Help !!

[Kunga]

I have high anxiety because of my horrible behavior offending people !
I just say whats on my mind without thinking much.
As a result I can't sleep at night, and I worry all day....
This has taught me a lesson to shut the fuck up.

I just want to make a public apology to:

Donna
Tomas
Nat (@ KIR)
Elizabeth
David Quinn
and anyone else I've offended.

Yeah ...I know it's to make me feel better too....I'm only human. But I am truly sorry, and this will be my last post hopefully for a very long time (at least until I can refrain from my disturbing behavior pattern). I will only post peacefully if I do post anything. I'm tired of
making trouble for myself and others....tired of bad energy....we need more peace & love everywhere....right ?

_/\_


Thankyou

Peace

_/\_

[Dennis Mahar]

I have high anxiety because of my horrible behavior offending people !

looks more like a savvy bullshit detector that gets to the nub of things.
don't doubt your wisdom.
high anxiety is optional.

You'd be no good at a Masquerade Party,
you'd be trying to rip the masks off!

[cousinbasil]

And I'm sure Tomas, for one, deserved it.

[GodsDaughter1]

Thank you Kunga, but, no need to apologize otherwise I'll have to also. We're only human Kunga and we're women, it seems we need to apologize occasionally because our behaviour is attrocious, strangely enough men seem to know to behave themselves so they have no need to apologize, it makes me wish I were a man.

We do have a conscience otherwise we wouldn't care enough to apologize, but, because we do care, we do the right thing.

Thanks for being a big person Kunga, you're doing good!

[Dan Rowden]

Kunga,

Two observations:

1) You do need to think a little more before expressing yourself (and to some extent a little more in terms of the manner); 2) sometimes, however, people are more sensitive than they need or ought to be. You can't necessarily control that and it isn't necessarily your fault. Nat and Elizabeth do not require an apology at KIR. What you need to appreciate with regard to that interchange is that your thinking was astray. Specifically, your perception of conventional society and psychobiology is way too romantic.

[Unidian]

No, we do not "require" an apology, but we do appreciate one. Being trashed in that manner is tiresome.

And she did, as others pointed out, totally miss the point of the OP at KIR.

Having said that, we are skeptical of Kunga's ability to refrain from ugly behavior. The evidence suggests one would be unwise to bet the farm on it. There is a well-established pattern with her that is unlikely to change, short of her investing truly tremendous effort and/or the occurrence of a psychological miracle.

[Dan Rowden]

I too think she struggles at times with her self control. And suggesting to a group with whom you disagree to "shut the fuck up" is highly disagreeable. Not sure, however, how her being banned wasn't an equivalent act of shutting someone the fuck up for expressing a different viewpoint.

[Kunga]

Nat,

you are greedy, shallow, self-absorbed, thoughtless, of limited intelligence, narrow-minded, cruel, gullible, mean-spirited, and just outright shitty in any number of ways.

A=A


:)


I can also print out another one of your rants showing who's the one with the "ugly" behavior.
But I will spare you the embarassment.

[Dennis Mahar]

Your stand against his corruption is authentic and valid Kunga.
He fails to be what he requires of others.
An utter braggart.
Deep down he knows his inauthenticity.
His one shot is to admit it,
to come clean.
To start afresh.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

I too think she struggles at times with her self control. And suggesting to a group with whom you disagree to "shut the fuck up" is highly disagreeable. Not sure, however, how her being banned wasn't an equivalent act of shutting someone the fuck up for expressing a different viewpoint.

She, and anyone else, is perfectly welcome to post a different viewpoint - but there is a time, a place, and a method of doing so - and then there is trolling. Kunga/India has established a pattern of attacking Nat, and I can't blame him for getting tired of being attacked and speaking up about it.

In her most recent attack on Nat and by a distant second on me, the shrapnel of her attack also hit other members of the board and offended the sensibilities of still more members. KIR, being a board that recognizes emotions are inextricable from most people and can be a valuable part of life for many people, must maintain the board as a safe place to post and read. Her attacks were likely allowed to go on much longer because the attacks were against administrators rather than non-admin members, but enough is enough - and how long it takes to get to "enough" gets shorter as her pattern of "attack and apologize" gets longer.

I deliberated carefully to be above and beyond sure that my decision was for the best of her and the board and not a personal retaliation, and chose a 3 day ban for India because it generally takes her between 2 days and a week to settle down, but a week long ban would likely have irritated her more rather than just give her a cooling off period. She tends to post a bunch of hateful stuff and then regret it later, so I likely saved her some regrets.

