Subscribe to Tarot-L
Brian M Oldham
Greetings All,
I wanted to subscribe to the tarot-l e-mail list, and would love it if
someone could post &/or e-mail me instructions.
TIA,
Brian
PS: I checked in the alt.tarot FAQ, and this info isn't there. Am I the
only one who thinks it should be?
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On Fri, 6 Feb 1998 12:43:27 -0800, Brian M Oldham <mer...@slip.net>
wrote:
My guess is it isn't there because JK and his glee club don't think
much of the idea of a mailing list where people actually discuss tarot
and leave the insults at the door.
There are two ways to get to the list
1. If you have a web browser point it to
http://www.lightspeed.bc.ca/hilander/tarotL.html and follow the
directions.
2. If you've only got email or want to just get on with it, send an
email to list...@techunix.technion.ac.iL. In the body of the letter
type:
"Subscribe Tarot-L [your email address] [your name]
That's about all there is to it.
Regards,
R
J. Karlin
Brian M Oldham wrote:
>
> Greetings All,
>
> I wanted to subscribe to the tarot-l e-mail list, and would love it if
> someone could post &/or e-mail me instructions.
>
> TIA,
> Brian
>
> PS: I checked in the alt.tarot FAQ, and this info isn't there. Am I the
> only one who thinks it should be?
This is alt.tarot, not tarot-l.
The alt.tarot FAQ covers the basics of tarot, and this newsgroup.
tarot-l is not pertinent to that discussion (except as
an historical footnote perhaps).
(jk)
J. Karlin
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
> My guess is it isn't there because JK and his glee club don't think
> much of the idea of a mailing list where people actually discuss tarot
> and leave the insults at the door.
Plenty of insults make it past the door at tarot-l, many of
them aimed at this newsgroup.
tarot-l is a censored posting environment. If you don't
want to be bothered by people expressing opinions or
asking you questions about what you write, then it's
a good place to go.
I believe that's what endears the place to you, isn't it?
Oh, and you'll get to rub elbows with people like Mary
Greer, although from what I hear, even the safe confines
of tarot-l are getting a little hot for the Princess
as of late.
Oh well, maybe they can start a new 'alternative' list
where the dregs of the newage can find some rest:
elephantgraveyard-l
(jk)
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On Sat, 07 Feb 1998 07:47:53 -0600, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
wrote:
>R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>
>> My guess is it isn't there because JK and his glee club don't think
>> much of the idea of a mailing list where people actually discuss tarot
>> and leave the insults at the door.
>
>Plenty of insults make it past the door at tarot-l, many of
>them aimed at this newsgroup.
Lie Number 1. In fact, contrary to Mr. Karlin's ego-spurred wishes,
alt.tarot is almost never discussed in the group. And I'm happy to
report that all the abusive language, threats, and infantile debating
techniques of Karlin and his ilk are left at the door.
>
>tarot-l is a censored posting environment. If you don't
>want to be bothered by people expressing opinions or
>asking you questions about what you write, then it's
>a good place to go.
Lie number 2. One would be on alt.tarot a long time before getting
any comments about expressing one's opinion. Questions and answers
abound in the group. They just aren't centered around ego trips. As
far as censorship goes, I've yet to see a single threat from anyone in
the group. Mr. Karlin cannot say the same while looking in the
mirror.
>
>I believe that's what endears the place to you, isn't it?
I'm endeared to any place where you are not in evidence.
>
>Oh, and you'll get to rub elbows with people like Mary
>Greer, although from what I hear, even the safe confines
>of tarot-l are getting a little hot for the Princess
>as of late.
Lie number 3. I've not noted the temperature rising there for anyone.
>
>Oh well, maybe they can start a new 'alternative' list
>where the dregs of the newage can find some rest:
>
>elephantgraveyard-l
We'll look for you there.
R
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On Sat, 07 Feb 1998 07:35:35 -0600, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
wrote:
>Brian M Oldham wrote:
>>
>> Greetings All,
>>
>> I wanted to subscribe to the tarot-l e-mail list, and would love it if
>> someone could post &/or e-mail me instructions.
>>
>> TIA,
>> Brian
>>
>> PS: I checked in the alt.tarot FAQ, and this info isn't there. Am I the
>> only one who thinks it should be?
>
>This is alt.tarot, not tarot-l.
Actually this is more like alt.j.karlin.god.complex.
>
>The alt.tarot FAQ covers the basics of tarot, and this newsgroup.
Interested readers will also find that any good book on abnormal
psychology also covers the basics of Mr. Karlin and this newsgroup.
>
>tarot-l is not pertinent to that discussion (except as
>an historical footnote perhaps).
Actually, considering the consistent decrease in postings to this
newsgroup, "historical footnote" seems more pertinent as a description
of alt.tarot.
R
Tom Ace
J. Karlin wrote:
> The alt.tarot FAQ covers the basics of tarot, and this newsgroup.
>
> an historical footnote perhaps).
But "how do I find tarot-l" is a frequently asked question
here. Pointers to other resources are often seen in Usenet
FAQ documents.
Tom Ace
cr...@best.com
Leihla
R [are...@ix.netcom.com] writes:
>>
>I believe that's what endears the place to you, isn't it?
>
> I'm endeared to any place where you are not in evidence.
-------------
Lie number...whatever.
You can't seem to get enough of this place.
> Lie number 3. I've not noted the temperature rising there for anyone.
-------------------
Of course you haven't 'noted' it, because you can't even decipher
such things for yourself, R, much less someone else. If you
could, you'd have cooled off your wimpy whining long ago.
L
Mile23
>My guess is it isn't there because JK and his glee club don't think
>much of the idea of a mailing list where people actually discuss tarot
>and leave the insults at the door.
Actually, its not a very Freqently Asked Question.
On the topic of finding mailing lists, there's a great web site called
<http://www.liszt.com/>. What yahoo is to the web and dejanews is to
usenet, liszt is to mailing lists.
--
Trying to email me without removing 'NOSPAM' from the address will result
in Bad Nasty Awful Things.
Victorya Roberts
"J. Karlin" (r3wi...@texas.net) writes:
> Brian M Oldham wrote:
>>
>> Greetings All,
>>
>> I wanted to subscribe to the tarot-l e-mail list, and would love it if
>> someone could post &/or e-mail me instructions.
>>
>> TIA,
>> Brian
>>
>> PS: I checked in the alt.tarot FAQ, and this info isn't there. Am I the
>> only one who thinks it should be?
>
> This is alt.tarot, not tarot-l.
>
> The alt.tarot FAQ covers the basics of tarot, and this newsgroup.
>
> tarot-l is not pertinent to that discussion (except as
> an historical footnote perhaps).
Only you would have such a closed-minded view of the purposes on a faq.
VMR.
--
Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When we don't even bother to deceive.
"Mulder, TOADS just fell from the sky." -- Scully
yodman
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
> 2. If you've only got email or want to just get on with it, send an
> email to list...@techunix.technion.ac.iL. In the body of the letter
> type:
>
> "Subscribe Tarot-L [your email address] [your name]
or:
SUBSCRIBE TAROT-L [your name or Anonymous]
if you opt for anonymous the list readers won't be able to know your
name or e-mail unless of course you send it in a reply.
Secretive
dy...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Victorya Roberts) wrote:
>"J. Karlin" (r3wi...@texas.net) writes:
>> Brian M Oldham wrote:
>>>
>>> Greetings All,
>>>
>>> I wanted to subscribe to the tarot-l e-mail list, and would love it if
>>> someone could post &/or e-mail me instructions.
>>>
>>> TIA,
>>> Brian
>>>
>>> PS: I checked in the alt.tarot FAQ, and this info isn't there. Am I the
>>> only one who thinks it should be?
>>
>> This is alt.tarot, not tarot-l.
>>
>> The alt.tarot FAQ covers the basics of tarot, and this newsgroup.
>>
>> tarot-l is not pertinent to that discussion (except as
>> an historical footnote perhaps).
>Only you would have such a closed-minded view of the purposes on a faq.
OK... I will state my curiousity... now the alt.tarot FAQ is about the
basics of Tarot and the newsgroup itself and now is being said by two
that it shouldn't be an alt.tarot FAQ only but to also encompass the
Tarot-L group ... now then this, in my opinion, would lay open the
issue that others may come up with that then URL's of web sites be
attached, now I am sure that out of the 40,000+ tarot related sites
some of those folks will feel that their sites are "up there in par
levels and thus be entitled to be attached to the FAQ"....
in my opinion, jk isn't being closeminded but rather laying boundaries
on what and what not type of links go into the FAQ as it *is* in
regards to the newgroup here and not the offshoots of it or folks who
frequent it on a regular basis. It is a basic glossary of what we
discuss here to help "introduce" the person to some of the basics and
such... not a teaching tool but a reference tool. Other groups on here
have FAQs ... but they don't list offshoots of their group on it
(unless they are a FAQ written by the same person) or other usenet
groups on it... a group FAQ is about the group not *all* related
groups on the internet. But then again ... this is my opinion only and
open to let others disagree with my opinion. *shrug*
Secretive
J. Karlin
Victorya Roberts wrote:
> > The alt.tarot FAQ covers the basics of tarot, and this newsgroup.
> >
> > tarot-l is not pertinent to that discussion (except as
> > an historical footnote perhaps).
>
> Only you would have such a closed-minded view of the purposes on a faq.
Does anyone else find that comment---uhm---ironic?
(jk)
Secretive
>Brian M Oldham wrote:
>>
>> Greetings All,
>>
>> I wanted to subscribe to the tarot-l e-mail list, and would love it if
>> someone could post &/or e-mail me instructions.
>>
Since this entire thread no one answered this part .... so I will try
to. For information about the Tarot-L list try looking at Michele
Jackson's homepage (believe it is at www.erols.com/~jacksn, not sure
though of exact URL) or DTKing's Home page (tarot.readers.com) , not
sure if Mary Greer will have the link for how to subscribe to it on
her homepage. Hope this helps you find the info on how to join the
e-mail group list.
>> TIA,
>> Brian
>>
>> PS: I checked in the alt.tarot FAQ, and this info isn't there. Am I the
>> only one who thinks it should be?
Not really, but the alt.tarot FAQ deals with principally with this
USENET newsgroup and not e-mail group listings or informational
posting procedures for them, I am sure that Tarot-L will send you a
posting and group FAQ upon sign up though -- most e-mail list groups
do this so you will know thier rules and such, and also how to
unsubscribe from it if you care to at a later date. There are a few
Tarot related e-mail groups out there that are not affiliated with
USENET groups or alt.tarot itself -- even though it may or may not
have been sparked as an offshoot idea of this group.
Secretive
Anah
R [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote in message
>2. If you've only got email or want to just get on with it, send an
>email to list...@techunix.technion.ac.iL. In the body of the letter
>type:
>"Subscribe Tarot-L [your email address] [your name]
>That's about all there is to it.
WOOHOO!!! thanks!!! I did it!!! :) already got my first letter too!! <<happy
dance>>
Anah
J. Karlin
Tom Ace wrote:
> But "how do I find tarot-l" is a frequently asked question
> here.
No, it isn't.
And when people asks about it someone answers. Very simple.
> Pointers to other resources are often seen in Usenet
> FAQ documents.
Again, if tarot-l were a pertinent resource, I might
mention it in the FAQ. As it is, it gets mentioned here
often enough.
(jk)
J. Karlin
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
> >Plenty of insults make it past the door at tarot-l, many of
> >them aimed at this newsgroup.
>
> Lie Number 1. In fact, contrary to Mr. Karlin's ego-spurred wishes,
> alt.tarot is almost never discussed in the group.
Your problem here is that I can easily document what
I'm saying.
Would you like me to do that?
> And I'm happy to
> report that all the abusive language, threats, and infantile debating
> techniques of Karlin and his ilk are left at the door.
Again, I'll be happy to document my comments.
I don't think YOU'LL be too happy about it though.
> >tarot-l is a censored posting environment. If you don't
> >want to be bothered by people expressing opinions or
> >asking you questions about what you write, then it's
> >a good place to go.
>
> Lie number 2. One would be on alt.tarot a long time before getting
> any comments about expressing one's opinion. Questions and answers
> abound in the group.
You're right, on alt.tarot they certainly do.
> far as censorship goes, I've yet to see a single threat from anyone in
> the group. Mr. Karlin cannot say the same while looking in the
> mirror.
Was that supposed to make some sense?
Do you realize just how insane you sound?
> >Oh, and you'll get to rub elbows with people like Mary
> >Greer, although from what I hear, even the safe confines
> >of tarot-l are getting a little hot for the Princess
> >as of late.
>
> Lie number 3. I've not noted the temperature rising there for anyone.
What you notice and what actually is going on are,
as we've seen here often enough, two different things.
(jk)
GGLWOLF
JK quoted then asked:
Sorry jk-laughing too hard at this to form any opinion. You realize though that
you're now dealing with a whole new generation that has no clue how tarot-l
came to be??? To ask YOU to do that- well, sorry, laughing again.
Maybe there should be a alt.tarot.historyfaq????
shadow
Mile23
In article <34e782a4...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, are...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>On Sun, 08 Feb 1998 22:18:41 GMT, secr...@1ho2tm3ai4l.com
>(Secretive) wrote:
>
>>Since this entire thread no one answered this part .... so I will try
>>to.
>
>I answered the poster's question in my very first response. I take
>the fact that you typically post four or five responses to the same
>article as evidence that you're not actually reading the articles
>you're responding to. You might try it sometime.
>
>R
R, usenet newsgroups are odd in that sometimes some messages get spread out
over the network really fast, and other times messages take a bit longer.
Which is to say, secretive may *be* reading all the messages *on her
server.* Her server may not have actually gotten your message yet.
It is probably no fault of hers that she didn't see your message.
Geez, R. I could build a whole massage therapy buisness on the tension that
must be inside your neck and shoulders right this minute... LIGHTEN UP!!
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
You're more than welcome. I think you'll find it a breath of fresh
air compared to alt.JKarlin.
R
___________________________________________________
Long life and health are in her right hand and glory
and immense riches in her left. Her ways are beaut-
iful and praiseworthy works and neither despicable
nor bad, and her paths are measured and not hasty,
but connected with persistent continuous hard work.
She is the Tree of Life for everybody who under-
stands her and a light which is never extinguished.
"Aurora Consurgens"
M.L. Von Franz
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On Sun, 08 Feb 1998 17:29:04 -0600, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
wrote:
>R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>
>> >Plenty of insults make it past the door at tarot-l, many of
>> >them aimed at this newsgroup.
>>
>> Lie Number 1. In fact, contrary to Mr. Karlin's ego-spurred wishes,
>> alt.tarot is almost never discussed in the group.
>
>Your problem here is that I can easily document what
>I'm saying.
>
>Would you like me to do that?
Yeah, do it. And make sure you make note of exactly how many posts
concern this group as opposed to posts which do not. Be specific.
>
>> And I'm happy to
>> report that all the abusive language, threats, and infantile debating
>> techniques of Karlin and his ilk are left at the door.
>
>Again, I'll be happy to document my comments.
>
>I don't think YOU'LL be too happy about it though.
Again, go for it. Since you're lying through your teeth it will be
interesting to see what parallel universe you're able to access in
coming up with the kind of obscenities and threats we've gotten used
to hearing from you.
>
>> far as censorship goes, I've yet to see a single threat from anyone in
>> the group. Mr. Karlin cannot say the same while looking in the
>> mirror.
>
>Was that supposed to make some sense?
Probably not to you. Have your remedial reading instructor go over it
again for you....slowwwwly.
MLYoung
>> Only you would have such a closed-minded view of the purposes on a faq.
>
>Does anyone else find that comment---uhm---ironic?
Well--uhm--yes.
--margaret
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
>
>>Brian M Oldham wrote:
>>>
>>> Greetings All,
>>>
>>> I wanted to subscribe to the tarot-l e-mail list, and would love it if
>>> someone could post &/or e-mail me instructions.
>>>
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
>>>Interested readers will also find that any good book on abnormal
>>>psychology also covers the basics of Mr. Karlin and this
>>>newsgroup.
>
>Repeatedly posting anti-karlinesque attacks in a ritualistic manner might be
>interpreted as an early manifestation of obsessive/compulsive disorder,
>according to DSM-IV. Have you discussed this problem with a helping
>professional?
>
>
Not yet. Have you considered a self-referral to a cult reprogrammer?
BTW, you might want to get a professional to look into the severe case
of Tourette's syndrome your cheerless leader is suffering from.
R
G Leake
Tom Ace <cr...@best.comX> wrote:
But "how do I find tarot-l" is a frequently asked question
FAQ documents.
*yeah, but "the" alt.tarot is really JK's version of "the" alt.tarot FAQ.
*come on, Tom. It's time to get *really* real.
*as it were.
--
____________________________________________________
I have noticed that people who dislike me are invariably rendered
so blind by malice that they give themselves away and make
themselves ridiculous.
-Aleister Crowley, _Confessions_
George Leake
*OBLIGATORY "TRESPASSERS WILL BE VIOLATED" TYPE WARNING*
By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer meets the definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment. By Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section is punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or $500, whichever is greater, for each violation.
