Nahm is a very sweet guy.
He visited me in real life.
However, he is not God-Realized. And he cannot lead you to God.
Which is why it was so hard to demote him.
For the record, he was not banned, he was merely demoted from Mod. But then he used that opportunity to try to steal half our userbase for himself under the radar. For which he was banned. This was a serious betrayal.
But I understand why he did it. He thinks he's Awake. But he's lost in Neo-Advaita silliness. I tried to communicate this to him, but he is so deep in it, there is no getting through to him. Which is sad, but I got bigger fish to fry.
You guys need to be very careful what spiritual clowns you take as your mentors and guides. They are NOT teaching you God-Realization, regardless of all their excuses.
None of that is God-Realization. And until you start taking what I say seriously, you'll never Awaken.
Do not be fooled by spritual sweetness. Be intelligent enough to see that that is just another game.

I'm efficient.  I go to wherever I can get the most information for the least amount of effort.  And I'm not an INTx, so really idgaf about the research methods or how well a paper is written.  I only need the conclusion, for the conclusion to be significant in some way, and for it to not be wrong.  That's what Ti2 is.  As long as it's all correct, the rest is unimportant, and Te6 will just be like "whatever man, your book means nothing to me".
I invest more energy into understanding the character/integrity/logic of people so I don't have to use Te as much.  You invest less energy into understanding people as you don't mind using Te and prefer to evaluate others' logic on a case-by-base basis.  You take a micro approach and nitpick the details which seem trivial and unimportant to me.  I take a macro view and use my broad understanding of a person and the extent of their intellect to figure out how they might've come to their conclusions and how likely they are to be right.
If Einstein / whatever genius said something crazy to you, you wouldn't suddenly go deep into thought taking him seriously, you'd instead be sceptical and try to verify with outside sources or think back to some person/book who might've said something similar.  My first instinct, however, would be to figure out what would cause such a man to to say such a crazy thing.  The man's character would be at the very forefront of the dilemma, and would greatly influence my evaluation.  An idiot and a genius could say the exact same thing, but my inference of their intended meaning would differ greatly because what's not spoken of in the moment is always more significant.
 
If I read the original SD texts by the Blue authors I'd be spending days reading 95% old information, from a questionable source.
9SEDT is a bit different, as the author seems to be an intuitive.  But what would I get from her research papers that I can't get from Leo's summary?  If I understand Leo and his biases, then I can get a good idea of what the model looks like unfiltered anyway.