Werner's Spawn; They Sprout Like Weeds

elle...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 7, 2013, 1:01:54 PM3/7/13

to

How amazing is it that the types of people who run this type of scam can still find enough people with money to pay for their silly programs...

Werner Erhard must be pleased. Or not.

http://www.donkdown.com/daniel-negreanu-antonio-esfandiari-shilling-for-choice-center-scam-cult/

Ellen

thetroubl...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 8, 2013, 12:24:30 PM3/8/13

to

Ellen, what does this "Daniel Negreanu & Antonio Esfandiari For Choice Center Las Vegas" thing have to do with alt.fan.landmark? If you want to discuss Landmark Education or even Werner Erhard, perhaps we could discuss this TEDx talk , see link below, which is directly influenced by the ideas associated with Werner Erhard. Or not.

Living the Adventure Called Your Life: Jean Lloyd
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6gPSM1-vxM

Jean Lloyd works with the Vanto Group.
http://www.vantogroup.com/details.jsp?top=167&mid=207&siteObjectID=110042

thetroubl...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 8, 2013, 12:28:39 PM3/8/13

to

You see people as "weeds" Ellen? Sounds like a magical Alice in Wonderland way of seeing the world around yourself. You exhibit the innocence of a creative child.

Serena Nordstrup

unread,

Mar 10, 2013, 1:00:25 AM3/10/13

to

On Mar 9, 6:28 am, thetroublewitht...@gmail.com wrote:
> You see people as "weeds" Ellen? Sounds like a magical Alice in Wonderland way of seeing the world around yourself. You exhibit the innocence of a creative child.

You see rosenbergist-spawn orgs as people? Strange ...

thetroubl...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 10, 2013, 8:45:12 AM3/10/13

to

> You see rosenbergist-spawn orgs as people? Strange ...

Bro, you see your fellow human beings as "spawn orgs"? You seen too many science fiction movies mi amigo.

And how many is too many you ask? The correct answer is 42

Serena Nordstrup

unread,

Mar 13, 2013, 5:48:42 AM3/13/13

to

On Mar 11, 1:45 am, thetroublewitht...@gmail.com wrote:
> > You see rosenbergist-spawn orgs as people? Strange ...
>
> Bro, you see your fellow human beings as "spawn orgs"?

No. Can we discuss rosenbergist spawn without confusing orgs with
their gullible dupes?

> You seen too many science fiction movies mi amigo.
>
> And how many is too many you ask? The correct answer is 42

No -- I've not seen that many science-fiction movies.

thetroubl...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 13, 2013, 10:00:45 AM3/13/13

to

> No. Can we discuss rosenbergist spawn without confusing orgs with
>
> their gullible dupes

Can you explain the above gobbledygook? Can't understand what you are talking about Bro. Perhaps repost without the jargon? Once you start speaking english and start talking about Landmark or even Werner Erhard, perhaps then yes we can "discuss" a few things. Till then, your Incomprehensible lingo is an obstacle to any considerate rational "discussion".

>
> No -- I've not seen that many science-fiction movies.

Yes you have. It is written right here on the internet (see below) , and bro that's all the proof that is needed.

Serena Nordstrup

unread,

Apr 5, 2013, 7:07:15 AM4/5/13

to

On Mar 14, 3:00 am, thetroublewitht...@gmail.com wrote:
> > No. Can we discuss rosenbergist spawn without confusing orgs with
>
> > their gullible dupes
>
> Can you explain the above gobbledygook?

With which lexemes do you seem to have difficulty?

> Can't understand what you are talking about Bro.

Stick around, the jargonic atmosphere may permeate your senses.

> Perhaps repost without the jargon? Once you start speaking english and start talking about Landmark or even Werner Erhard, perhaps then yes we can "discuss" a few things. Till then, your Incomprehensible lingo is an obstacle to any considerate rational "discussion".

The thread topic apparently involves "Werner's Spawn". We have a
context!

> > No -- I've not seen that many science-fiction movies.
>
> Yes you have. It is written right here on the internet (see below) , and bro that's all the proof that is needed.

You may have confused an identity with an ~interpretation~...

TJ

unread,

Apr 5, 2013, 8:24:57 AM4/5/13

to

> With which lexemes do you seem to have difficulty?

The "lexemes" I have "difficulty with", duh.

> The thread topic apparently involves "Werner's Spawn". We have a context!

Thanks AND, again, perhaps you would repost without the jargon? Once you start speaking english and start talking about Landmark or even Werner Erhard, perhaps then yes we can "discuss" a few things. Till then, your Incomprehensible lingo is an obstacle to any considerate rational "discussion".

> You may have confused an identity with an ~interpretation~...

May have, may not have.