G Leake
G Leake
In article <19980207180...@ladder03.news.aol.com>, lei...@aol.com
(Leihla) wrote:
If you
could, you'd have cooled off your wimpy whining long ago.
*yeah, really. Try putting your money where your mouth is and discuss
tarot. That's what we'd all rather be doing instead of satisfying your own
ego-attachments by replying to yr whining emails
G Leake
*as to "the" FAQ, *anyone* here is free to come up with their own version.
And to post it here.
Secretive
> VMR.
--
G Leake
are...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>Plenty of insults make it past the door at tarot-l, many of
>them aimed at this newsgroup.
Lie Number 1. In fact, contrary to Mr. Karlin's ego-spurred wishes,
alt.tarot is almost never discussed in the group. And I'm happy to
report that all the abusive language, threats, and infantile debating
techniques of Karlin and his ilk are left at the door.
*yeah, but there's insults and insulting (mainly to the intelligence of
others) stuff there all the time. And yes, there are mentions of alt.tarot
there all the time, and I happen to be one of many of such perpetrators.
>tarot-l is a censored posting environment. If you don't
>want to be bothered by people expressing opinions or
>asking you questions about what you write, then it's
>a good place to go.
Lie number 2. One would be on alt.tarot a long time before getting
any comments about expressing one's opinion. Questions and answers
abound in the group. They just aren't centered around ego trips.
*scuse me? Get a clue buddy!
*believe me, as far as THAT goes, people here are just a lot more honest
about things. There people simply won't do things that some of us think
might be merciful, such as tell so and so they're a blathering idiot. Of
course there's a lot of offline discussion not on alt.tarot about how yes
I'm right and JK is right, so an so is acting like a bloody idiot or space
cadet.
As
far as censorship goes, I've yet to see a single threat from anyone in
the group. Mr. Karlin cannot say the same while looking in the
mirror.
*people's intelligence is threatened there every day. You're obviously new
to tarot-L if you really think this.
G Leake
are...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
On Sun, 08 Feb 1998 17:29:04 -0600, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
wrote:
>R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>
>> >Plenty of insults make it past the door at tarot-l, many of
>> >them aimed at this newsgroup.
>>
>> Lie Number 1. In fact, contrary to Mr. Karlin's ego-spurred wishes,
>> alt.tarot is almost never discussed in the group.
>
>Your problem here is that I can easily document what
>I'm saying.
>
>Would you like me to do that?
Yeah, do it. And make sure you make note of exactly how many posts
concern this group as opposed to posts which do not. Be specific.
*uh-oh! Area 51 shoulda listened....
>> And I'm happy to
>> report that all the abusive language, threats, and infantile debating
>> techniques of Karlin and his ilk are left at the door.
>
>Again, I'll be happy to document my comments.
>
>I don't think YOU'LL be too happy about it though.
Again, go for it. Since you're lying through your teeth it will be
interesting to see what parallel universe you're able to access in
coming up with the kind of obscenities and threats we've gotten used
to hearing from you.
*this should be interesting.
G Leake
are...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
You're more than welcome. I think you'll find it a breath of fresh
air compared to alt.JKarlin.
J. Karlin
G Leake wrote:
> *this should be interesting.
Yep.
Keep an eye out for your chapter (the one where they
stab you in the back and then wonder why so many people
think they sound like a bunch of fucking nazis).
That should be coming up shortly.
(jk)
J. Karlin
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
> >> Lie Number 1. In fact, contrary to Mr. Karlin's ego-spurred wishes,
> >> alt.tarot is almost never discussed in the group.
> >
> >Your problem here is that I can easily document what
> >I'm saying.
> >
> >Would you like me to do that?
>
> Yeah, do it. And make sure you make note of exactly how many posts
> concern this group as opposed to posts which do not.
Sometimes alt.tarot or jk are all people talk about there.
But then they tend to run out of ideas about tarot fairly
quickly.
Anyway, you asked for it:
------------------------------------------
THE tarot-l STORY,
"maybe the folks at Mattel would be interested in marketing the
whole place as some kind of new age playroom, complete with
"soothable Mary figure", who takes offense at loud noises but
will at length allow herself to be appeased with continued promises
of nurturing and fealty ..."
---alt.tarot alum on the 'virtues' of tarot-l
Part I
Princess Mary, the Copper Goose
Background: OK, so first and foremost you've got to understand
that the subcreatures of tarot-l have, from the start,
worshipped the remarkably tarnished figure of Mary K. Greer
as if she were indeed the goose that laid the copper egg.
If you don't accept that then the wonder of what shall
transpire in this little tale will be entirely lost.
About a year ago, it came to my attention that Mary had
made an offer on tarot-l to list members. In an effort to
help her reach other readers who might also be interested
in her 'generosity', I posted something about it on alt.tarot
(Mary includes it in her initial screech).
As you'll see, PM or CG immediately went into one of
her Loretta Young routines, claiming she'd been
'betrayed' and that she must leave tarot-l (oh no!!),
the object of which was to get the idiots of tarot-l to
beg her to stay.
This is a ploy she's used several times now (yet,
she never bothers to thank me for providing her
with the appropriate stage and lighting for her
scam). Oh well, no one ever accused Mary of being
grateful.
These postings are in chronological order (more or less).
There's a lot here. I suggest just sitting back and
letting it all sink in. For those who've not ever
been to tarot-l, yes that's little jk, the one writing to
you here, that they are talking about as if he
were a spawn of Satan. But then, as they point out,
that's why they are writing on tarot-l and not on
'evil alt.tarot'.
Happy reading.
---------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 16:02:02 -0800
From: "Mary K. Greer" <ta...@NCCN.NET>
Subject: Forwarded Messages
I am shocked to learn that material that I posted to the Tarot
Discussion List has been posted by Jess Karlin on alt.tarot. I am
shocked and feel betrayed (not that a little betrayal is not
good for the soul).
Previously I have not felt that we needed a rule about not
forwarding tarot-l material to other people without permission
- I've never minded that. But to have my words to the
tarot-l posted on alt.tarot by Jess Karlin (or anyone else
without my permission) is unconscionable.
He not only has posted something that is obviously meant to
be private to this list, but he feels that he can speak for
me (see "disclaimer"). He may be able to do what he likes on
alt.tarot, but I feel betrayed that the tarot-l is no longer
a safe place to speak my heart because it could be posted and
publically spat on by Jess Karlin at any time he pleases.
I don't want to leave the tarot-l which I love, but I hang out here
rather than on alt.tarot because I won't stay in unhealthy, battering
relationships or communities.
We all make mistakes, and I hope we all learn from them, but I cannot
belong to the tarot-l if this is to continue. I guess we need to
consider a policy. ARCANA has the rule that no one can forward
posts outside the list without the express permission of the poster,
or that person will be unsubscribed. I was hoping we could do
without this as we all know people who might benefit from some
tidbit -- BUT ... how do the rest of you feel about this?
________
From: "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@eden.com>
To: alt.tarot
Date: 1997/02/22
Message-Id: <330E97...@eden.com>
Subject: Guess Mary Greer Forgot
...to mention to all you alt.tarot readers (not that she does not
LOVE you just as much as anyone else)---
BUT, if you'll join 'her' listserv right now, YOU'LL RECEIVE---
(in her own words)
>I'll also take this opportunity to let late-comers know that I am
>providing tarot-l members with a copy of an original GD Tarot
>deck for the purpose of discussion, research and comparison of
>decks. Send me $7 plus your mailing address (please add $3 for
>overseas airmail). This is not a commercial offer, nor is it
>open to the public. I'm not trying to keep the deck secret -
>I just have no intention of "selling" it.
Better hurry---supplies are limited.
(disclaimer: due to the UNLIMITED flow of utter drivel on tarot-l,
neither Mary Greer nor tarot-l take any responsibility, whatsoever,
for any brainrot which might occur in readers from even brief exposure
to what is written there.)
(jk)
--------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 16:31:55 -0800
From: Queribus <quer...@CALWEB.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Mary K. Greer wrote:
>I am shocked to learn that material that I posted to the Tarot
Discussion List has been posted by Jess Karlin on alt.tarot. I am
shocked and feel betrayed (not that a little betrayal is not good
for the soul).
snipped
>We all make mistakes, and I hope we all learn from them, but
I cannot belong to the tarot-l if this is to continue. I guess
we need to consider a policy. ARCANA has the rule that no one
can forward posts outside the list without the express permission
of the poster, or that person will be unsubscribed. I was hoping
we could do without this as we all know people who might benefit
from some tidbit -- BUT ... how do the rest of you feel about this?
This is appalling. Surely there is some rule that these rude and
insulting actions can be considered to have broken. Certainly,
I have been assuming, wrongly, it now appears, that what is said
on the list stays on the list. Politeness, respect should imply
this. I'm very glad I never considered even peeking at alt.tarot.
Don't leave, Mary, clean house instead.
Queri
------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 19:54:49 -0400
From: Ariadne <ari...@ICI.NET>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Mary Greer wrote:
>He not only has posted something that is obviously meant to be
private to this list, but he feels that he can speak for me
(see "disclaimer"). He may be able to do what he likes on alt.tarot,
but I feel betrayed that the tarot-l is no longer a safe place to
speak my heart because it could be posted and publically spat on
by Jess Karlin at any time he pleases.
What, is he lurking here? Great, I'll never be able to sleep. My
first reaction to this was, "What an @$$#*[@!! Christ!?! Can't
we just kill him?"
>We all make mistakes, and I hope we all learn from them, but
I cannot belong to the tarot-l if this is to continue. I guess
we need to consider a policy. ARCANA has the rule that no one
can forward posts outside the list without the express permission
of the poster, or that person will be unsubscribed. I was hoping
we could do without this as we all know people who might benefit
from some tidbit -- BUT ... how do the rest of you feel about
this?
I am assuming that to get ahold of your post in order to repost
it to alt.tarot, he is already here, correct? And I would think
that his treatment of your post was meant as a flame (or at least
very unkindly) and would already be grounds to evict him, under
pretty much the only "rule" there is here. Is that what we're
looking for? Permission to kick him out specifically? If he can
sit here and be polite (if that means never saying a word, so
be it) he's welcome. But if he (or anyone) is going to pull shit
like that, forget it. I don't know that we need a specific rule
about reposting things without permission (I'd think it would
be general common sense); maybe just a mention of it in the little
info letter you get when you join? I certainly don't want this
to turn into alt.tarot--I stop by there on a regular basis and
read the posts, but I would never post to it--it's just not worth
it to get ripped to shreds because you asked a question. This
list is a wonderful place (and certainly no secret or anything)
because we can all come here and talk seriously (or not so
seriously) about Tarot, without fear of being shot down.
Ariadne
------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 20:03:36 -0500
From: Kathleen Berto <NAD...@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Mary K. Greer wrote:
>I am shocked to learn that material that I posted to the Tarot
Discussion List has been posted by Jess Karlin on alt.tarot. I am
shocked and feel betrayed (not that a little betrayal is not good
for the soul).
snipped
>We all make mistakes, and I hope we all learn from them, but
I cannot belong to the tarot-l if this is to continue. I guess
we need to consider a policy. ARCANA has the rule that no one
can forward posts outside the list without the express permission
of the poster, or that person will be unsubscribed. I was hoping
we could do without this as we all know people who might benefit
from some tidbit -- BUT ... how do the rest of you feel about this?
Queri wrote:
|
| This is appalling. Surely there is some rule that these rude and | insulting
actions can be considered to have broken. Certainly, I have | been assuming,
wrongly, it now appears, that what is said on the list | stays on the list.
Politeness, respect should imply this. I'm very glad | I never considered even
peeking at alt.tarot. |
| Don't leave, Mary, clean house instead. | Queri
According to JK, someone from tarot-l is forwarding him things
from this forum on a regular basis. I think the ASSHOLE who is
doing this should fess up - be a man or a woman for that matter
and come clean. Excuse my language but this sort of stuff should
not be tolerated and don't tell me you didn't realize you were
making a mistake - I don't buy it.
I don't have a problem with folks belonging to this list and
alt.tarot. I do have a problem with people forwarding material
from this forum to another forum without asking permission. Whoever
is doing this KNOWS that it is common net courtesy
to ask whether they can forward someone elses material.
Mary sweetie, I hope you decide that you will remain here on
tarot-l. If you quit, I'm afraid I will have to do the same.
Tea, moderators, I think something should be done about this
immediately.
I've said my peace....
***Nad...@aol.com***
-----------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 17:13:26 -0800
From: "Mary K. Greer" <ta...@NCCN.NET>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Ariadne wrote:
>I am assuming that to get ahold of your post in order to repost
it to alt.tarot, he [Jess Karlin] is already here, correct?
My impression is that someone (or several people) is/are sending
him our private discussions.
>If he can sit here and be polite (if that means never saying a
word, so be it) he's welcome.
I always felt the same way. But he holds no punches, and would as
soon tear apart and destroy anything is good and decent.
BTW, I want to apologize if my first post about this was incoherent
- I was shaking so bad I could hardly write. Unfortunately I have
lost the sense of incredible trust I had built up for the members
of this list - which may be a wise thing after all.
Mary
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 17:31:38 -0800
From: Yvonne <yv...@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
>Mary K. Greer wrote:
>>I am shocked to learn that material that I posted to the
Tarot Discussion List has been posted by Jess Karlin on alt.tarot.
I am shocked and feel betrayed (not that a little betrayal is
not good for the soul).
It's appalling that someone is forwarding mail off-list (come
on folks, that's one of the top ten rules - we all know this!).
It's also appalling that he is stamping on your incredibly
generous nature. Please don't go Mary. The people here who talk
with you love you and respect your words here. I understand not
feeling safe, I don't feel safe now and jk has only had one
little flaming session with me. I understand not wanting to post
here for a while, but please at least lurk until we rout out
the bass tarde.
----------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 20:51:42 -0500
From: Arnell Ando <Arn...@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
In a message dated 97-02-22 20:33:40 EST, you write:
<< It's appalling that someone is forwarding mail off-list
(come on folks, that's one of the top ten rules - we all know
this!). It's also appalling that he is stamping on your incredibly
generous nature. Please don't go Mary. The people here who talk
with you love you and respect your words here. I understand not
feeling safe, I don't feel safe now and jk has only had one little
flaming session with me. I understand not wanting to post here
for a while, but please at least lurk until we rout out the bass
tarde.
I agree completely. It's a terrible breach of trust and I would
hope the guilty party would e-mail Mary directly and explain
yourself/ves. In the meantime I would also hope everyone agrees
what is said here is private unless getting permission from the
contributor. I hope you realize Mary, that you are much loved
and appreciated here and would be profoundly missed if you left.
Please don't let one rotten apple spoil it for the rest of us.
You have every reason to be angry, but I hope it can somehow
be resolved. You have my full support, for what it's worth.
arnell
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 21:33:35 -0500
From: Bob O'Neill <eon...@IBM.NET>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
If you leave, I leave.
Mary, your reaction is exactly what the elf wanted - If you don't
react, there is no practical joke, no game, no fun at all. When
you react, Jess wins.
(1) will the person that forwarded the message to jk please send
an apology to Mary on private email. I feel certain that the
person that forwarded the message did it quite innocently and
I know that Mary will forgive instantly
(2) Lets agree to no forwarding without permission of the poster.
(3) I think the act that jk performed is not funny. If it offends
one of the most perceptive and precious souls on this list, then
it is not a practical joke, not dark humor - not funny in any
sense. So jk owes Mary an apology. I hope others will join me
in "freezing" jk - no answers to anything on alt.tarot or by
private email until an apology is posted.
(4) I think everyone here who found out about this list because
of Mary should join me in going to alt.tarot, protesting this
and promising not to respond to anything from jk until an apology
is posted.
(5) If no one volunteers to admit (privately) to Mary that they
forwarded the posting to jk, then we must assume that jk has
access to Tarot-L. I propose that we reconstitute the mail-list,
providing access only to those who volunteer in writing (with an
independent witness's signature) that they will not forward
messages. Its actually as easy as starting Tarot-Z and limiting
access to persons that have been personally met and verified
by another person on the list.
Robert
-----------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 18:42:50 -0800
From: Aladdin Sane <jma...@TELEPORT.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
I'll make no statement as to the character of JK, everyone sees
him in his own light. As to crossposting, or cross pollination
as it were, with alt.tarot, I think that can be a healthy thing.
But to post someone elses material, and to identify them as the
source, without their permission is at best rude. Particularly
to forward those messages to a person or persons with a specific
negative agenda, is inexcusable.
Our community will survive this situation, and I hope we can
recover fully. Once broken, trust is so difficult to repair;
but it has been one of the most pervasive foundations of our
community, and we must work to repair it. Bear this in mind,
there is little I am aware of that would give JK greater pleasure
than to bring ruin to Tarot-L. Take this to heart, our love,
our purpose and our desire is our strength.
