotionally disconnected."
http://www.transformationalwriting.co.uk/blog/angerwhy-dont-some-people-get -angry-when-they-need-to

In my opinion. closing threads to avoid escalation of emotions results only in the internalising of anger by those whom have been denied the opportunity to express that strong emotion. ... And this fuelling of emotions then creates passive-aggression by those members. ... For example, I am finding it impossible to "not go" to the SPITR board (despite now knowing that it is unproductive/unwise for me to do so): Aquaguy has provocatively moved from his residence (in wankety wankerson) to a rent-free apartment inside the head of gamma/Grahma males* and Ami Anne started a thread on "sociopaths" which is clearly a passive-aggressive attack upon me.

Hence, the policy of closing threads to maintain peace/calm is serving only to ensure that there are no ripples on the surface of the water which betray the hunting going on underneath.

[ * However, perhaps Aquaguy has simply moved to "a safe place apartment, within the safe place board of the LL kingdom" - and Ami Anne genuinely feels that a thread on sociopaths is a necessary addition to the SPITR board.][/B]

---

I agree with you, and I left yesterday, because I was angry that neither of them acknowledged what you had to say, or apologized for their own behaviour. The sociopath thing isn’t new, either, it’s happened before, and that was why we lost a good group of people.

posted March 09, 2021 09:46 AM            

Interesting blast from the past that one.

ETA: I miss reading Ceridwen, Faith and Leeloo. I learned a lot from them.

posted March 09, 2021 11:51 AM              

Those posts have already released much of the internalised anger that was causing me to return to the SPITR board ... and I am hearing the advice to "stop swimming in shark-infested seas".

posted March 09, 2021 11:51 AM              

Those posts have already released much of the internalised anger that was causing me to return to the SPITR board ... and I am hearing the advice to "stop swimming in shark-infested seas".

posted March 09, 2021 12:31 PM            

I wish you had been around before when things were thriving. Not without problems, possibly with more, but the site was also alive with wisdom, learning and sharing. Unfortunately, the enabling you spoke of in Sweet Peas has been a bone of contention for a long time and is what resulted in many excellent astrologers of all levels leaving.

It's not really talked about now, but that wound in LL's heart is still open. And IMHO the community never recovered. And the problem remains. It is unfair, but it somehow must be part of LL's path. Hopefully, not her demise.

posted March 10, 2021 04:19 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
Thank you for your viewpoint, Voix. However, I would be remiss if I did not provide an alternate perspective. If you are going to fill Graham in on the past, allow me to color in the rest of the story. LL is not heading for a demise. Quite the contrary. A number of times over the past two decades cliques have been formed here. Then those cliques bully people. It’s the equivalence of the present-day “woke” mob. In the last blow-up you referenced, did good astrologers leave? Yes. But they also caused drama (not all of them but just a couple). A few others followed and joined in. And we have had almost no real drama at LL in the years since they departed (till the recent Graham/AG conflict), which speaks for itself. You also make it sound like a lot of people left from that last conflict. “Many” have come and gone over 21 years. People move on. Life is like that. Some come back. Some don’t. Some leave over personality conflicts. Only a few people left because of that conflict. I will never bow to cliques who make me “ultimatums.” We have some strong personalities at LL, and not everyone is going to always get along with everyone else. There is no open wound here, in my opinion. There is peace. AG lashed out, but it is understandable (albeit not justifiable) if, in fact, Graham disrespected him concerning the death of his mother. I don’t know whether there was a misunderstanding about what was said or not, because I don’t know where that conversation took place, and didn’t read that exchange. Graham got the last word in the thread before it was closed. I fail to see why there is a need to continue the discord. There’s a lot I could say about what was going on behind the scenes in the referenced conflict. I do not wish to rehash it. Just know that there are two or more sides to every story. I do hate losing members, but this community thrives best when learning and helping each other is more important than drama. I also do not want anyone here who doesn’t want to be here. Not everyone is going to feel like LL is a fit for them. I wish everyone well. Well, almost everyone. I want LL to be a place of refuge in the storm. And that is my vision for LL. I am not always successful at accomplishing this. In fact, I often fall short. That being said, I do recognize the need to get emotions out, which is why I opened up the GU forum. I am also not discounting the role of Ami, AG, or myself in the conflict referenced. Everyone was guilty in some respect. But my views on what happened do not match your own, Voix, and that’s okay. That’s what makes life so wonderful. We are all unique. You are also not privy to all of the information, as I am. However, that still does not make my view entirely correct or yours entirely incorrect. Often, a view is limited by where the viewer is standing. My rant is over. Carry on. PS: Love the quote in your signature!