Serena Nordstrup

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 5:57:28 AM4/7/13

to

On Apr 6, 12:24 am, TJ <thetroublewitht...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > With which lexemes do you seem to have difficulty?
>
> The "lexemes" I have "difficulty with", duh.

Not just a pose, then?

> > The thread topic apparently involves "Werner's Spawn". We have a context!
>
> Thanks

Think ~nothing~ of it...

> AND, again, perhaps you would repost without the jargon? Once you start speaking english and start talking about Landmark or even Werner Erhard, perhaps then yes we can "discuss" a few things. Till then, your Incomprehensible lingo is an obstacle to any considerate rational "discussion".

Why would want to talk about the despicable bigamist Jack Rosenberg?
After all, this Usenet group concentrates on landmarquetry...

> > You may have confused an identity with an ~interpretation~...
>
> May have, may not have.

On the other hand, perhaps the lack of ~distinction~ between so-called
jargon and the English language may play a role...

Message has been deleted

TJ

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:12:59 AM4/7/13

to

> Not just a pose, then?

You know all about "posing" Nordstrop

> Why would want to talk about the despicable bigamist Jack Rosenberg? After all, this Usenet group concentrates on landmarquetry...

Once again, perhaps you would repost all your gobbledygook minus the jargon? Once you start speaking english and start talking on topic about Landmark or even Werner Erhard, perhaps a "discussion" of some kind will emerge. Till then, your Incomprehensible Nordstrop lingo is an obstacle to any considerate rational "discussion".

> On the other hand, perhaps the lack of ~distinction~ between so-called jargon and the English language may play a role...

Perhaps, perhaps not.

Serena Nordstrup

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 7:33:53 AM4/8/13

to

On Apr 8, 1:12 am, TJ <thetroublewitht...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Not just a pose, then?
>
> You know all about "posing" Nordstrop

hence the requirement to check out non-posing...

> > Why would want to talk about the despicable bigamist Jack Rosenberg? After all, this Usenet group concentrates on landmarquetry...
>
> Once again, perhaps you would repost all your gobbledygook minus the jargon? Once you start speaking english and start talking on topic about Landmark or even Werner Erhard, perhaps a "discussion" of some kind will emerge. Till then, your Incomprehensible Nordstrop lingo is an obstacle to any considerate rational "discussion".

Why would anyone want to talk about the despicable bigamist Jack

Rosenberg? After all, this Usenet group concentrates on

landmarquetry... Even in the absence of any identification of alleged
Jargon.

> > On the other hand, perhaps the lack of ~distinction~ between so-called jargon and the English language may play a role...
>
> Perhaps, perhaps not.

Building up an intricate web of combinations of non-~possibility~
here...

TJ

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 8:04:49 AM4/8/13

to

> Why would anyone want to talk about the despicable bigamist Jack
>
> Rosenberg? After all, this Usenet group concentrates on
>
> landmarquetry... Even in the absence of any identification of alleged
>
> Jargon.

Once again, perhaps you would repost all your gobbledygook minus the jargon? Once you start speaking english and start talking on topic about Landmark or even Werner Erhard, perhaps a "discussion" of some kind will emerge. Till then, your Incomprehensible Nordstrop lingo is an obstacle to any considerate rational "discussion

> Building up an intricate web of combinations of non-~possibility~ here...

Nordstrop, your gobbledygook might sound intelligent to you but I got no clue what the f-ck you are talking about. I have a grade 5 education and your fascination with your own wordy jargon seems to exclude any interest in talking to other people in plain english.

Serena Nordstrup

unread,

Apr 9, 2013, 7:21:59 AM4/9/13

to

On Apr 9, 12:04 am, TJ <thetroublewitht...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Why would anyone want to talk about the despicable bigamist Jack
>
> > Rosenberg? After all, this Usenet group concentrates on
>
> > landmarquetry... Even in the absence of any identification of alleged
>
> > Jargon.
>
> Once again, perhaps you would repost all your gobbledygook minus the jargon? Once you start speaking english and start talking on topic about Landmark or even Werner Erhard, perhaps a "discussion" of some kind will emerge. Till then, your Incomprehensible Nordstrop lingo is an obstacle to any considerate rational "discussion

But why would anyone want to talk about the despicable bigamist Jack
Rosenberg? After all, this Usenet group concentrates on landmarquetry,
not on some individual con-artist... Even in the absence of any
identification of alleged jargon...

> > Building up an intricate web of combinations of non-~possibility~ here...
>
> Nordstrop, your gobbledygook might sound intelligent to you but I got no clue what the f-ck you are talking about. I have a grade 5 education and your fascination with your own wordy jargon seems to exclude any interest in talking to other people in plain english.

Consider the ~possibility~of coming down from the stands and crowding
the court 'til nobody can move.