It is my hope that whoever is forwarding these messages did
so with honorable intention. Be it otherwise, well, I don't
care to dwell there. Unfortunately, it looks like we will have
to add to our list of rules. I would propose no forwarding of
messages without the specific permission of all persons whose
comments are present in the message. If you wish to take an
idea to alt.tarot, it can be summarized to achieve the free
sharing of ideas and information without setting up uninvolved
parties in the post.
My sympathies Mary, I would truly miss your presence were you
to leave.
A. S.
----------------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 21:46:13 -0500
From: Bob O'Neill <eon...@IBM.NET>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
I have lost the
>sense of incredible trust I had built up for the members of this
list - which may be a wise thing after all.
>Mary
*****
Clearly the only way to establish your trust is to have the individual
that forwarded the message send you a private apology.
If no one apologizes - then we must assume that he is here under
another virtual identity.
I went over to alt.tarot - the message isn't there -at least
not yet.If it appears, I think everyne here owes it to Mary to
go to alt.tarot, protest the gross violation and ask everyone
to "freeze" jk, not answer anything he posts, until he proffers
an apology. NOT reacting to jk is the only thing that defeats him.
Bob
-------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 21:02:27 PST
From: John Hanson <JHa...@SND.SOFTFARM.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
| I am shocked to learn that material that I posted to the
Tarot | Discussion List has been posted by Jess Karlin on
alt.tarot. I am | shocked and feel betrayed (not that a little
betrayal is not good for | the soul).
***I read his article this afternoon and could not believe
he, or someone else, would post from one list to another. I
have only read a little of his stuff and decided I would
never give him the satisfaction of an answer. Well, I blew
that today by answering his post about you. I shouldn't have.
I should have just ignored his ignorance. And if not ignoring
it, should have blasted him harder, except for the fact that
he gets off on it. He likes being beaten and whipped.
Mary, you are the reason people like me, come here-----To
Learn. You gave me the invite and I am grateful. Please be
cautioned, though, by paying attention to this--------If
You Leave, He Wins. If you leave, We Lose. We lose your
direction, your knowledge, your spirit, your very essence (at
the risk of sounding maudlin).
And, Mary, believe it or not, you LOSE too. You lose your
students, your coleagues, and a part of yourself for giving
in to a DORK! Stay with us. But always remember,
There are many more people on this l-serve than those who ever
write. Not everyone is good-hearted. Though you want to, you
can not put your faith in EVERYBODY all the time.
Wishing You'd Stay,
John Hanson The Hermit Rebel With a Cause
jha...@snd.softfarm.com
tr...@snd.softfarm.com
------------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 19:14:45 -0800
From: Aladdin Sane <jma...@TELEPORT.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Bob O'Neill wrote:
>If you leave, I leave.
>Mary, your reaction is exactly what the elf wanted - If you don't
react, there is no practical joke, no game, no fun at all. When you
react, Jess wins.
snip snip snip
>(4) I think everyone here who found out about this list because
of Mary should join me in going to alt.tarot, protesting this
and promising not to respond to anything from jk until an apology
is posted.
Bob and All:
We think that any communication with JK on this matter will
be counter-productive. JK lives not for truth or knowledge, but
to be always right and to demonstrate his superiority. He will
contradict himself from thread to thread for the express purpose
of subjecting persons to his belittling and vitrolic posts. How
do you beat JK at his game? Don't play. Don't involve him in posts,
don't rise to his challenge, don't sink to his level.
We are creatures of free will. Let Us choose to rise above
the fray. JK can call me all the names he wants, he can belittle
my opinions, he can say what he wishes about me. I don't care
because, while I may respect and/or with some of his posts, I do
not respect him, he has no hold over me.
Let Us respect the free will of others, their ability to choose
and make decisions for themsleves. We care not if others choose
to side with JK or Ourselves. We refuse to think there are sides.
Those that wish to join Us are free to do so and welcome. Those
who choose to follow JK, best wishes and farewell.
A. S.
--------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 22:39:42 -0500
From: Bob O'Neill <eon...@IBM.NET>
Subject: Freezing jk
I have just visited dejanews and verified that jk did indeed post
the message from Mary. I suggest that everyone on the list go to
alt.tarot (send me a private email if you don't know how to get
there) and post a message protesting the insult and asking
everyone on the newsgroup to "freeze" jk until he apologizes.
The ONLY penalty that jk will understand is being ignored.
Bob
--------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 22:57:30 -0500
From: Karen Witter <kk...@PIPELINE.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Mary, I, too, am deeply offended by this....but not surprised. I
am sorry for you and angry at whomever would have done this...
whether it be JK, himself, or one of his cohorts.
Bob wrote:
>If you leave, I leave.
Others have said so as well. I join in the sentiment. However,
I do *NOT* want to see an end to this incredible list and if
we all leave...JK has won!!!!
>Mary, your reaction is exactly what the elf wanted - If you
don't react, there is no practical joke, no game, no fun at
all. When you react, Jess wins.
That's exactly right....he wants to be recognized everywhere
in ANYway. Look what great attention he's getting here now. No
reaction TO him is an appropriate response, in my opinion.
However, I certainly can't blame Mary for her reaction....what
an invasion, an insult!!!! Who *could* be expected not to
react????
>(1) will the person that forwarded the message to jk please
send an apology to Mary on private email. I feel certain that
the person that forwarded the message did it quite innocently
and I know that Mary will forgive instantly
I'm not convinced it was done innocently...nonetheless an apology
is certainly in order. I'm not holding my breath....
>(2) Lets agree to no forwarding without permission of the poster.
I *thought* this was an unstated agreement. I officially state my
agreement to this now.
>(3) I think the act that jk performed is not funny. If it offends
one of the most perceptive and precious souls on this list, then
it is not a practical joke, not dark humor - not funny in any
sense. So jk owes Mary an apology. I hope others will join me in
"freezing" jk - no answers to anything on alt.tarot or by private
email until an apology is posted.
Good, but you will *never* get an apology from JK.
>(4) I think everyone here who found out about this list because
of Mary should join me in going to alt.tarot, protesting this
and promising not to respond to anything from jk until an apology
is posted.
I'm afraid that is just the kind of response and attention that
JK would LOVE and is contrary to what you mentioned in the first
place which is to have no response to him whatsoever.
>(5) If no one volunteers to admit (privately) to Mary that they
forwarded the posting to jk, then we must assume that jk has
access to Tarot-L. I propose that we reconstitute the mail-list,
providing access only to those who volunteer in writing (with
an independent witness's signature) that they will not forward
messages. Its actually as easy as starting Tarot-Z and limiting
access to persons that have been personally met and verified by
another person on the list.
Can't agree here, Bob...because no one on this list has personally
met me. That would effectively eliminate me from the list. Do
you really want to do that to me.
One shining light to this whole thing....JK has done our advertising
of the list for us. All those, of whom there are many, who are
dissatisfied with the atmosphere of alt.tarot now know of an
alternative place to discuss tarot in a welcoming environment.
This could be a great boon for those who never knew of an option
and felt they had to tolerate JK just to have a place to discuss
tarot. I suggest that one post be made to alt.tarot inviting
anyone who would like to join us here in an atmosphere of respect.
We can continue to monitor the quality of our discussion within
the list. Unfortunately, I believe there is little that we can
do to monitor or direct the quality of discussion within the
alt.tarot itself.
Love and Light
Karen
--------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 22:58:50 -0500
From: Nicole Dorman <LikWi...@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
In a message dated 97-02-22 19:48:50 EST, Mary Greer wrote:
>He not only has posted something that is obviously meant to be
private to this list, but he feels that he can speak for me (see
"disclaimer"). He may be able to do what he likes on alt.tarot,
but I feel betrayed that the tarot-l is no longer a safe place
to speak my heart because it could be posted and publically spat
on by Jess Karlin at any time he pleases.
I can sympathize with how you feel. I would not want Jess Karlin
posting anything I had written (since I am sure the majority of
you know that Jess and I do *not* get along). He would (and does,
in alt.tarot) twist and manipulate everything said until it not
only benefited him, but made me look bad in the process.
<< >We all make mistakes, and I hope we all learn from them, but
I cannot belong to the tarot-l if this is to continue. I guess we
need to consider a policy. ARCANA has the rule that no one can
forward posts outside the list without the express permission of
the poster, or that person will be unsubscribed. I was hoping we
could do without this as we all know people who might benefit
from some tidbit -- BUT ... how do the rest of you feel about
this? >>
I can totally understand your feelings Mary, but how did you
come about "assuming" that someone from Tarot-L had "enlightened"
him. I think it is farely safe to say, that the majority of us
have been or are in the process (as is my case) of being flamed
by him. I would like to call your attention to a part of a post
he made at alt.tarot:
from a message posted by JKarlin at alt.tarot: <<BTW, I've had
a couple of people invite ME to join that list, but up till now
I've simply 'benefitted' from postings that those same people
see fit to send to me---kind of a Reader's Digest condensed
version.>>
How do you know that he hasn't joined? I assume that someone must
know who all is on the list. But then again, I don't know much
about these things. Just thought I would add that perspective,
because I don't know of a single person here that would send
ANYTHING to JK. Please don't mistake my intentions here Mary,
I am not criticizing you for becoming offended in any way.
I definitely would be too.
And if someone DID do that.... SHAME ON YOU!!!!
Peace and Light....
-Fire-
--------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 23:00:49 -0500
From: Karen Witter <kk...@PIPELINE.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Aladdin Sane wrote:
>Our community will survive this situation, and I hope we can
recover fully. Once broken, trust is so difficult to repair;
but it has been one of the most pervasive foundations of our
community, and we must work to repair it. Bear this in mind,
there is little I am aware of that would give JK greater pleasure
than to bring ruin to Tarot-L. Take this to heart, our love, our
purpose and our desire is our strength.
Thank you for this positive reminder of our positive strengths.
*This* is what cannot be taken from tarot-l!!!!
Love and Light
Karen
--------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 23:03:08 -0500
From: Karen Witter <kk...@PIPELINE.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Bob wrote:
>I went over to alt.tarot - the message isn't there -at least
not yet. If it appears, I think everyne here owes it to Mary to
go to alt.tarot, protest the gross violation and ask everyone
to "freeze" jk, not answer anything he posts, until he proffers
an apology. NOT reacting to jk is the only thing that defeats him.
>Bob
Bob, I already mentioned this in one reply to you but I will
mention it again....everyone going to alt.tarot to protest
will only give JK the attention that you say we should not
do (and I agree with). He would LOVE that, don't you see?
Love and Light
Karen
--------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 23:13:21 -0500
From: "Marc H. Gerstein" <m...@INX.NET>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Mary Greer wrote:
>I am shocked to learn that material that I posted to the Tarot
Discussion List has been posted by Jess Karlin on alt.tarot. I
am shocked and feel betrayed (not that a little betrayal is not
good for the soul).
I agree with what others here have said, so I won't be redundant.
But here's a perspective that may be getting lost in the shuffle:
If a tree falls in an empty forest, does it make a sound? Restated
for relevace to the issue at hand: If JK flames to an empty
newsgroup, does anything burn?
*********
OK. I know I'm overstating this and that alt.tarot isn't literally
"empty." But it sure feels that way.
Several people told me about tarot-l long before I actually
joined. I resisted coming here mainly due to logistics. I liked
the external message board setup in the newsgroup. I'm not
thrilled dealing with 30-50 emails a day which are unsorted by
thread. And the listserve commands aren't the friendliest around.
So why am I here? Simple. Because this is the only place where
I can find some serious, high-quality discussion of tarot.
The flames on usenet never really bugged me much. I have a
fairly thick hide; living in New York City and working as a
lawyer/investment analyst (and having worked as a NYC taxi driver
while in school; and being a N.Y. Jets fan for 30+ years), I
need one. But what annoyed me a lot was the fact that others
were bothered by the flames, that much intelligenet tarot
discussion migrated out of alt.tarot (to here), and that
alt.tarot is now an appalling bore.
I got fed up reading lengthy threads only to find maybe 2
or 3 substantve posts intermingled with lots more discussing
the issues of flaming, courtesy, and jk's personality. That,
of course, is intermixed with such nonsense as get rich quick
come-ons. I've seen some bright folks appear on the newsgroup
from time to time. But my best guess is that they have either
moved here, or will soon do so. The bottom line: I'll put up
with the listeserve logisitcs, because everthing else here
makes it well worthwhile (so much so that I feel like a
world-class doofus for waiting so long to come here).
I suppose jk thinks he won some sort of victory. But lets look
at the context. If I simply say the NY Yankess are the baseball
champions, can you really admire them yet? No. You also need
to understand that they are the champions of "Major League"
baseball; not a local sandlot league. We've learned from jk's
stunt that he can hit the ball on the sandlots. But he hasn't
even been admitted to Yankee Stadium.
Mary.... please don't leave the Yankees.
**********
Before posting this, just checked alt.taort for the first
time in almost a month. Once upon a time,when I'd go on
alt.tarot my browser would find 50-100 unread postings,
often more. Tonight, with no change in browser settings,
I saw only 20. One was a technical question from one who
appeared to be new. Two had nothing whatsoever to do with
tarot. And nine posts were a flame war involving....
guess who!
If jk thinks alt.tarot is still serious tarot discussion
and that tarot-l is an unlimited flow of utter divel, he
can do that. He can also think the earth is flat.
************
Marc
------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 23:34:45 -0500
From: Nicole Dorman <LikWi...@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
In a message dated 97-02-22 23:22:29 EST, you write:
<< to be new. Two had nothing whatsoever to do with tarot. And nine
posts were a flame war involving.... guess who! >>
LOL....Sorry, I bet that "flame war" you were referring to
involved me. I had been lurking there for quite some time. I got
to post one thing, and then I was set afire by the "Almighty
JK" (As I refer to him in my posts) I gave up though, defending
myself against someone that sit's so high upon his self-constructed
pedestal has made me hoarse. Thank you Mary for saving me
from that:)
---------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 21:43:22 -0800
From: Yvonne <yv...@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
>If a tree falls in an empty forest, does it make a sound? Restated
for relevace to the issue at hand: If JK flames to an empty
newsgroup, does anything burn?
Yes! So what if Jess Karlin gets ahold of some of the stuff we
post here? What's he going to do? Spew vitriol to an empty house
and tell what few people are left at alt.tarot that there is an
option to suffering his abuse. It's a shock that this happened.
But we are now forewarned.
Worst case scenario:
Jess Karlin can read every post we write, but he can't say
anything to us. He has to read our insightful, caring, supportive
responses and he has no way of telling us of. Think of it.
This is great! This is Jess Karlin's personal hell!!!
--'--,--@ --'--,--@ --'--,--@
Happy Trails,
Yvonne
yv...@earthlink.net
--------------
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 00:42:07 -0800
From: "Fr. ALSO" <Bi...@VAV-NUN.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Hi Mary,
The JK character sure fires up the emotions! i imagine if
anyone else had stumbled upon your generous offer you would have
been willing to help them, but the dreaded JK makes a mockery
of it.
I recieved my present and was very happy! thank you so much.
I notice something rather sad in this clip you provided. Mr.
JK appears hurt from being excluded:
>Subject: Guess Mary Greer Forgot
>...to mention to all you alt.tarot readers (not that she does
not LOVE you just as much as anyone else)---
His sarcasm appears to me as a defensive response to exclusion
(which really hurts, no matter how tough someone thinks they are)
apparantly he has earned this extreme sanction and so be it.
I cant remember when i've heard a more unanimous condemnation
of a person!
You are truly a sunny sky Mary, i really feel fortunate to have
the chance to listen to you on Tarot-L.
-Fr.ALSO
--------------
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 22:54:52 -0800
From: "Mary K. Greer" <ta...@NCCN.NET>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Arnell Ando wrote:
>Please don't let one rotten apple spoil it for the rest of us. You have every
reason to be angry, but I hope it can somehow be resolved.
Bob O'Neill wrote:
>Mary, your reaction is exactly what the elf wanted - If you
don't react, there is no practical joke, no game, no fun at all.
When you react, Jess wins.
Aladdin Sane wrote:
>Bear this in mind, there is little I am aware of that would give
JK greater pleasure than to bring ruin to Tarot-L. Take this
to heart, our love, our purpose and our desire is our strength.
<snip>
>I would propose no forwarding of messages without the specific
permission of all persons whose comments are present in the
message. If you wish to take an idea to alt.tarot, it can be
summarized to achieve the free sharing of ideas and information
without setting up uninvolved parties in the post.
[Bob O'Neill proposed essentially the same.]
Thanks to all of you - and everyone else who has written.
You are so right. I shouldn't let JK have ANY effect over my
relationship with this group which has been wonderful. I'm not
so shaken anymore and feel that we will work out what is best
for us.
As to anyone coming forward to the list or privately about
passing on the info, I don't feel that is necessary, but I
hope they will treat our communications with respect for our
group well-being in the future.
Karen Witter wrote:
that Bob O'Neill wrote:
>>(4) I think everyone here who found out about this list
because of Mary should join me in going to alt.tarot, protesting
this and promising not to respond to anything from jk until
an apology is posted.
>I'm afraid that is just the kind of response and attention
that JK would LOVE and is contrary to what you mentioned in
the first place which is to have no response to him whatsoever.