---

Thank you for expanding this out Randall, I hope I did not come across as ungrateful or disrespectful, as this is not how I feel toward LL. Perhaps I spoke out of turn, as I am sure were things about that conflict behind the scenes that I was not privy to, and yes, my perception will be limited by that. However, LL has one person causing issues for a long time. Granted, things do appear to be better than before, there's been a marked improvement, but recent behaviour indicates that if they can get away with it, this person still likes to get the boot in. That is why the wound is still open. This behaviour is the reason many left in the last conflict. I'm not saying that everyone who left was without fault, but you retained the common denominator in many of the conflicts since I was here, and lost the other parties.

For some reason, you felt it better for LL to protect this person, no matter what damage they were doing. It may have felt Uranian-against-the-grain at the time, like they were the underdog, but from the outside looking in, they were creating their own enemies and drama then playing the victim on many occasions and once people get a whiff of that, they respond in kind (rightly or wrongly). I'm not absolving anyone (on any side, including myself) of wrongdoing, when things gets heated we can all behave as lesser versions of ourselves, but it's important to know how these things start. It was not as simple as personality clashes. Some people enjoy the attention they get from drama, and the attention they get from you when they use the drama to cry wolf and play victim. I don't agree with bullying, but neither do I agree with antagonism. From where I was sitting, there was more than one person on each side, so I'm reluctant to call any of it bullying.

In terms of value of astrological content, which is what I thought was core to LL, what was lost was of a far higher value than what was retained. That's not to disparage the excellent astrologers who stayed, but it cannot be denied that it was a huge loss from an astrological standpoint. But yes, this is just my opinion.

I only brought this up because the same pattern emerged as before. A conflict happens, gets settled and then someone subtly stokes the burning embers for their own amusement. If you take anything away from my response here, this paragraph sums it up.

For some reason I feel very attached to LL, and Linda's style, even though I am not one of her best students, or one of the oldest members, nor one of the best contributors. I don't know why I feel this way (perhaps its the synastry), but I stay because of this. Loyalty, I guess. To LL, to you for creating and investing in LL, and to those past and present who have taught me so much.

The sig? Yeah, I'm trying to live by it

@Graham, I hope you don't feel I am trying to portray LL in a negative light to you - I love LL, but you have been directly affected by things recently that are not new. You took the high road and self-reflected, and then you apologised. We all make mistakes, but the important thing is that we learn something and review ourselves, which you did. However you were then poked with a stick, right after you did the right thing. I just wanted you to know that it IS worth doing the right thing, and that people who antagonise have always done so, it is not personal. LL still benefits from more people doing the right thing, even if some people have never changed.

posted March 10, 2021 04:30 AM              

Still think closing threads results in "peace-in-our-time" and "goodwill-to-all-people"?

In reality, it results only in aggrieved members (including Moderators) hunting for the "offending" member on other threads.

posted March 10, 2021 04:50 AM              

quote:

---

@Graham, I hope you don't feel I am trying to portray LL in a negative light to you - I love LL, but you have been directly affected by things recently that are not new. You took the high road and self-reflected, and then you apologised. We all make mistakes, but the important thing is that we learn something and review ourselves, which you did. However you were then poked with a stick, right after you did the right thing. I just wanted you to know that it IS worth doing the right thing, and that people who antagonise have always done so, it is not personal. LL still benefits from more people doing the right thing, even if some people have never changed.

---

Thank you for this, Voix ... I do indeed believe that I have done the right thing here, by refusing to turn a blind eye to the anti-social behaviour of two member/moderators on the SPITR board - and stressing that it needs to be managed rather than ignored.

posted March 10, 2021 07:37 AM            

ETA: I recently apologised to Ami because I regretted the times I was hurtful toward her, but this does not excuse her conduct.

posted March 10, 2021 07:57 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Graham:
Originally posted by Voix :-

Thank you for this, Voix ... I do indeed believe that I have done the right thing here, by refusing to turn a blind eye to the anti-social behaviour of two member/moderators on the SPITR board - and stressing that it needs to be managed rather than ignored.

