Natasha Tori Maru

You can't just apologise over and over and still act out in the same terrible way. Eventually the behaviour needs to be addressed. As an example - you keep getting angry and verbally abusing your partner. Then apologising. The apology means very little if you continue to abuse and apologize, expecting forgiveness or for your partner to accept poor treatment. It lacks integrity. Your word, your apology, means nothing without your actions (not doing abusing) lining up. For most, we can accept a provisional time where we work on changing behaviour and be patient, accepting. But work needs to be done to change behaviour when it is unacceptable. In this context, the behaviour should align with the guidelines, spirit of the forum and good, charitable terms of engagement. Ideally. Usually in this space, when users don't change, we can simply ignore them as a boundary. Even if they do apologise.

I think there needs to be a behaviour change. Sorry doesn't cut it. A change in behaviour (or an effort to) is the best apology.

Smooth brained scientists

In Australia gym rat is not a negative term. It is positive to be called a gym rat, implying fitness is a priority. Gym bro is highly negative, though

Honestly there is so much disinformation and fake shit in the UFO / UAP / NHI domain now, really thorough epistemology is a priority more than ever. I th8nk misinformation and red herrings were always a tactic. But as soon as that scourge, Luis Elizondo, showed up, the new game of confusion was openly obvious 😢

Maybe I should make an apology/karma purge mega thread. Anyone can come and go after they cool down from forum jostles. Apologise where they feel they need to (link the thread, tag the user or not, as they choose). Absolve and heal. There is a big area of growth in domains of humility and surrender this forum has no place for. It could be a healthy, safe space to facilitate this. We probably all go to bed, wake up and reread "the fuck was I thinking", "hmm, okay I see the point now", "oh yeah I was being uncharitable / a dick". Usually when people cool down they see clearly. It would have stricter standard of moderating. But would probably assist with grudges, built up dislike, tension and karma accumulation.

@Xonas Pitfall It's interesting because this reflects a lot of the types of thinking that I see prevelent in the manosphere, MGTOW and Red-pill and adjacent communities. They are fantastic at identifying truths - especially truths many people don't want to hear. Then they go and fuck it all up with obsessive compulsive evo-psych/mechanistic style hyper fixated explanations and insane methods to try to leverage them. The truths are the good bit. The hyper fixated behavioural psychology is crazy. Half the downstream advice from the conclusions of their explanations act to make the problems for them worse. The endless evo-psych explanations are a form of cope. Not the truth observations they originate from.

I never claimed I didn't. I usually review and try to improve after my interactions. I always include myself in my analysis - which is, incidentally - where most of the conclusions come from (my own behaviour noticed first, then how that is seen in others). Pointing out hypocrisy doesn't mean truth isn't illustrated in what was raised.

Yep! I think your replies were based on previous interactions between yourself and Emerald. In those, there was a serious disagreement that had little to do with being uncharitable or slippery with rasing and countering points (from my perspective anyway). In most of your history with her you, she engaged in some serious mental jousting because you were approaching in good faith. And you have always been a charitable and good faith debater (from my observations). Context for this thread: https://www.actualized.org/forum/topic/116710-women-are-better-hunter-science-suggests/?page=1

Don't conflate nice with honest and charitable (especially in this context - debate). I don't think it does anyone any service to try to argue (or frame in such a way) uncharitable tactics are acceptable.

Hence leaving the forum.

@Jirh @eos_nyxia I enjoyed your analysis above 🫶🏻 @integral It wasn't the winning or losing, right / wrong that resulted in @Emeralds departure. It was the dishonest, uncharitable debate tactics engaged in.

@Thought Art Definitely. Which is why we give grace. If we want to develop or work on ourselves, we have to admit that we can be wrong. We also need a good measure of openness AND groundedness in balance. To be here on this forum, wanting to develop, means we admit there is something that needs critical assessment, recalibration and change. Engaging in dishonest debate tactics often isn't an attempt to get closer to the truth. It's about winning and egos. The fact of the matter remains - some people are here just to debate. Some are here for spiritual insights, some are here for philosophy. It varies. We clash a lot when we think we are all here with the same meaning in tow, looking at the forum to fulfil or grow different aspects of our life.

Flood the zone with shit. Misinformation, disinformation. Obscure it all.

It is noticed for sure Same for me (regarding conduct). We all misbehave. Human nature. Grace is in how we reconcile. And I can see how this whole thread appears to run counter to reconsiliation. I think it is simply Emerald asserting a boundary for what she will/won't tolerate. Leaving the forum is the boundary.