<snip>
>I suggest that one post be made to alt.tarot inviting anyone
who would like to join us here in an atmosphere of respect. We
can continue to monitor the quality of our discussion within
the list.
I agree with Karen on the above: the best thing is not to
respond to JK at all - he hates that. And I think one announcement
on alt.tarot would be appropriate - just to let people know we
are not closing anyone out who agrees to our format.
Mary
--
Mary K. Greer ta...@nccn.net
Tools And Rites Of Transformation (T.A.R.O.T.) Visit our Tarot site at
http://www.nccn.net/~tarot/
--------------
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 09:35:53 -0800
From: Yvonne <yv...@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Fr. Also wrote:
>[JK's] sarcasm appears to me as a defensive response to
exclusion (which really hurts, no matter how tough someone
thinks they are)
>apparantly he has earned this extreme sanction and so be it.
I cant remember when i've heard a more unanimous condemnation
of a person!
Fr. Also has a very good point. I thought about this whole thing
a lot last night. It's amazing how riled up I am over this.
(I'm not going to pretend I stopped feeling riled, but my mind
did kick in finally.) It seems to me that Jess Karlin is a
persona that really affects a lot of people negatively. He's
hurt many people here and refuses to acknowledge that.
It also seems to me that we can extend our knowledge of the
tarot to him. (Isn't this what our studies are about?) If I
were to describe JK in tarot terms, I would say that he is
firmly bound to that chunk of stone on which the Devil sits
(trad. R/W/S). He is creating for himself a place where very
few people care for him, much less understand him. He does
this by creating the illusion that he is the superior one.
I think he's very jealous of us. Mary, he hurt you and you
got to come here and be supported and cared for. What does
he get? More people flaming him on alt.tarot. This is the
reality he has created for himself. We have created this
tarot list. He says he prefers his. That's fine. I prefer
ours. That's fine, too. If he's not happy with this arrangement,
he needs to look at what he can do to change his reality.
I don't know if we can stop people forwarding off list.
Perhaps one of the moderators can tell us if there is any
way to detect this, but I don't think there is. We must
live with the reality that Jess Karlin can probably get
most anything we post here. We have some ways of dealing
with this. We can stop posting here, but this would ruin
what we have. A far preferrable option, in my mind, is to
see if we can detach from JK. We know he's creating his
own hell. HIS HELL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH US. Let him
create his ego crises. We can give him a chance if he
ever reaches the Star.
This morning I came up with a plan. I think we should
completely stop reading alt.tarot... with one exception.
Every once in a while, when someone here posts one of those
gems (you know the kind of post I'm talking about: supportive,
intelligent, witty) we elect - with the author's permission -
to forward that gem to alt.tarot. We include in the post
an intro something like, "If you would prefer this kind of
discourse, please subscribe to the Tarot list."
This way, anyone who wants real discussion of tarot
without flames will know there is an option to Jess Karlin.
--'--,--@ --'--,--@ --'--,--@
Happy Trails,
Yvonne
yv...@earthlink.net
--------------
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 12:45:07 -0500
From: Bob O'Neill <eon...@IBM.NET>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
>apparantly he has earned this extreme sanction and so be it.
I cant remember when i've heard a more unanimous condemnation of a person!
******************
Whoa -Unanimous condemnation of an ACT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Yes
Of a person - NO
jk is a woodland imp -
hiding in the trees and jumping out and scaring kids that
wander off the path- making mischief for fun -
He plays a very old game, a sort of "ego chess" It goes like
this:
Someone stands up and starts to pontificate about Tarot He
insults their ego If they defend - then its clear that their
ego is still dominant, they are not very far down the journey
yet, they just proved to everyone that they are not as far
along the Tarot journey as they might have thought they were!!!!!
I have run into one spiritual guide in my life who also
operates in this mode. When you least expected it, the guide
insulted you. If you reacted, he offered advice.
For the most part, jk does no harm - just a game - bruises
egos (but that's not so bad)
I think the act with Mary was simply vengeful and nasty - I
don't see any good that derived from it - the message contained
no "bull" that needed to be filtered.
But I won't condemn the imp.
He's just playing.
--------------
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 12:30:01 PST
From: John Hanson <JHa...@SND.SOFTFARM.COM> Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Yvonne wrote-->
<Scissors action>|
| Fr. Also has a very good point. I thought about this whole
thing a lot | last night. It's amazing how riled up I am over
this. (I'm not going to | pretend I stopped feeling riled,
but my mind did kick in finally.) It seems| to me that Jess
Karlin is a persona that really affects a lot of people |
negatively. He's hurt many people here and refuses to acknowledge
that.
**I picked a few cards last night for ol' JK, myself. First one
up-Focus Card-was the Devil.
He played his games and we were chained to him, yet able to
cast the chains away.
Yvonne wrote more <more scissors>
|He is creating for himself a place where very few people care for him, much
less understand him. |He does this by| creating the illusion that he is the
superior one.
**The second card was Cultivation, 5 of Shields (pentacles) The
picture on this Native American card is that of a parched field
of maize. His "fields" have dried up and he needs the
"resevoir" of knowledge and, perhaps more importantly, the
resevoir of spirit that this group spreads out upon
the dried fields of mundane existence.
<more scissors and then.... the most beautiful part of her letter>
|We can give him a chance if he ever reaches the Star.
**The Third Card was Harvest, 10 of shields. This was the one
that puzzled me over last night and into this morning. His
"chance" might be to, on the surface, glean great satisfaction
from his rude, and otherwise ignoble, prank. But I look at
Harvest (from the farmer's standpoint) as a helpful and
'healing' card. At more risk of sounding naive, rather than
intelligent, I wonder if jk's true "chance" would be to
really comprehend the essence of what he did and turn away
from that sort of life. The one aspect of human nature that
I keep most of my faith based on is the ability to CHANGE!
My interpretation of the entire spread was twofold. Jk's
standpoint and My own. While not flaming him, and suggesting,
rather, that he kick back and meditate for awhile, I can still
keep on reaping my own "harvest" and sharing whatever small
portion of spirit I have with no feelings of regret for
having made cheap shots at someone else. (Even though Bunny
Bob might name a cheap shot that I had suggested). If
I had succumbed to my original impulse--attaching my highest
memory file to a letter addressed to him---I would have
harvested what I had sown.
Well, I'll shuddup now,
sincerely
jh
--------------
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 15:14:59 -0500
From: Kathleen Berto <NAD...@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Ok, since the subject of this thread is "forwarded messages",
I took the liberty to forward a message from JK to our tarot
list so we can have ourselves a little laugh.
Attention: JK fans: Run back to alt.tarot and tell JK what
that bitch Nadeera from tarot-l did. How dare she!!! Now she
must suffer the wrath of JK!!! ooooh I'm shaking in my boots <g>
___________________________________
Subject: Re: To the almighty JK
From: "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@eden.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 16:24:35 +0000
Rolls Straveca wrote:
>Anyway, Mad, I started another thread especially for you and it's called
"alt.tarot.friendly". It's about alternative tarot discussion groups.
I believe 'kwitter' was responsible for the creation of
alt.tarot.friendly. She and the WolfD boyz were investigating
alternatives to alt.tarot on alt.config in the last few months.
WolfD even claimed to have received over 600!! requests that it
form something called alt.tarot.broker.
Now THERE'S a fun-sounding group.
For what it's worth, and it's not worth much, the tarot mailing
list, which I think is called tarot-l, is so repusively
well-mannered that I can't imagine ANY of the people who are
looking for some kind of 'jess support group' having anything
but a wonderful time there.
You will find the likes of Mary Greer and Rachel Pollack blathering
on about nothing, as usual---all the while welcoming newcomers
as sweetly as if they were deacons (priestesses?) passing the
collection plate (which is something to think about).
BTW, I've had a couple of people invite ME to join that list,
but up till now I've simply 'benefitted' from postings that
those same people see fit to send to me---kind of a Reader's
Digest condensed version.
If that's the sort of 'nice' environment you all want then
GO TO IT, cause as long as I can still type you sure as hell
won't be getting it here.
(jk)
_____________________________
Attention Tea and Moderators: I'm sorry but I just couldn't
help myself. I promise I won't cross post any more stuff from
alt.tarot without asking JK's "permission" <g>
Seriously though, I think we've all said our peace on the subject
and it's now time to get back to discussion of the tarot ;-)
The best thing we can do is ignore the guy ;-)
***Nadeera***
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 15:15:50 -0500
From: Kathleen Berto <NAD...@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Bob O'Neill wrote:
<< I feel certain that the person that forwarded the message did
it quite innocently and I know that Mary will forgive instantly >>
Do you really believe that this was an innocent misunderstanding
Bob? I don't buy it. Here's just one example that might change your mind ;-)
<< Subject: Re: Guess Mary Greer Forgot...
From: "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@eden.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:52:56 +0000
Gerry O'Neill wrote:
>I believe that cross-posting of information from a monitored mail
list is a gross violation of courtesy.
JK: Why? Is there something there you don't want the rest of us
to see? I know there's stuff there you don't want ME to see, but
I'm seeing it anyway.
>I believe that jk owes Mary a public apology.
JK: Why don't you down a couple of Mai Tais, hold your breath, and wait for it.
>I would request that everyone on this news group join me in "freezing" jk
(simply don't respond to anything he posts) until he offers a public apology.
JK: 'spinning, spinning, no jk, no jk'
You're pretty funny Bob.
(jk) >>
See Bob, someone obviously forwarded your message to him as
well. You posted that spinning, spinning thread here the other
day and now he has it.
Someone is obviously being a good little puppy and forwarding
stuff to their master so he can give them a nice pat on the head.
***Nad...@aol.com***
-----------
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 15:15:43 -0500
From: Kathleen Berto <NAD...@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Forwarded Messages
Fr.ALSO wrote:
<<Hi Mary,
The JK character sure fires up the emotions! i imagine if anyone
else had stumbled upon your generous offer you would have been
willing to help them, but the dreaded JK makes a mockery of it.
I recieved my present and was very happy! thank you so much. >>
What really bothers me is that Mary made this generous offer to
"this" list (tarot-l) and "this" list only. She was not offering
it to the entire internet community.
Whoever sent it to JK knew what he/she was doing and imho,
they are punks because they won't come clean and admit they
are the guilty party. I have no shame in my game and if I
did it, I would own up to it (hint, hint).
<<I notice something rather sad in this clip you provided.
Mr. JK appears hurt from being excluded:
>Subject: Guess Mary Greer Forgot
>...to mention to all you alt.tarot readers (not that she
does not LOVE you just as much as anyone else)---
His sarcasm appears to me as a defensive response to
exclusion (which really hurts, no matter how tough someone
thinks they are) >>
I agree - I think he's hurt because we won't play with him anymore.
<<You are truly a sunny sky Mary, i really feel fortunate to
have the chance to listen to you on Tarot-L. >>
Ditto ;-)
***Nad...@aol.com***
-----------------------------------
More tomorrow.
(jk)
Mile23
In article <squeegee-090...@newshost.cc.utexas.edu>,
sque...@yr.3rd.aye.beeATCH (G Leake) replied to area51 thusly:
>Again, go for it. Since you're lying through your teeth it will be
>interesting to see what parallel universe you're able to access in
>coming up with the kind of obscenities and threats we've gotten used
>to hearing from you.
>
>*this should be interesting.
Actually, no. It won't be interesting at all.
Mile23
In article <34DFB1AE...@texas.net>, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
wrote:
>THE tarot-l STORY,
>
[...]
>More tomorrow.
>
>(jk)
I won't miss it if it doesn't show up.
Mile23
In article <34dfba8...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, are...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>>Part I
>
>Where's the comparison of alt.tarot vs. non-alt.tarot messages.
>You've presented the tiny number of alt.tarot related messages as
>though they're the whole story. Try telling the truth, Mr. Karlin.
>Try making it plain that the number of daily postings to tarot-L is
>something like four to five times the number of postings to alt.tarot.
>What you've presented represents something like less than a single
>percent of what's being posted there.
>
>Oh BTW, where are the obscenities, the insults and the censorship?
>
>Thanks for showing yourself as the liar you truly are.
>
>R
No, seriously. Do you have a massage therapist? Would you like to hire one?
Did you ever learn any relaxation techniques like deep breathing?
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On Mon, 09 Feb 1998 19:48:09 -0600, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
wrote:
>R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>
>> >> Lie Number 1. In fact, contrary to Mr. Karlin's ego-spurred wishes,
>> >> alt.tarot is almost never discussed in the group.
>> >
>> >Your problem here is that I can easily document what
>> >I'm saying.
>> >
>> >Would you like me to do that?
>>
>> Yeah, do it. And make sure you make note of exactly how many posts
>> concern this group as opposed to posts which do not.
>
>Sometimes alt.tarot or jk are all people talk about there.
>
>But then they tend to run out of ideas about tarot fairly
>quickly.
>
>Anyway, you asked for it:
>
>------------------------------------------
>
>
>THE tarot-l STORY,
>
>"maybe the folks at Mattel would be interested in marketing the
>whole place as some kind of new age playroom, complete with
>"soothable Mary figure", who takes offense at loud noises but
>will at length allow herself to be appeased with continued promises
>of nurturing and fealty ..."
>
>---alt.tarot alum on the 'virtues' of tarot-l
>
>
>Part I
Where's the comparison of alt.tarot vs. non-alt.tarot messages.
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On 9 Feb 1998 23:26:01 GMT, sque...@yr.3rd.aye.beeATCH (G Leake)
wrote:
>are...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>>Plenty of insults make it past the door at tarot-l, many of
>>them aimed at this newsgroup.
>
>Lie Number 1. In fact, contrary to Mr. Karlin's ego-spurred wishes,
>alt.tarot is almost never discussed in the group. And I'm happy to
>report that all the abusive language, threats, and infantile debating
>techniques of Karlin and his ilk are left at the door.
>
>*yeah, but there's insults and insulting (mainly to the intelligence of
>others) stuff there all the time. And yes, there are mentions of alt.tarot
>there all the time, and I happen to be one of many of such perpetrators.
Or possibly one of the only perpetrators. Let's cough up some of
those insults. Since there are supposedly so many of them, I'm sure
you'll find it easy to do.
R
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
>Thank you, R, for your kind suggestion.
Not a problem. I hear they're making real strides in deprogramming
these days. Two or three decades and you'll be ready to actually
think some of your own thoughts.
Yours in endless hope.
R
David Coffman
R wrote
>JK and his glee club
> Mr. Karlin's ego-spurred wishes
> infantile debating techniques of Karlin and his ilk
> Have your remedial reading instructor go over it
>again for you....slowwwwly.
>Interested readers will also find that any good book on abnormal
>psychology also covers the basics of Mr. Karlin and this newsgroup.
>
And all this from someone who wants us to go to tarot-l because they
are above insults and nasty remarks!
coffmans^@^texas.net
to reply remove the spam spikes (^)
http://www.alamopc.org
"Nothing happens unless first a dream." Carl Sandberg
MLYoung
>I won't miss it if it doesn't show up.
Well, you could skip the thread . . .
--margaret
>
>
J. Karlin
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
> >THE tarot-l STORY,
> >
> >"maybe the folks at Mattel would be interested in marketing the
> >whole place as some kind of new age playroom, complete with
> >"soothable Mary figure", who takes offense at loud noises but
> >will at length allow herself to be appeased with continued promises
> >of nurturing and fealty ..."
> >
> >---alt.tarot alum on the 'virtues' of tarot-l
> >
> >
> >Part I
>
> Where's the comparison of alt.tarot vs. non-alt.tarot messages.
Well, did you see all those posts? I edited very few out that
group did NOT deal with alt.tarot and jk.
And that was just chapter one. That kind of thing happens
all the time there, and not just about me and alt.tarot.
Other people get abused there too. Sometimes they even
get thrown off the list by secret conspiracies.
We're gonna explore just how 'nice' that fucking
place really is.
We're gonna have tarot-l follies all this week on alt.tarot.
And tarot-l can thank YOU for it.
Have fun back on the list, dickhead.
(jk)
J. Karlin
Mile23 wrote:
>
> In article <34DFB1AE...@texas.net>, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
> wrote:
>
> >THE tarot-l STORY,
> >
> [...]
> >More tomorrow.
> >
> >(jk)
>
I think you should read it, and really pay attention to the
dynamics at work. It's interesting, just for itself, and
it certainly reveals a certain 'character' of tarot-l
that they have, up till now, publicly denied exists
there.
(jk)
Edward A. Aviza
Karlin, you are one seriously disturbed motherfucker.
Get a life.
J. Karlin wrote in message <34E04864...@texas.net>...
>R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>
>> >THE tarot-l STORY,
>> >
>> >"maybe the folks at Mattel would be interested in marketing the
>> >whole place as some kind of new age playroom, complete with
>> >"soothable Mary figure", who takes offense at loud noises but
>> >will at length allow herself to be appeased with continued promises
>> >of nurturing and fealty ..."
>> >
>> >---alt.tarot alum on the 'virtues' of tarot-l
>> >
>> >
>> >Part I
>>
Secretive
sque...@yr.3rd.aye.beeATCH (G Leake) wrote:
>Tom Ace <cr...@best.comX> wrote:
>But "how do I find tarot-l" is a frequently asked question
>here. Pointers to other resources are often seen in Usenet
>FAQ documents.