However, I also agree none of that detracts from the (well-evidenced) fact that Randall has built a special home/realm here ... and those of us that care about it have to be "big enough and ugly enough" to accept his house rules, or leave the premises if we cannot find a way to do so.

---

Well that's the thing isn't it? I stepped in as moderator and asked you and Dumuzi to back off - you both did. Not only that, you have then reflected and since apologised. BTW, I have no clique or affiliation with any LL member outside of LL, other than a little sporadic contact with iQ. I believed I was acting with the needs of the forum I was responsible for in mind, rightly or wrongly.

I think it was a poor decision to try again with AG, but you know that now, and it was unnecessary and unethical for another moderator (with no mitigating factors) to join in with the name-calling, no matter how subtly - that should also be dealt with. It is unfair and disruptive to allow moderators to call out knowflakes and yet not be held to the same high standards of behaviour themselves.

posted March 10, 2021 10:07 AM            

You don't appear to be acknowledging the part that Ami has and continues to play in these issues. And that is unfair.

ETA: I see you added a comment about Ami needing to grow as a moderator. That is great and I love the idea of LL being open to supporting moderators to develop in their roles, however, what just happened with the sociopath thread indicates that there is still work to be done. How can LL be drama-free if the people tasked with mediating drama enflame it further?

posted March 10, 2021 10:07 AM              

quote:

---

Originally posted by Voix_de_la_Mer:
Well that's the thing isn't it? I stepped in as moderator and asked you and Dumuzi to back off - you both did. Not only that, you have then reflected and since apologised. BTW, I have no clique or affiliation with any LL member outside of LL, other than a little sporadic contact with iQ. I believed I was acting with the needs of the forum I was responsible for in mind, rightly or wrongly.

I think it was a poor decision to try again with AG, but you know that now, and it was unnecessary and unethical for another moderator (with no mitigating factors) to join in with the name-calling, no matter how subtly - that should also be dealt with. It is unfair and disruptive to allow moderators to call out knowflakes and yet not be held to the same high standards of behaviour themselves.

---

I fully agree with what you are saying here, Voix ... so, it requires no further comment/expansion from me.

However, I think it is worth me pursuing with Randall his confusion about whether or not I was disrespectful to AG about the death of his mother ... which (from memory) relates to the thread on which you (repeatedly) asked Dumuzi and myself to back off, and we (eventually) did.

I believe that thread is at http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum27/HTML/002702.html ... and that my first ever contact with AG was when I entered that thread at 04:24pm on 14th December 2020.

posted March 10, 2021 10:26 AM              

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
I still haven’t heard you put any blame on Graham for his part. I never said you were in a clique. And you have no clue about the history of Juni and Ami. Yes, Ami had a lot of growth to endure, but she never pretended to be someone she wasn’t, unlike some of those you seem to admire.

---

Do you not think it is time that YOU (as the forum owner) made an effort to find out for yourself the extent to which each of us involved in this incident is "to blame", Randall?

And ... I still haven't heard you put any blame on Ami Anne for baiting me on the thread. ... You see only that I should not have retaliated. ... You shout loudly that "there are two sides to every story", but opted to consider only the view of "your own party".
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

quote:

---

I’m still confused by one thing. Were you or were you not disrespectful about the death of AG’s mother? If so, why?

---

I believe the thread interaction which upset AG is at http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum27/HTML/002702.html ... and that my first ever contact with AG was when I entered that thread at 04:24pm on 14th December 2020.

At the time of entering, I was completely unaware of the death of AG's mother - and remained so until he raised it in his reply to Dumuzi on December 17, 2020 (at 06:14 PM).

Please let me know how you would have handled my interaction with AG from the point at which I entered that thread (on 14th December) to the point at which he raised his mother's death (on 17th December).

I would also be interested in hearing your holier-than-thou view about how I could have better-reacted to the comments made to me by AG during that period.

And, thank you for finally making the effort to ask the question which you (as the forum owner) should have asked me from the outset.

posted March 10, 2021 10:45 AM              

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
I was looking for that interactions and could not find it.

---

posted March 10, 2021 10:48 AM              

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
In that thread, Voix acted perfectly. Dumuzi likely should have been banned. And Graham, you should have stopped interacting with AG, who obviously didn’t want your help, yet you continued to force it on him. AG apologized the next day in the thread. He was hurting big time.

---

Yeah. ... And it was just a few hotheads that stormed the Capitol on 6th January 2021. ... So all is well with the forum, the USA and the world generally.