In some FAQ's, yeah - I took the time to pull up a few of the ones I
have on file, list as "other resources" archives and such stored on a
ftp server or maintained by the poster of the FAQ. Not really much
more than that .... *shrug* Their list of "resources" seem to be about
a list of recommended reading (which alt.tarot FAQ has) and the
archives you are welcome to access and peruse thru at your leisure the
the writer of the FAQ maintains at an FTP site his time and cost, not
the group itself.
Also, many web sites list links to information about Tarot-L and so is
easily found if you went to a search engine to aid in you in this
searching for said information. Do we fail to answer the question
about how to subscribe to this group or where to get possible
information on how to do so when someone asks? And before you state
that JK did this, he responded to the question, also posed by the
original poster, about what and what should not be on the FAQ.
>*yeah, but "the" alt.tarot is really JK's version of "the" alt.tarot FAQ.
*nod* this is true... and also a FAQ that was more or less put up for
grabs on the newsgroup for someone to take over from the original
poster of it in the past ... and I don't seem to recall too many
folks jumping up to say "Sure, give it to me... I will do it!" Mayhaps
they knew how much of a headache this actually is and didn't care to
up their aspirin supply in the medicine cabinet.
>*come on, Tom. It's time to get *really* real.
>*as it were.
>--
J. Karlin
Edward A. Aviza wrote:
>
> Karlin, you are one seriously disturbed motherfucker.
Really, why do you think that?
(jk)
J. Karlin
Secretive wrote:
> >*yeah, but "the" alt.tarot is really JK's version of "the" alt.tarot FAQ.
>
> *nod* this is true... and also a FAQ that was more or less put up for
> grabs on the newsgroup for someone to take over from the original
> poster of it in the past ... and I don't seem to recall too many
> folks jumping up to say "Sure, give it to me... I will do it!"
Actually, the process of passing the responsibilities
for the FAQ in this group was quite normal. The former
owner of the FAQ posted to alt.tarot (back in early 1996)
that he was no longer able to take care of it and asked for
people to volunteer to take it over.
No one did.
Except me.
(jk)
Edward A. Aviza
That you would take the time to post all that stuff... it was a bit
excessive, don't you think? Even you called it pointless. If pointless,
why bother? It's surprising that you even care enough to waste your time.
Leave 'em alone, why don't you? Hell, there are enough people here for you
to flame, aren't there? If people go to tarot-l to "escape" your
flamethrower, they should have that right. While perhaps the discussions
over there about you are out of character with their stated charter, you
have to admit you've alienated and offended plenty of people with your
implicit assumption of the role of The Tower...
J. Karlin wrote in message <34E0B161...@texas.net>...
Secretive
mil...@usa.net (Mile23) wrote:
>In article <34e782a4...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, are...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>>On Sun, 08 Feb 1998 22:18:41 GMT, secr...@1ho2tm3ai4l.com
>>(Secretive) wrote:
>>
>>>Since this entire thread no one answered this part .... so I will try
>>>to.
>>
>>I answered the poster's question in my very first response. I take
>>the fact that you typically post four or five responses to the same
>>article as evidence that you're not actually reading the articles
>>you're responding to. You might try it sometime.
Which, at first read and second read of this paragraph, it appears
that you are now retracting the preaching you have done about this
group in a couple of threads (referring to your claims that this group
discourages postings) and trying to discourage me from posting,
wouldn't it? *chuckle*
But sorry to say, my ISP's newserver has failed to deliver, as of
yet, the first response you stated above that you have posted on
this thread ...
>>
>>R
>R, usenet newsgroups are odd in that sometimes some messages get spread out
>over the network really fast, and other times messages take a bit longer.
>Which is to say, secretive may *be* reading all the messages *on her
>server.* Her server may not have actually gotten your message yet.
>It is probably no fault of hers that she didn't see your message.
Which in fact seems to be the case here, I see in Anah's post to this
thread her thanks for this information and yet I still have not
received that post that contained it....Nor have I received the
posting that you responded to here from "R" as of yet.
I do appreciate you pointing out that not all servers are alike and
thus postings are received at different intervals thru them. *grin*
*hug*
Secretive
>Geez, R. I could build a whole massage therapy buisness on the tension that
>must be inside your neck and shoulders right this minute... LIGHTEN UP!!
J. Karlin
Edward A. Aviza wrote:
> That you would take the time to post all that stuff...
Well...let's see...I clicked this button and it posted.
It took about a second. Does your system work differently?
> it was a bit
> excessive, don't you think?
I don't know. I didn't write all that shit. 'they' did.
I just posted it here as evidence.
> Even you called it pointless.
No, Comet Kohoutek added that bit.
> If pointless, why bother?
If it were pointless, it wouldn't have bothered you.
> It's surprising that you even care enough to waste your time.
It didn't take that much time actually. Most of those posts
were sequential. I edited a handful that did not whine
about me and alt.tarot.
And there's more to come. You can thank area51 for that.
> Leave 'em alone, why don't you?
What the fuck do you mean?
All I'm doing is posting what they wrote. How am I
doing anything to them?
> Hell, there are enough people here for you
> to flame, aren't there?
Again, maybe you can't read, but the people
doing the flaming in that post are from tarot-l.
And I can see having that fact revealed to everyone
bothers you.
And that doesn't matter to me in the least.
> If people go to tarot-l to "escape" your
> flamethrower, they should have that right.
What you mean is that they should have the 'right'
to hide on tarot-l and flame me and alt.tarot and not
have anyone here expose what they are writing.
> While perhaps the discussions
> over there about you are out of character with their stated charter,
No, they're perfectly in character with the people that
populate the list---a bunch of sanctimonious cowards
who pretend to the outside world that they are 'kinder
and gentler' but who will think nothing of stabbing
even their own in the back if it suits them.
> you
> have to admit you've alienated and offended plenty of people with your
> implicit assumption of the role of The Tower...
Is someone offended?
All I do is ask questions.
Next time you post one of your ads here you'll see
what I mean.
(jk)
Edward A. Aviza
OK, let's try it.
If you are looking for tarot software for the PC, why not try CyberTarot.
You can download a shareware version and find additional information on my
website at
http://www.netcom.com/~edaviza
Edward A. Aviza
J. Karlin wrote in message <34E0E396...@texas.net>...
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
>Funny, that's exactly what we've been hoping for you.
>
>You randomly recommend book titles
Yawn. The same tired rant. Unfortunately none of your imaginary
complaints addresses the rather obvious personality disorders that
Karlin has succeeded in turning into a tacky cult.
R
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On Tue, 10 Feb 1998 06:30:32 -0600, in alt.tarot you wrote:
>R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>
>> >THE tarot-l STORY,
>> >
>> >"maybe the folks at Mattel would be interested in marketing the
>> >whole place as some kind of new age playroom, complete with
>> >"soothable Mary figure", who takes offense at loud noises but
>> >will at length allow herself to be appeased with continued promises
>> >of nurturing and fealty ..."
>> >
>> >---alt.tarot alum on the 'virtues' of tarot-l
>> >
>> >
>> >Part I
>>
>> Where's the comparison of alt.tarot vs. non-alt.tarot messages.
>
>Well, did you see all those posts? I edited very few out that
>group did NOT deal with alt.tarot and jk.
Since there are over 50 - 80 posts there per day it sort of stands to
reason that you missed a few there, sport. Anyone who is actually on
the group knows immediately that your little example is a crock...but
nice try. Every day, day in and day out scores of posts that have
nothing whatsoever to do with J Karlin and his flamethrower. Scores
of posts with no threats, no obscenities, no conspiracies. While all
the while little Jessie sits in the dark desperately hoping for some
reference to him and his otherwise meaningless existence. Afraid to
actually post to the group he's subscribed to, all he can do is sit
and gnaw on the hatred.
>
>And that was just chapter one. That kind of thing happens
>all the time there, and not just about me and alt.tarot.
>Other people get abused there too. Sometimes they even
>get thrown off the list by secret conspiracies.
Be specific, please. Perhaps they're reported as advertisers to their
ISPs...you think?
>
>We're gonna explore just how 'nice' that fucking
>place really is.
Tourette's IS such a terrible disease, isn't it?
>
>We're gonna have tarot-l follies all this week on alt.tarot.
>
>And tarot-l can thank YOU for it.
Actually, it seems as though in an ironic way, they can thank YOU for
it. There are scores of posters at tarot-L that are there precisely
because of the obscenities, threats and pointless vindictiveness that
you are so justly infamous for. Just think, all those people and a
group several orders of magnitude more successful than this little
rathole you've dug for yourself. And much of it all because you chose
to treat alt.tarot like a personal fiefdom.
So now responses to your group trickle away to all time lows and your
teeny group of sycophants are reduced to posting multiple rants on the
same articles for lack of any outside input whatsoever. In the midst
of all of this, you choose the crowning Freudian irony of referring to
Tarot-L as a historical footnote.
I'm laughing at you, Mr. Karlin.
R
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
>Edward A. Aviza wrote:
>
>> That you would take the time to post all that stuff...
>
>Well...let's see...I clicked this button and it posted.
>
>It took about a second. Does your system work differently?
>
>> it was a bit
>> excessive, don't you think?
>
>I don't know. I didn't write all that shit. 'they' did.
>
>I just posted it here as evidence.
Of what? That you're an idiot? I think that's become abundantly
obvious to most. However, it does offer further evidence that your
only real talent is editing. It's nice knowing that as a "footnote in
history" you will at least be adequately spellchecked.
R
MLYoung
>So now responses to your group trickle away to all time lows
Actually, the level of posts here is pretty consistent.
> and your teeny group of sycophants are reduced to posting multiple rants on
the
>same articles for lack of any outside input whatsoever. In the
And several of the people here are fairly new posters.
But, hey, why let facts get in the way?
--margaret
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Mile23
In article <34E0493E...@texas.net>, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
wrote:
I've seen that dynamic in action already, JK. I don't need to see it *yet
again*. Its all over the place. Its everywhere. It happens all over usenet,
all over other netspaces, all over *everywhere.*
All you're illustrating is that you have exactly nothing to talk about.
Mile23
In article <6brksj$b...@camel15.mindspring.com>, "Susan Vaughn"
<windj...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Alt.tarot is the father's larger penis, and Tarot-L is, shall we
>say, your smaller deck of cards...
As I was saying....
Mile23
>Yawn. The same tired rant. Unfortunately none of your imaginary
>complaints addresses the rather obvious personality disorders that
>Karlin has succeeded in turning into a tacky cult.
>
>R
I'll have you know my many personality disorders point me in the direction
of *disliking* JK. That I'm in his cult is evidence not of his manipulation
of my many personality disorders, but rather, the fact that he cooks a
really good pork chop and has genitalia that rate above-average, size-wise.
So, speak for yourself, pal.
J. Karlin
Mile23 wrote:
> I've seen that dynamic in action already, JK.
And if you were the only person who read posts here
I guess you'd have a point.
But you're not. Just because you feel you've seen it
all and done it all does not mean everyone feels that
way.
Besides, I was asked to provide documentation to my
charges that tarot-l is not the flame-less haven
it makes itself out to be.
And that I will do.
> I don't need to see it *yet
> again*. Its all over the place. Its everywhere. It happens all over usenet,
You know what else happens all over Usenet, people whining about
what they don't want to read, instead of posting about what
they do want to read.
Put up or shut up.
(jk)
J. Karlin
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
> >I just posted it here as evidence.
>
> Of what? That you're an idiot?
You don't like the evidence, do you?
Guess what? You'll like what's coming even less.
(jk)
J. Karlin
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
> >Well, did you see all those posts? I edited very few out that
> >group did NOT deal with alt.tarot and jk.
>
> Since there are over 50 - 80 posts there per day
That volume is not consistent. It goes up and down, just
like the volume here does. And people come and go out
of that list all the time.
On the days those postings were made there were very few
non-jk and non-alt.tarot messages posted.
The point here is that you attempted to make it appear as
if people hardly ever said an unkind thing to anyone
about anything there.
And that's simply a lie.
> it sort of stands to
> reason that you missed a few there, sport.
It also stands to reason that if your original statement
had any credibility at all:
"In fact, contrary to Mr. Karlin's ego-spurred wishes,
alt.tarot is almost never discussed in the group. And I'm happy to
report that all the abusive language, threats, and infantile debating
techniques of Karlin and his ilk are left at the door."
---then I should not have been able to EASILY find
scores of postings which contradict you. And not just scores
spread out over months, but all occurring within a
couple of days. And that kind of thing continues there
even up till recently as you well know.
> Anyone who is actually on
> the group knows immediately that your little example is a crock...
If it were a 'little example' you might have a point. But
it was quite lengthy, as has been 'pointed' out.
Furthermore, it is not in any way unique, as we shall see.
> but
> nice try. Every day, day in and day out scores of posts that have
> nothing whatsoever to do with J Karlin and his flamethrower.
Or with tarot. tarot-l discussions, when they do bother to
focus on tarot, are remarkably dull, lifeless creatures. Again,
we'll examine that phenomenon in our study as well.
> Scores
> of posts with no threats, no obscenities, no conspiracies.
Same is true here.
In fact, most of the people using obscenities and threats
and conspiracies on alt.tarot are those who end up being
recruited by tarot-l. Interesting.
> While all
> the while little Jessie sits in the dark desperately hoping for some
> reference to him
Now, I want you to stop for just a moment and use whatever
brain you have left after the accident and THINK.
If that were really true, if that's all I lived for, to see
a bunch of morons who have to help each other collectively tie
their shoes (one reason they are always tripping) mention
my name, don't you think I'd have revealed all this stuff
here a long time ago. After all that thread is a year old
now. I really had little reason to even think about it
(or tarot-l) till you decided to call me a liar.
You've fucked up over and over again here.
And you did it again, but this time you fucked up for
all your little tarot-l friends too.
Congratulations.
> and his otherwise meaningless existence. Afraid to
> actually post to the group he's subscribed to,
What 'group' do you think I am 'subscribed' to?
> all he can do is sit
> and gnaw on the hatred.
I don't hate those people. I'm glad they have a place to
go (indeed, I highly encourage people who are cowards and idiots
to go there---forever). But neither they nor you are going to
post bullshit here to the effect that they are just a 'sweet'
bunch of folks who love to commune flamelessly about tarot.
Because that's a god-damned lie.
> >And that was just chapter one. That kind of thing happens
> >all the time there, and not just about me and alt.tarot.
> >Other people get abused there too. Sometimes they even
> >get thrown off the list by secret conspiracies.
>
> Be specific, please.
Please note that he asked for it---again.
No problem. We're gonna go deep into the George
conspiracy here, just to please you.
> Perhaps they're reported as advertisers to their
> ISPs...you think?
Only if they post ads on a non-commercial newsgroup.
Like you did.
> >We're gonna explore just how 'nice' that fucking
> >place really is.
>
> Tourette's IS such a terrible disease, isn't it?
So is hypocrisy.
For a guy who whines about mindless insults
you seem to have plenty of them to hand out.
> >We're gonna have tarot-l follies all this week on alt.tarot.
> >
> >And tarot-l can thank YOU for it.
>
> Actually, it seems as though in an ironic way, they can thank YOU for
> it. There are scores of posters at tarot-L that are there precisely
> because of the obscenities,
What do you define as an obscenity?
In my book, I define it as obdurate stupidity, and on that
basis tarot-l is obviously a hothouse of obscenity.
> threats
Everyone on tarot-l lives under the constant threat that
some idiot will take offense at something he wrote and will
report him to the moderators (who, depending on their
political leanings for that person, may just toss them off
the list). As we'll see, the ONLY time that was actually
done was against someone who MANY people falsely believed
was me. Thus, they allowed their moronic hysteria to
make them behave---well, like what they are---witch-burners.
> and pointless vindictiveness
If it were pointless, it would not disturb so many
'sensitive' people.
> that
> you are so justly infamous for.
But I'm also justly infamous for actually writing about
tarot.
If you had aspired to that kind of infamy here, instead
of being a poltroonish clown, you might have fared better.
> Just think, all those people and a
> group several orders of magnitude more successful than this little
> rathole you've dug for yourself.
Several people have helped dig this rathole, and it's
quite a comfy place (for people not afraid of actually
learning about tarot), if you don't count the occasional
flea, such as yourself, who comes trying to spread
the plague of idiotic sanctimony and useless ignorance
about the subject of this group.
And that's really at the bottom of this:
The subject of alt.tarot is tarot.
The subject of tarot-l is, as Bob once put it, 'no jk, no jk'.
> And much of it all because you chose
> to treat alt.tarot like a personal fiefdom.
No, it's because I treat tarot like a subject worthy
of serious study.
> So now responses to your group trickle away to all time lows
I'll simply point out to you that the idiots on tarot-l
who were proudly proclaiming victory over alt.tarot a year
ago (THEY were the ones who framed the thing as a contest)
were saying the same stupid thing.
Volume on newsgroups varies all the time.
We've actually had more sustained volume here in the past few
months than I've seen here in a long time.
And one thing that is consistent here, the discussions
about tarot, even though sometimes they may take a
backseat to discussions about me or about 'civility',
are at least worth reading usually.
That's generally not the case on tarot-l.
> and your
> teeny group of sycophants
Actually, the group of 'sycophants' was quite large back
when you were refusing to debate me on---anything.
Remember all those people asking you to shut up whining
and actually discuss tarot with me?
> are reduced to posting multiple rants on the
> same articles for lack of any outside input whatsoever. In the midst
> of all of this, you choose the crowning Freudian irony of referring to
> Tarot-L as a historical footnote.
That's all it is, as far as this newsgroup is concerned.
tarot-l is our toilet.
> I'm laughing at you, Mr. Karlin.
I hope your cell is soundproofed at least.
(jk)
Valorie Zimmerman
snip------
More tomorrow.
(jk)
Oh, Jess, do you hafta?
This is like an expose' of BARNEY!
Valorie AKA Phoenix
GGLWOLF
R wrote:
>Since there are over 50 - 80 posts there per day it sort of stands to reason
that you missed a few there, sport.
OK, went to count posts from last four days-- nope, not even close to fifty a
day-- although sometimes there are quite a few-- is this an average or did you
even bother to get facts on this?
Anyone who is actually on
>the group knows immediately that your little example is a crock...but >nice
try.
Actually R, having been on both lists for some time, and longer than I suspect
you have been, jk's point here is not irrelevant. The tarot-l list was put
together orinally as a private list by folks trying to get away from
jk...that's just the fact, live with it. And yes, alt.tarot and jk come up
regularly on tarot-l in what seems to be cycles. Even though the list rules
are clear on this type of conversation, it seems that folks just have to vent
their frustration publicly.
Every day, day in and day out scores of posts that have
>nothing whatsoever to do with J Karlin and his flamethrower. Scores of posts
with no threats, no obscenities, no conspiracies
Ok R, first of all you are either missing or ignoring the point here. Jk is not
saying that this is an everyday topic- but is pointing out that the folks there
are not immune to slamming him while maintaining the "blessed be" attitude. It
is one of the problems I have with most new age bullshit- talking the talk, but
not even crawling the walk. If you want to be so pure and judgmental- why
spend so much energy slamming jk? You criticize jk for exactly what you are
doing-- look in the mirror on this one...
. While all
>the while little Jessie sits in the dark desperately hoping for some
>reference to him and his otherwise meaningless existence. Afraid to actually
post to the group he's subscribed to, all he can do is sit and gnaw on the
hatred. >>
LOL at this one- I don't think you get it R- jk doesn't care about all this-
he's just having way too much fun. Cripes R- the whole point of tarot-l, at
least before it went public, and I believe by its rules now, was to be a
place where folks could chat away without jk asking those hard questions and
challenging ones thoughts or 'flaming' ones kind sensibilities. The ironic
problem has been when those same folks have blasted jk with the very venom they
accuse him of having--that is where the defence weakens considerably.
You know R- if you would get your facts straight and argue with jk instead of
just continually slamming him, you might get some respect. I, for one, shudder
to think you are the defender of tarot-l on this ng.
See R, by not getting your facts straight, you have opened the door to jk
airing tarot-l's dirty laundry...thanks to you and your continued juvenile
slams on jk.. Quite dissappointing.
shadow
J. Karlin
Valorie Zimmerman wrote:
> snip------
>
> More tomorrow.
>
> (jk)
>
> Oh, Jess, do you hafta?
>
> This is like an expose' of BARNEY!
Agreed, both Barney and tarot-l are puerile cults.
(jk)
J. Karlin
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>
> On Mon, 9 Feb 1998 21:35:24 -0800, "Susan Vaughn"
> <windj...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >>>Not a problem. I hear they're making real strides in
> >>>deprogramming these days. Two or three decades and you'll be
> >>>ready to actually think some of your own thoughts.
> >
> >Funny, that's exactly what we've been hoping for you.
> >
> >You randomly recommend book titles
>
No, I just think that's what people will always remember you
for---making fearless and mindless recommendations about
tarot books which you would NEVER explain to anyone
who asked about them.
Just like all the other advertisers who've ever thought
posting their ads was the main purpose for this group.
(jk)
Secretive
R [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
<snippage of parts not related to my response whatsoever>
>So now responses to your group trickle away to all time lows and your
>teeny group of sycophants are reduced to posting multiple rants on the
>same articles for lack of any outside input whatsoever.
Ok... in another thread this idea popped into Area51's head in
response to a posting of mine. So apparently originality hisn't his
strong suit... be that as it may, Mr. Area51 don't believe nothing
from no one with out "documented" proof ... so here he goes, I took
the liberty to search up documented proof on my side of the posting
venue
Area51 said that I posted 4 to 5 times to the exact same post and that
I had (in such eloquent terms) learn to read, more or less -- at least
I think that is his supposed insult. Now I hate to waste time to go
about prove anyone wrong on the internet, feeling most folks (if they
aren't annoying that is) are entitled to their thoughts ... but sorry
Area51, you started this whine fest hard and heavy according to my
"sources" here around January 31st.
Now, I could have replied to that one post where you stated I
multi-posted a posting to death that I felt I didn't ... but we both
know you wouldn't have believed that. *shrug* So now you are trying to
lay to claim that everyone here is posting original postings to death
and mainly those are rants.
OK... I took the time to go thru the postings on my side of the modem
trail... nnow a couple I know I posted never appeared on my side, so
my count may be off by one or two ... If you care for me to do the
same for you, Area51, I will be more than happy to do so -- I use Free
Agent and so have kept most of the threads saved over here.
Secretive's Posting Record:
1. Re: Advice wanted on storing cards ... I responded on 1/10 to
MoonDawG's posting to the original poster
2. Elemental Attributes of Suits .... I responded 4 times to this
thread: a. 1/31 to REDTAROT's comments, b. 2/2 to Area51's comments
about my posting (historical footnote - near the beginning of Area51's
posting campaign of "how bad we all are"), c. 1/28 to HossesGirl out
of the blue letter, and d. 1/31 to a comment REDTAROT posted later on
in the day.
(oh my.... that's 4 but sorry Area51... they weren't to the same
person nor about the same original post ... shucks... let's continue
though in case you are proven right about the past 5 weeks shall we?)
3. tarot ... I responded on 1/7 to Area51's skip dancing around the
answering fo questions put forth to him by several on this thread.
4. Please Help With Reading .... I responded once to this one but it
never showed up on my side, I believe about 1/10 I went thru the cards
the person listed since I can't e-mail at the moment.
5. Online Readings ... I responded once to this post when it
originally appeared but the posting didn't show up on my side, I
believe it was also in the 1/10 time range though.
6. rebuttal ... I responded on 1/10 to George Leake about his question
of if/how phone line psychics were trained and I told him about a news
article I read.
7. Tarot and Cabala (was: tarot) ... I responded on 1/28 to HossesGirl
(rant? perhaps...)
8. Reversed or Illdignified and Other Options .... I responded on 1/10
to KCMorlock's questions
9. Tarot As Divination .... I responded 4 times to this thread: a.
1/10 to ask a question about Area51's posting out of curiousity, b.
1/16 in response to JK's posting, c. 1/19 in response to starmime's
post in regards to parts of my posting, and d. 1/22 in response to
JK's post.
(Ut-oh... dreaded 4 number came up again there huh? But gee, still not
all devoted to the same post being one-handedly rehashed by me ...
sorry Area51, haven't proved you right yet on this one... so let's
continue with my list of my posting record)
10. New to Tarot ... I responded on 2/1 to HossesGirl
11. Learning Tarot ... I responded 3 times to this thread : a. 2/10 to
a posting from JK that contained portions of Area51's post in it, b.
1/21 in response to Leihla's post about my posting asking for me to
further explain myself, and c. 1/22 I posted a letter to Leihla to
apologise if my words seemed harsh or self-defensive in my post back
to her (guess that was a no-no sice Area51 was counting the posts to
my nick)
12. curious ... I responded on 1/19 to DreamnZzzz and Area51's
combined comments
13. Help Me Pleaseeeee .... I responded on 1/19 to Druid14U's post ...
rant? definitely
14. Favourate Spreads ... I responded 3 times; a. 1/19 in response to
Tracy's question, b.1/19 to MLYoung's posting later on, and c. on 1/20
to the posting of GGLWOLF's that contained JK's question.
15. Major and Minor together and apart .... I responded on 1/19 to
KCMorlock's questions
16. To "Anon" on alt. tarot ... I responded on 1/19 to Area51's post
17. Compatability Of Suits ... I responded on 1/31 to REDTAROT's
questions about where to see David C. Jones' FAQ at
18. PREDICTION by Dr. Turdi ... I responded 3 times to this one; a.
1/28 to "Susan Vaughn"'s post, b. 1/31 in response to her reply back
to my post, and c. 1/31 to drturi's post
19. forecast part 2 .... I responded to drturi's post on 1/31
20. NOTE TO ALL READERS ... I posted *gasp* 4 times to this thread; a.
1/31 to drturi's post, b. 1/31 to a later in the day drturi post, c.
2/1 in response to drturi's reposting of an article (thus diff. letter
in this thread), and d. 2/2 in response to Karen's post.
(Hmmm Area51, it looks like that maybe I will prove to you that I read
just fine and mayhaps you need the eye doctor's appointment, dont'
it?)
21. <Sigh> Another Flame War (was: Elemental Attributes of the Suits)
.. I counted here 2 responses; a. 1/29 to REDTAROT (rant? nope..not
at all) and b. 1/31 to Area51
22. Questions About ASTRO TAROT ... I responded on 1/31 to drturi's
post ... then on 2/1 to his new post on the thread
23. Enlightened by a psychic ... I responded on 1/28 to Trebor9094's
psoting about how he can take you to a great psychic on the same day
he posted on a person't posting for a free reading for them to shut up
and nope, no reading.
24. choosing a deck ... I responded to "andy warhol" thanking me
25. J, Tania, I'm new, Help me get started .... I responded 3 times to
this thread ...2 to the same post but of different vein of thought
(still not the 4 or 5 times you claimed to have counted... so no count
on your side yet for accuracy) ; a. 2/7 to Area51 about the FAQ , b.
2/5 responded to Area51's rant aspect of his post, and b. took same
post and tried to give Area51 what he said he wanted, to discuss Tarot
so I discussed my thoughts of Mary K. Greer's "Tarot For Self" ... he
has yet to respond to that one.
26. The Hidden Meaning of the Tarot ... I responded on 2/5 to Area51's
posting, and gee... wasn't a rant....shucks
27. trying to find a specific deck .... I responded on 1/31 to
MLYoung's answer to the original poster with an URL I had found that
may be of help ...
28. none .... I responded on 1/31 to Anonymous's question about the
Prudence card in some decks....
29. No Comments? .... I responded on 2/2 to Area51's rants
30. Pumpkin Head -- "Susan Vaughn" - New to tarot ... I responded 3
times to this one; a. 2/7 in response to JK's letter about reader
"ethics", b. 2/1 in response to REDTAROT's questions about reading on
an absent person and c. 2/2 in response to "Susan Vaughn" reply
31. Next wndow Feb 10th, 1998 ... I responded oon 1/31 to drturi's
post
32. Tarot ... I responded to Stephanie's questions in her post asking
for more specific areas she was having questions about and then I
posted to her on the same day to explain that I didn't mean for her to
rush out and buy Stuart Kaplan's books but to look thru them first.
Shame on me, huh?
33. KEY TO THE UNIVERSE ... SECRETS ...* ... I responded to New age
astrology bb in a somewhat humorous vein of thought that crossed thru
my mind
34. Subscribe to Tarot-L ... I responded 4 times to this thread ... a.
2/10 in response to George Leake's post to Tom Ace, b. 2/8 to Victorya
Roberts' post to JK, c. delayed response on 2/8 to Brian M. Oldham's
"how to subscribe" question, and d. 2/11 to Mile23's response to you
about me.
35. tarot for kids.... I responded on 2/9 to Mile23's post with info
on the Lord of the Rings deck
36. Dear Area51 (aka R); Long One Here ... I posted this original post
into a new thread
37. The tarot-l Story, part I (Long! but pointless) .... I responded
to Area51's supposed insult to the group with this post.
OK ... there ya go Area51... there is a list of my posts and notice,
about 1/3 you could possibly try to tag as rants in the dr turi's
posting threads but overall most were in response to others or to
attempt to help answer some questions they had.... Now I have time to
kill today and I can go thru and dig up the dates and classify the
contents of your posts and we can see who is the one going around
ranting and ravign on posting threads OR.... you can just say "gee
Secretive, I was wrong, you didnt' post a posting half to death nor
did you post 4 or 5 times to the same post...."
>I'm laughing at you, Mr. Karlin
Don't turn around, you might see the crowd behind you laughing ...but
darn, it ain't at JK they are laughing at is it?
Secretive
.
>R
J. Karlin
Secretive wrote:
> Now I have time to
> kill today and I can go thru and dig up the dates and classify the
> contents of your posts and we can see who is the one going around
> ranting and ravign on posting threads
Now that would be a dull task indeed.
500 postings of 'no comment' and 'jk is evil' and 'so
are his sycophants'.
(jk)
J. Karlin
Edward A. Aviza wrote:
> OK, let's try it.
> If you are looking for tarot software for the PC, why not try CyberTarot.
Better question. Why try CyberTarot?
I think one of the reasons we might or might not want to
try a product such as this would have to do with the
claims and beliefs of the author about the subject---tarot.
Having looked through your comments about tarot from a
couple of different sources, I find two outstanding
reasons (and a bunch of minor ones) NOT to recommend the
purchase of your product:
A. While you use Waite's deck for your book (and presumably
for your software) you ignore Waite's ideas and instructions
for what the cards mean. This is a typical and necessary
'method' of marketing for those who prefer to replace
tarot symbolism with 'Jungian Archetypes'.
B. You don't recommend reading cards but rather imagining
that one can read cards---there's a difference. When you
write for example:
"Do not allow yourself to be limited by what is offered
here" one might applaud you for honestly admitting
that what you have to say about the Waite deck is just
amorphous piffle, having little to do with Waite's
ideas, but then you qualify your statement, "instead,
let these suggested interpretations open the door
of your imagination and intuition so you can find
what is meaningful for you in each card."
As we've seen so many times here, THAT is not a productive
way to learn tarot. And it certainly does not yield a
clear method of READING tarot.
Also, where do you get that pattern for Celtic Cross?
It's certainly not in any way 'traditional' (which I
guess you figure is a 'feature').
(jk)
Leihla
R [are...@ix.netcom.com] writes:
>I'm laughing at you, Mr. Karlin.
R
--------------
Nope. Far from it.
Endlessly.
L
Sarah Ovenall
(GGLWOLF) wrote:
> See R, by not getting your facts straight, you have opened the door to jk
> airing tarot-l's dirty laundry...
For me the real message of "the Tarot-L Story" is that you can't write
something down, post it to a hundred or more people on the Internet and
expect it to stay a secret. Regardless of confidentiality agreements (I
might have misunderstood but it sounded like Tarot-L didn't even have one
at the time this all happened), there's just no control over who gets the
material and what they do with it.
The only way to totally ensure privacy is not to share the private matter,
especially not to write it. When a celebrity's love letters end up in a
tell-all biography or a Tarot-L bitchfest ends up on alt.tarot, the
original authors may be mighty embarrassed, but they ought to blame
themselves.
Back to lurking, Sarah
J. Karlin
Sarah Ovenall wrote:
>
> (GGLWOLF) wrote:
>
> > See R, by not getting your facts straight, you have opened the door to jk
> > airing tarot-l's dirty laundry...
>
> For me the real message of "the Tarot-L Story" is that you can't write
> something down, post it to a hundred or more people on the Internet and
> expect it to stay a secret. Regardless of confidentiality agreements (I
> might have misunderstood but it sounded like Tarot-L didn't even have one
> at the time this all happened),
Right, Mary took the 'betrayal' as an opportunity to
demand that the rules be changed in accord with her
need to be 'protected' from the possibility that I might
actually read something she wrote there---and worse yet,
might talk about it here.
Of course, the rule change didn't do her (or them) any
good.
> The only way to totally ensure privacy is not to share the private matter,
> especially not to write it. When a celebrity's love letters end up in a
> tell-all biography or a Tarot-L bitchfest ends up on alt.tarot, the
> original authors may be mighty embarrassed, but they ought to blame
> themselves.
Actually, this point has been raised as a concern for historians.
People are realizing just how loose electronic communication
is and are editing their private thoughts more and more.
While that might make doing history more problematic in the
future, I guess people are more concerned about having
their REAL thoughts and feelings NOT serve to make some
really bad history for them right now.
In essence, the Thought Police are already here and they
are us.
Of course, that's only true for people that are ashamed to
confess what they really think.
I don't recall too many regulars of alt.tarot suffering from that
problem.
(jk)
MLYoung
>Date: Wed, Feb 11, 1998 06:34 EST
>Message-id: <mile23-ya02408000...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>
>
>In article <34e10ce...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, are...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
>>Yawn. The same tired rant. Unfortunately none of your imaginary
>>complaints addresses the rather obvious personality disorders that
>>Karlin has succeeded in turning into a tacky cult.
>>
>>R
>
>I'll have you know my many personality disorders point me in the direction
>of *disliking* JK. That I'm in his cult is evidence not of his manipulation
>of my many personality disorders, but rather, the fact that he cooks a
>really good pork chop and has genitalia that rate above-average, size-wise.
Golly, the things one learns. First, intimate info. on Slick
Willie's and now JK.
And Jess has never offered me a pork chop. <sniff>
--margaret
MLYoung
Shadow wrote:
>
>See R, by not getting your facts straight, you
> have opened the door to jk
> and your continued juvenile
>slams on jk.. Quite dissappointing.
Yeah, nice work R.--you really think tarot-l
wanted this? Didn't ever occur to you there
was a reason no tarot-lers were rushing to
your defense on alt.tarot?
With members like you, tarot-l doesn't need
enemies.
--margaret
>
>shadow
>
>
>
MLYoung
>snip------
>
>More tomorrow.
>
>(jk)
>
>Oh, Jess, do you hafta?
>
>This is like an expose' of BARNEY!
As someone who's been around here for years,
I can pretty much guarantee that when Jess
gets the bit between his teeth he's going to
finish the race.
However, Valorie, there are those of us
who will discuss tarot if you like. I've been
wimping out on the Devil thread I started,
but I could probably handle something a
little milder.
Okay, what makes a deck good for
reading purposes? I find I read well with Rider
and Thoth. I can't read well with the St. Petersbug,
though I think it's quite beautiful. The black backgrounds
and small figures don't give me the initial impression
I need to get a quick sense of the overall picture.
A friend of mine who's just learning to read (with
Thoth) forms her impressions about the reading's
tone by reacting to the colors of the cards. I know
someone else who very much likes the people in
Rider--the clarity of the pictures.
I like the abstract, yet emotionally resonant,
quality of the Thoth minors. I get a feeling
from the card, but there's
no story interfering with my sense of the card.
For other people, I suspect, the story is the way
into the card's meaning.
I have no feeling at all for pretty decks like the
Aquarian or Connelly--there's not really a wide
range of impressions to be gathered from them--
the cards are too similar to one another.
--margaret
>
>Valorie AKA Phoenix
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
MLYoung
Dr. Vaughni dissected:
>From a Freudian perspective, your obsession with
>jk belies a primitive, unresolved Oedipal struggle.
> You, the unpowerful offspring, harbor
>murderous rage at the more powerful male
> who possesses the attention you
>crave. Alt.tarot is the father's larger penis,
> and Tarot-L is, shall we say, your smaller deck of cards...
>
You know, this is somehow rather appropriate given
that the Thoth's Devil is being discussed.
--margaret
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Marc H. Gerstein
GGLWOLF wrote:
> jk's point here is not irrelevant. The tarot-l list was put
> together orinally as a private list by folks trying to get away from
> jk...that's just the fact, live with it. And yes, alt.tarot and jk come up
> regularly on tarot-l in what seems to be cycles. Even though the list rules
> are clear on this type of conversation, it seems that folks just have to vent
> their frustration publicly.
A friend of mine was right when she told me that I would find alt.tarot
interesting right now. :-))
I thought I would chime in with a tarot-l moderator's perspective. (I am not
speaking just for myself, not for any other moderator or any of the
listowners.)
First, Geri's comments, as quoted above, are accurate. Criticism of jk on
tarot-l is not welcome. If one wishes to criticize Jess, it should be done
here, where he can reply to any criticism should he choose to do so.
Unfortunately, though, we are living in the real world, not a perfect, ideal
world. And in this real world, Jess does occassionally get mentioned -- more
to the point, bashed -- on tarot-l. I consider that inappropriate for
tarot-l, and I believe the other moderators/listowners agree with me. We try
to prevent it. But it has happened.
Secondly, there is the issue of tarot discussion itself. Tarot-l is not a
full-fledged free-speech zone. We try to have as free as possible discussion
of ideas, but attacks against people are contrary to the rules. Again, in a
perfect, ideal world, that's precisely how it would be. But again, we live in
the real world. At times, things aren't exactly as we'd like them to be. I
should know becasue I have on occassion been in the middle of such
situations. There have been times when I was angered at things posted toor
aobut me on tarot-l, and there have been itmes when I've posted things
there that were not as well conceived as they could have been. Even so, I
still think it's fair to say that the overall flavor of tarot-l is less
aggressive than on al.tarot.
I've been on line for a while now and my opinions have evolved over time, But
my current belief is that alt.tarot and tarot-l are two very different
environments and that each has its own important place on the internet. Whch
one is right for you? If you have no time constraints, I'd suggest
participation in both forums, and there are some who do this. I'd also
partcipate in both, but the twenty-four hour day is a constraint so I have to
make a choice (an issue that has become even more pronounced with my recent
focus on qblh-l, a qabala discussion list structured similalry to tarot-l,
but much smaller). My decision to allocate my tarot time to tarot-l is based
largely on issues involving my own temperament, etc.
As you all know, alt.tarot is a wide open free-expression venue. People are
going to express themselves with full candor. At tarot-l, there is a
tradeoff. By joining, one does agree to moderate the vigor of their
statements and in retrun, your own statements ought not be challenged in
quite the same way you'd experience on alt.tarot. Which makes for "better"
discussion of tarot? I've seen both forums run the gamut from deep to
shallow. And both venues seem to run in cycles with their own ups-and-downs
in terms of volume and depth of discussion. Does depth appear on one forum
more often than the other? Frankly, I can't answer that becasue I don't
follow alt.tarot systematically enough to form an intelligent opinion.
But from the occasisonal lurking experience I have had on alt.tarot, I can
offer one thought. I am aware of how candid Jess Karlin can be in expressing
his opinions. Speaking as one who has some emotional distance from his
candor, I would advise those of you who choose to participate in alt.tarot to
spend less time fretting about such things as attacks, insults, etc. and more
time thinking about what Jess says regarding tarot. You'll learn a helluva
lot. And for those who haven't checked Jess' web site, I strongly recommend
that you do so.
And even if you don't agree with Jess' opinions about tarot, when he
challenges you to defend what you say, then take him up on it and defend your
ideas. It will not be a comfortable experience for you; but then again, you
did choose to post here. So make it work for you. Just as those on tarot-l
ought not expect it to give them an alt.tarot type of interaction, those on
alt.tarot should not expect it to imitate tarot-l.
If you post on alt.tarot, then benefit from the specific flavor of this
venue. Play along with Jess when he (or anyone else) challenges your
statments. By going through the process you'll learn a lot -- about tarot,
and more importantly, how to think about tarot. Frankly, watching how Jess
challenges folks reminds me a lot of a professor I had back in law school. He
was a killer and he left students shaking. But even now, twenty-plus years
later, I still remember him as standing head and shoulders above any other
teacher I had. In fact, after all these years, he's the only prof. who still
has a continuing impact on my thought process.
Oh...one other thing. It does seem fashionable here for some to portray jk as
some sort of self-proclaimed tarot god who expects everyone to think what he
wants them to think. Although i have seen jess agressively challnege POVs
with which he disagrees, I have not seen anything from him that would justify
such a portrayal.
The bottom line:
When you're on tarot-l, act in such a way as to allow yourself to benefit
form the unique things that tarot-l offers.
When you're on alt.tarot, act in such a way as to allow yourself to benefit
from the unique things that alt.tarot offers.
Marc
Mile23
In article <34E1903F...@texas.net>, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
wrote TO ME, mile23:
>You know what else happens all over Usenet, people whining about
>what they don't want to read, instead of posting about what
>they do want to read.
>
>Put up or shut up.
>
>(jk)
See, you deliver that ultimatum as if its some sort of difficult choice. I
*know* I have nothing else to say, so I *won't say it.* I'll just go back
to lurking and trying to avoid these stupid threads that waste everyone's
time and energy.
Whee!
Edward A. Aviza
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
>Just like all the other advertisers who've ever thought
>posting their ads was the main purpose for this group.
>
>(jk)
I see we're back to the tired old advertiser rant. Wow! How creative
you aren't.
R
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 05:53:43 -0600, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
wrote:
>R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>
>> >I just posted it here as evidence.
>>
>> Of what? That you're an idiot?
>
>You don't like the evidence, do you?
That you're an idiot? By no means! I LOVE that evidence. And I
remain supremely confident that the more you post the more evident
that idiocy and knee jerk hostility will become.
By the way. Have people always been able to play you like a harp?
R
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On 11 Feb 1998 22:28:52 GMT, mly...@aol.com (MLYoung) wrote:
>>snip------
>>
>>More tomorrow.
>>
>>(jk)
>>
>>Oh, Jess, do you hafta?
>>
>>This is like an expose' of BARNEY!
>
>As someone who's been around here for years,
>I can pretty much guarantee that when Jess
>gets the bit between his teeth he's going to
>finish the race.
Especially when he's baited into racing against his own shadow.
R
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 07:14:38 -0600, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
wrote:
>R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>
>> >Well, did you see all those posts? I edited very few out that
>> >group did NOT deal with alt.tarot and jk.
>>
>> Since there are over 50 - 80 posts there per day
>
>That volume is not consistent. It goes up and down, just
>like the volume here does.
I've noticed. The volume here goes from next to nothing to nothing.
>On the days those postings were made there were very few
>non-jk and non-alt.tarot messages posted.
Yeah, right. Like I said.... show your examples in relationship to
the usual overwhelmingly non alt.tarot related postings. Otherwise
you haven't really proved anything, now have you?
>
>The point here is that you attempted to make it appear as
>if people hardly ever said an unkind thing to anyone
>about anything there.
>
>And that's simply a lie.
No, actually it's not. Since what I wrote is that the group is this
group sans the insults and the obscenities which are mostly supplied
by Mr. Karlin [especially the obscenities]. You've failed to show
otherwise which puts this sad little experiment in the same class as
your other attempts.
>
>> it sort of stands to
>> reason that you missed a few there, sport.
>
>It also stands to reason that if your original statement
>had any credibility at all:
>
>"In fact, contrary to Mr. Karlin's ego-spurred wishes,
>alt.tarot is almost never discussed in the group. And I'm happy to
>report that all the abusive language, threats, and infantile debating
>techniques of Karlin and his ilk are left at the door."
>
>---then I should not have been able to EASILY find
>scores of postings which contradict you. And not just scores
>spread out over months, but all occurring within a
>couple of days. And that kind of thing continues there
>even up till recently as you well know.
and anyone would find the above to be true. You, being the inveterate
liar that you are, would be one obvious exception.
>
>> Anyone who is actually on
>> the group knows immediately that your little example is a crock...
>
>If it were a 'little example' you might have a point. But
>it was quite lengthy, as has been 'pointed' out.
Lengthy in a group with upwards to a hundred post per day, it aint.
>
>Furthermore, it is not in any way unique, as we shall see.
>
>> but
>> nice try. Every day, day in and day out scores of posts that have
>> nothing whatsoever to do with J Karlin and his flamethrower.
>
>Or with tarot.
Hardly. Nevertheless since you don't disagree with my statement
above, I'll take it that you agree, which is nice as it stands as the
one honest item that's come out of you through all of this.
> tarot-l discussions, when they do bother to
>focus on tarot, are remarkably dull, lifeless creatures.
Well, what could compare with your writing, er...editing job on that
FAQ?
> Again,
>we'll examine that phenomenon in our study as well.
More lies to come???
>
>> Scores
>> of posts with no threats, no obscenities, no conspiracies.
>
>Same is true here.
Only ones you don't have anything to do with. Nevertheless, it stands
as at least one more point where you have to agree. That alone will
be and has been enough with the couple of dozen lurkers that have
already contacted me on how to get connected with a real tarot
discussion group.
>
>In fact, most of the people using obscenities and threats
>and conspiracies on alt.tarot are those who end up being
>recruited by tarot-l. Interesting.
Proof please. Since you never post there, you can hardly use yourself
as an example. Please be specific.
>
>> While all
>> the while little Jessie sits in the dark desperately hoping for some
>> reference to him
>
>Now, I want you to stop for just a moment and use whatever
>brain you have left after the accident and THINK.
Thanks for the invitation but your gratuitous misrepresentation of the
facts don't really make that necessary. Truly, Mr. Karlin. You don't
need me to argue with you here. A gnat with email could easily
compare the two groups and see the enormity of your lies here.
>
>If that were really true, if that's all I lived for, to see
>a bunch of morons who have to help each other collectively tie
>their shoes (one reason they are always tripping) mention
>my name, don't you think I'd have revealed all this stuff
>here a long time ago. After all that thread is a year old
>now. I really had little reason to even think about it
>(or tarot-l) till you decided to call me a liar.
Actually, I've demonstrated that you're a liar.
>
>You've fucked up over and over again here.
Actually I've been so successful here that I'm beginning to think of
myself as the Underground Railroad conductor of Internet Tarot groups.
And that's mostly due to the egregious stupidity and truly amazingly
inflated ego of you yourself. And I and all those who are not happily
discussing and reading about the real tarot on Tarot-L want to THANK
YOU!
>> >We're gonna explore just how 'nice' that fucking
>> >place really is.
>>
>> Tourette's IS such a terrible disease, isn't it?
>
>So is hypocrisy.
I know. And It seems as though you've been afflicted with both.
R
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On 11 Feb 1998 14:30:24 GMT, ggl...@aol.com (GGLWOLF) wrote:
>See R, by not getting your facts straight, you have opened the door to jk
>airing tarot-l's dirty laundry...thanks to you and your continued juvenile
>slams on jk.. Quite dissappointing.
>
>shadow
This is probably the only interesting thing to come out of this and it
is worth a comment. What's fascinating about the above statement is
that it is illustrative of the kind of twisted thinking that seems to
surround people like JK. The obvious question that would occur in a
sane universe would be "why does JK have to have "the door" opened to
him in the first place?" The answer in alt.tarot seems to be that JK
has no objective reality but has become a reflection of others.
The fact is that this is not a courtroom with rules of
cross-examination where one has to be careful of "opening the door" to
the kind of juvenile foolishness that Mr. Karlin suffers from. But
here in alt.tarot, Karlin has succeeded in creating a twisted
reflection of reality where overwhelming tactical responses are
reached for rather than the simple little dignities that individuals
in civilized society have come to expect out of thinking beings.
Nevertheless, such responses are peculiar to those who suffer from Mr.
Karlin's obvious personality disorders. What is truly amazing here is
the degree to which his behavior is accepted as the norm, even
applauded as exemplary.
This is why alt.tarot is a virtual gold mine to the student of cult
mentality and the dark side of charisma.
R
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 13:14:28 -0600, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
wrote:
>Sarah Ovenall wrote:
>>
>> (GGLWOLF) wrote:
>>
>> > See R, by not getting your facts straight, you have opened the door to jk
>> > airing tarot-l's dirty laundry...
>>
>> For me the real message of "the Tarot-L Story" is that you can't write
>> something down, post it to a hundred or more people on the Internet and
>> expect it to stay a secret. Regardless of confidentiality agreements (I
>> might have misunderstood but it sounded like Tarot-L didn't even have one
>> at the time this all happened),
>
>Right, Mary took the 'betrayal' as an opportunity to
>demand that the rules be changed in accord with her
>need to be 'protected' from the possibility that I might
>actually read something she wrote there---and worse yet,
>might talk about it here.
>
>Of course, the rule change didn't do her (or them) any
>good.
Leaving you free to indulge in the voyeurism that serves as an energy
source for much of your hostility. As a collector of fringe
personality types, I'd have to say I'm glad. Personality disorders
are sadly common on the internet, but one as inflated as yours is
still a find.
R
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
>R [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>
><snippage of parts not related to my response whatsoever>
>
>>So now responses to your group trickle away to all time lows and your
>>teeny group of sycophants are reduced to posting multiple rants on the
>>same articles for lack of any outside input whatsoever.
>
>Ok... in another thread this idea popped into Area51's head in
>response to a posting of mine.
[Text of "War and Peace" snipped for brevity]
Let's see if you can keep it pared down to one response on this one.
R
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 23:04:55 -0500, "Marc H. Gerstein" <m...@inx.net>
wrote:
>
>I thought I would chime in with a tarot-l moderator's perspective. (I am not
>speaking just for myself, not for any other moderator or any of the
>listowners.)
[rest of text stripped for brevity]
Well, that pretty neatly nips Mr. Karlin's premise in the bud, doesn't
it?
But I can't go all the way. College professors don't typically
threaten or swear at their students even were we to grant Mr. Karlin
that kind of status. And the fact remains that Mr. Karlin has chased
more people away from Tarot than he has attracted to it. All of which
makes Mr. Karlin a poor teacher and a worse advertisement.
But as an illustrative example of an extreme personality disorder, I
think he's highly useful.
R
Leihla
R [are...@ix.netcom.com] writes:
>"Marc H. Gerstein" m...@inx.net wrote:
>>
>> I thought I would chime in with a tarot-l moderator's perspective.
>> (I am not speaking just for myself, not for any other moderator
>> or any of the listowners.)
>
> [rest of text stripped for brevity]
----------
Em, nope. Rest was not snipped for 'brevity', R, it was just
ignored by you. This person gave all of us, including *you*,
some good advice:
>[...] I am aware of how candid Jess Karlin can be in
> expressing his opinions. Speaking as one who has
> some emotional distance from his candor,
[iow--a tarot-l member who's not head-rushed by some personal,
emotionally warped agenda against other authors.]
> I would advise those of you who choose to participate in
> alt.tarot to spend less time fretting about such things as
> attacks, insults, etc. and more time thinking about what
> Jess says regarding tarot. You'll learn a helluva lot. [...]
[iow--R, a moderator of the group you've gone bonkers
'in the name of...' does NOT support your slew campaign.]
> Well, that pretty neatly nips Mr. Karlin's premise in the bud,
> doesn't it?
-----------
How? By showing us there are tarot-l members who *can* keep
their heads? I think that's great. Too bad you won't listen to
reason from such a person. You also snipped this part:
> And even if you don't agree with Jess' opinions about
> tarot, when he challenges you to defend what you say,
> then take him up on it and defend your ideas.
[iow--ideas about 'tarot'...the topic you refuse to discuss.]
> It will not be a comfortable experience for you; but then
> again, you did choose to post here.
[...and post...and post....and about nothing more than your
jealousy and hatred toward people here.]
> So make it work for you. Just as those on tarot-l ought
> not expect it to give them an alt.tarot type of interaction,
> those on alt.tarot should not expect it to imitate tarot-l.
[Yup. Walk your talk. If you hate fighting, then stop doing it.
If you hate insults, then stop slinging them.]
> But I can't go all the way. College professors don't typically
> threaten or swear at their students even were we to grant Mr.
> Karlin that kind of status.
------------
If jk reminds him of somebody, then he just does. Marc never
implied they are one in the same.
Besides, I've known *plenty* of professors who threaten and
swear, up-n-down. They're confident enough to skip placating
false 'niceism' and often turn out great students...because
those grown-ups are keenly focused on the subject matter,
not on avoiding it through inventing personal 'issues' with the
messenger. The secondary lesson: Getting ON succeeds,
while over-sensitivity fails miserably and gives whining
half-hearts something convenient to derail over.
.
> And the fact remains that Mr. Karlin has chased more people
> away from Tarot than he has attracted to it.
---------------
Away from alt.tarot? So wot. This place is voluntary. Away
from tarot cards? That's not his responsibility. If some
'boo-hiss' messages would 'chase' someone from their
beloved readings...how beloved are they?
> All of which makes Mr. Karlin a poor teacher and a worse
> advertisement.
----------------
Um...I think the *last* thing he's trying to be is an advertisement.
And you don't like his teaching 'cause he gave you shitty marks.
Oh well. So has everybody else, including your tarot-l group
moderator.
> But as an illustrative example of an extreme personality disorder,
> I think he's highly useful.
>
>R
-----------------
Are you representing yourself as one who's here to 'study'
personalities, R? (Since we've established you're not here
to study tarot?) You snipped one last piece of advice from
an admirable member of your favorite group:
> Oh...one other thing. It does seem fashionable here for
> some to portray jk as some sort of self-proclaimed tarot
> god who expects everyone to think what he wants them
> to think. Although i have seen jess agressively challnege
> POVs with which he disagrees, I have not seen anything
> from him that would justify such a portrayal.
>
>The bottom line:
>
> When you're on tarot-l, act in such a way as to allow
> yourself to benefit form the unique things that tarot-l offers.
> When you're on alt.tarot, act in such a way as to allow
> yourself to benefit from the unique things that alt.tarot offers.
>
>Marc
Seconded by,
L
J. Karlin
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
> Have people always been able to play you like a harp?
If that's what you call what's happening to you, then
enjoy the music, moron.
(jk)
GGLWOLF
R wrote:
Oh but first- a time out for a message:
Um, R, do you realize that people from all sides of the tarot-l and alt.tarot
fences are wondering if you have a brain, are drugged, or just plain stupid?
Thought you might like to know that your constant inability to look at anything
related to jk with any modicum of logic or rationalization is making people
wonder...
>
>This is probably the only interesting thing to come out of this and it is
worth a comment.
Hardly a compliment from you. As I said- you've turned out to be quite a
dissappointment- poor debating techniques, infantile arguments, lack of
comprehension and no mastery of facts.
Plus this wierd obsession with jk that you have.
What's fascinating about the above statement is
>that it is illustrative of the kind of twisted thinking that seems to
>surround people like JK. The obvious question that would occur in a>sane
universe would be "why does JK have to have "the door" opened to him in the
first place?" The answer in alt.tarot seems to be that JK has no objective
reality but has become a reflection of others.
What exactly does that mean R? I mean really, you make little sense in this
paragraph. Hell R, take the responsibility for giving jk the opportunity to
post on tarot-l-- or are you sufficiently ballless enough to not even do that?
As for twisted thinking--lol at this one--don't you realize that any comment
from you now has no validity?
Has it occurred to you that the many folks here criticising you are doing so
not out of any affiliation with jk but just coz you are acting like an asshole,
and not even a smart one?
>
>The fact is that this is not a courtroom with rules of
>cross-examination where one has to be careful of "opening the door" to the
kind of juvenile foolishness that Mr. Karlin suffers from.
Huh? You know R, analysis takes place outside the courtroom too- and people
judge things all the time. Let's look at the fact that you have this
compulsion to slam jk anytime he posts--why??-- either you want the attention,
however negative (seek professional help) or you are just plain old petty and
childish.
But here in alt.tarot, Karlin has succeeded in creating a twisted
>reflection of reality where overwhelming tactical responses are
>reached for rather than the simple little dignities that individuals
>in civilized society have come to expect out of thinking beings.
You sound quite envious R.
Are you talking about yourself with this one? YOU are the one who seems to
constantly have to barrage this group with infantile remarks on jk--YOU are the
one that has little dignity or courtesy.
>Nevertheless, such responses are peculiar to those who suffer from Mr.
>Karlin's obvious personality disorders. What is truly amazing here is
>the degree to which his behavior is accepted as the norm, even
>applauded as exemplary.
Do keep up the remarks on the personality disorders ok? We are beginning to
get a clue to your mental problems- You know, there are self help groups for
folks with this kind of obsession.
>This is why alt.tarot is a virtual gold mine to the student of cult
>mentality and the dark side of charisma.
Oh this is too cute... Cult mentlity? Dark side of charisma? Oh dear- I think
Susan Vaughn is right about you having some serious issues with jk, but R- its
all about YOUR problems and obsessions...again, seek professional help. We are
just having fun with all this ya know, although as usual with this type
ofposts, the redundancy is beginning to get a bit boring, so the attention may
indeed peter out (pun intended)...what then?
Once again, dissappointed in your debating techniques and response...however
not to worry, I've lowered my expectations.
shadow
J. Karlin
MLYoung wrote:
>
> Shadow wrote:
> >
> >See R, by not getting your facts straight, you
> > have opened the door to jk
> > and your continued juvenile
> >slams on jk.. Quite dissappointing.
>
> wanted this?
I'm curious Margaret, could you quote some examples of
where this creature ever DID display the ability to
think through the potential effects of his comments.
He seems to have neatly cornered himself at every turn.
I suppose that is a kind of skill.
(jk)
J. Karlin
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 07:14:38 -0600, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
> wrote:
>
> >R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
> >
> >> >Well, did you see all those posts? I edited very few out that
> >> >group did NOT deal with alt.tarot and jk.
> >>
> >> Since there are over 50 - 80 posts there per day
> >
> >That volume is not consistent. It goes up and down, just
> >like the volume here does.
>
> I've noticed. The volume here goes from next to nothing to nothing.
Well, let's check your noticing skills, why don't we?
Deja News reports for 1997:
9,113 documents for alt.tarot [NOTE: 'documents' includes some
multi-segmented posts but then Deja also misses quite a few
postings made here]---
9,113 divided by 365 days= 24.96 posts per day.
However, if you examine this on a monthly basis you'll
see that average varies a lot, with the last few months
being way above that.
Also, this number is substantially lower than 1996 (when
we got 14,077 documents). There's no question that tarot-l
has siphoned off some posters, BUT there's also no question
that the numbers of flame wars here have declined markedly in
the past year. The people remaining here, and the new people
who come here, generally post SUBSTANCE, not whining, and the
anti-jk sentiment is all bottled up in tarot-l, where it can
fester in relative isolation.
Indeed, area51 is the most vocal idiot we've had here in
a long time and he pales in comparison to the damaging
effects some of his predecessors have had.
So, all things considered, alt.tarot is actually doing
quite well, despite tarot-l and despite r's failure to
either 'save it' from me and my 'sycophants'---and his
puerile reaction to his rejection here.
(jk)
J. Karlin
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
> Leaving you free to indulge in the voyeurism that serves as an energy
> source for much of your hostility. As a collector of fringe
> personality types,
You might check your collection---some of them appear to
have broken free and taken possession of the 'collector'.
(jk)
J. Karlin
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
> Well, that pretty neatly nips Mr. Karlin's premise in the bud, doesn't
> it?
Actually, the only thing it served to nip is any remaining
shred of credibility you possessed. He affirmed in toto
everything I said and he rejected your claim (that I was
a liar) and furthermore suggested that you shut up and look
around and realize that the 'rules' are different here.
Now, we've got plenty of evidence offered that you can't
read (with comprehension), I'd say this example pretty
much closes the case on you.
> But I can't go all the way.
I'm sure that's a relief to lambs everywhere.
> College professors don't typically
> threaten or swear at their students
Neither do I.
> even were we to grant Mr. Karlin
> that kind of status. And the fact remains that Mr. Karlin has chased
> more people away from Tarot than he has attracted to it.
No, the fact is that alt.tarot has a huge number of lurkers
(we know this because the readership here is in the thousands
all over the world---some of whom have lurked here for years),
including people from tarot-l. Lurkers have gathered over time
that if they don't have anything intelligent to offer to
the discussions here that it might be better to just
shut up and listen.
> All of which
> makes Mr. Karlin a poor teacher
With a few exceptions I don't make claims to be a teacher,
poor or otherwise, but quite a few people would disagree
with your assessment.
> and a worse advertisement.
Not all of us are concerned, as you are, with the commercial
potential of the group. We're here to talk about tarot.
> But as an illustrative example of an extreme personality disorder, I
> think he's highly useful.
So your only purpose here has descended from the 'lofty' goal
of saving the group from me to just depending upon my
'disorder' to give you some sense of personal identity.
Interesting...very interesting.
(jk)
r_[area51@ix.netcom.com]
On Thu, 12 Feb 1998 08:17:25 -0600, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
wrote:
>R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 07:14:38 -0600, "J. Karlin" <r3wi...@texas.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Well, did you see all those posts? I edited very few out that
>> >> >group did NOT deal with alt.tarot and jk.
>> >>
>> >> Since there are over 50 - 80 posts there per day
>> >
>> >That volume is not consistent. It goes up and down, just
>> >like the volume here does.
>>
>> I've noticed. The volume here goes from next to nothing to nothing.
>
>Well, let's check your noticing skills, why don't we?
>
>Deja News reports for 1997:
>
>9,113 documents for alt.tarot [NOTE: 'documents' includes some
>multi-segmented posts but then Deja also misses quite a few
>postings made here]---
>
>9,113 divided by 365 days= 24.96 posts per day.
Which is great until you realize that at best it's about half of
what's being posted in the footnote to history mailing list. Not to
mention the fact that it mostly consists of JK and his coterie
preening themselves over how they blasted some newbie.
>So, all things considered, alt.tarot is actually doing
>quite well,
for a graveyard.
R
J. Karlin
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
>
> On 11 Feb 1998 14:30:24 GMT, ggl...@aol.com (GGLWOLF) wrote:
>
> >See R, by not getting your facts straight, you have opened the door to jk
> >airing tarot-l's dirty laundry...thanks to you and your continued juvenile
> >slams on jk.. Quite dissappointing.
> >
>
> This is probably the only interesting thing to come out of this and it
> that it is illustrative of the kind of twisted thinking that seems to
> surround people like JK.
Really, and in what way does her observation indicate that
she is 'twisted'? Is it simply because she does not see
things YOUR way?
> The obvious question that would occur in a
> sane universe
Oh, so now it's the fault of the entire universe.
Could someone call the white jackets. 'r' is ready
to go.
> would be "why does JK have to have "the door" opened to
> him in the first place?"
I think that was answered for you before---I had no
pressing need or interest in discussing these things
before you decided to call me a liar and I offered
to document how that was not the case.
No, this is entirely about you and your utter lack of
good judgment.
Good god man, two lawyers (and tarot-l list members) have just
told you that you've lost the case---do you need a judge to
sentence you to 30 days of 'observation' too?
> The answer in alt.tarot seems to be that JK
> has no objective reality but has become a reflection of others.
No, the answer is that the rest of us are here to talk
about tarot and you're here to talk about ME.
> The fact is that this is not a courtroom with rules of
> cross-examination where one has to be careful of "opening the door" to
> the kind of juvenile foolishness that Mr. Karlin suffers from.
So, in other words, your mistake can be counted up as
your lack of need to be careful when accusing a 'foolish
juvenile' of being a liar?
Any of you lawyers want to take THIS GUY as a client?
> But
> here in alt.tarot, Karlin has succeeded in creating a twisted
> reflection of reality
In other words, because no one cares about your concerns,
and because everyone agrees you really OUGHT to either
discuss tarot here or shut up, it's not YOUR problem, but
that of a 'twisted reflection of reality'?
> where overwhelming tactical responses are
> reached for rather than the simple little dignities
'simple little dignities'?
Isn't that a feminine hygiene product?
> that individuals
> in civilized society have come to expect out of thinking beings.
Since they started out with Socrates I don't know why
'they' would come to expect that.
But then maybe 'they' aren't thinking beings.
> Nevertheless, such responses are peculiar to those who suffer from Mr.
> Karlin's obvious personality disorders.
This isn't about 'personality disorders', this is about
the fact you called me a liar on a point you should have
known I could support, and support in a way that would have
been very upsetting to the very people YOU claim as
'civilized'.
In other words, your puerile need to beat me (at something,
at anything) was so great you didn't contemplate the consequences
of your actions.
Sounds kind of like you need to grow up.
> What is truly amazing here is
> the degree to which his behavior is accepted as the norm, even
> applauded as exemplary.
I'm sure that's entirely my fault, and not that of
those poor deluded souls who just happen to disagree
with you.
> This is why alt.tarot is a virtual gold mine to the student of cult
> mentality and the dark side of charisma.
'r', you're so god-damned stupid you don't even realize
that my main worshipper here is YOU.
(jk)
DeltaLady
R:
I'd never say this to you over on tarot-l, but since we're not in that
world -- R, honey, it's time to put a sock in it.
Alt.tarot is Jess's sandbox. Period. Don't bother trying to foment an
insurrection -- everyone who remains here for any period of time, lurker
or participant, does so because he/she 1) respects Jess's opinions
and/or 2) kinda enjoys watching him do what he does.
Marc put it perfectly, as he so often does. So read that post again, and
then come back over to tarot-l and leave Jess alone.
DL
FP
> R
--
+========================================================================+
| Frank Perlaky Email: fper...@telerama.lm.com |
| Pittsburgh, Pa. USA Website: http://www.lm.com/~fperlaky |
+========================================================================+
J. Karlin
R, [are...@ix.netcom.com] wrote:
> >9,113 divided by 365 days= 24.96 posts per day.
>
> Which is great until you realize that at best it's about half of
> what's being posted in the footnote to history mailing list.
The difference in those numbers is 'content'.
There IS none of that on tarot-l, as we note from time to time
when their chief 'Manifestor' bothers to grace alt.tarot
with one of her theories.
You all might recall that ridiculous nonsense Mary Greer
was posting here a few weeks ago about 'matadors'.
Not only did she crawl back to tarot-l where she announced
that tarot-l was a 'more appropriate' forum for her
ideas (how true), but, as noted before, area51 was nowhere
to be found during that time. Certainly, if he cared
about his queen bee and the beating she (and by extension,
tarot-l) was taking here, he should have come to her
aid. But he didn't.
I think we all know why that is.
> >So, all things considered, alt.tarot is actually doing
> >quite well,
>
> for a graveyard.
Well, if it's a graveyard, how come you're here?
Could it have to do with the fact that a bunch of
'zombies' stole your tiny clump of self-respect, and
you can't cope with that?
(jk)
J. Karlin
Mile23 wrote:
> See, you deliver that ultimatum as if its some sort of difficult choice.
No, it's actually delivered in hopes you'll talk about
tarot.
But if you can't do that, then at least try to be entertaining,
and not so whiny.
(jk)
J. Karlin
DeltaLady wrote:
> Marc put it perfectly, as he so often does. So read that post again, and
> then come back over to tarot-l and leave Jess alone.
Kohoutek, your mommy says you have to go in for supper now.
(jk)