I prefer free speech even when people post things far uglier than anything Kunga/India has posted because I prefer to have wrong or ugly thoughts confronted, logically and reasonably debated, and refuted. Sometimes people get into a thinking rut where they are too focused on what they are trying to say, therefore making it impossible for them to hear the other side. Sometimes that rut has to be stopped for the person with a forced break. The first clue that someone is in a thinking rut is if they only tangentially respond to what was said to begin with. The second clue is when they use "appeal to emotion" and under that fallacy I will include "intentionally pushing what is known to be hot buttons in the other party." India started off with all of that, and rode the "appeal to emotion" train all the way through. Actually, India's posts in this thread are educational to me in analyzing how emotional manipulation can impact an argument, even against seasoned debaters.

A strong belief in the value of free speech does not preclude a sense of safety on your own territory. One does not have to tolerate verbal abuse in order to support free speech. In general, if a person does not want to hear what someone else is saying, the person can go away - however if the person who does not want to hear the rancour being spewed at them and they have more right to be at a particular location (like your own message board, your military son's funeral, or your per-arranged speech/performance) then it seems reasonable to me if the agitator is ejected from the otherwise peaceful assembly (like India from KIR, Westboro Baptist Church from funerals, or an unruly audience member from an event).

We did not tell her to STFU, even by banning. We merely told here "not here, not like that anymore."

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

Your stand against his corruption is authentic and valid Kunga.
He fails to be what he requires of others.
An utter braggart.
Deep down he knows his inauthenticity.
His one shot is to admit it,
to come clean.
To start afresh.

He knows that he is not perfect, and has admitted in multiple times and multiple places that he is far from perfect - but being imperfect one's self does not disqualify one from pointing at the moon from time to time.

[Unidian]

Who the hell is "Dennis Mahar," anyway? He appears to be some insignificant chickenshit who always seems to have a lot of negative things to say about me and/or KIR, but never on my board where he knows I'd stomp him. LOL.

And I see India's "apology" lasted about as long as I figured it would. Disappointingly unsurprising.

The next episode of nasty behavior at KIR will result in your permanent ban and relegation to places like... well... this.

[Kunga]

Elizabeth wrote:

She, and anyone else, is perfectly welcome to post a different viewpoint - but there is a time, a place, and a method of doing so - and then there is trolling. Kunga/India has established a pattern of attacking Nat, and I can't blame him for getting tired of being attacked and speaking up about it.

I only get defensive when I am provolked. I defend myself instead of getting the shit beat out of me.

I wrote a few responses before this one...this one is toned down and more reserved. I saved the others as "drafts" if you'd like to see the difference.

I am truely sick of arguing with you .

A wise person would be silent .

[Dennis Mahar]

mind loses way,
needs correction.
monkey wants Zen,
monkey gets Zen,
monkey squeals.

[Unidian]

Kunga,

We are truly sick of arguing with you as well. You have done fantastic things for both of us, and we have expressed our appreciation repeatedly. But that's all in the distant past now. These days, you just keep attacking us and frankly, we don't understand why. What's wrong with you? Really. What is your problem? Just stop attacking us and you'll be fine - but I won't hold my breath. For some reason (God knows why) you went from having a silly crush on me to hating me. And apparently you now hate E as well for marrying me, or for some other unknown reason. We don't understand it, and we are hurt. Why are you so against us? If we weren't your friends (at least in the past), we wouldn't care. But we do.

So what say you?

[Kunga]

Nat,

It seems the problem started when I started defending people you considered trolls.
My crush on you only lasted a few weeks (brought on by your guitar playing) lol
I have absolutely no jealousy in me , but I was barely over the shock of you leaving one relationship & starting another & then the surprise of the sudden marriage ...you've been through a lot of change and drama the past 1/2 year...I hope for the good.
I don't argue with anyone except people at KIR. Otherwise my life is peaceful. Maybe I needed some excitement ? lol

I am done with arguing. I will find another way to express my anger & fight for justice. It has taught me a lesson. I don't argue with people in real life, I just avoid them...and after a while will resume communication peacefully...discussing things that bother me in a peaceful manner.

I have apologized to Elizabeth for my ignorant comment (why can't she just forget about her PTSD). I guess why I said that was because I forgot about my BPD, as a matter of fact I've never been treated for it...it is out of sight and out of mind......and I get on with my life without it. Yeah, life hasn't been "normal" for me...but I have survived due to my creativity and romantic thinking...lol
Also (although I am far from a "good" Buddhist) it has literally saved my life... many times.

I am inspired by the Mahasiddas...who were/are far from normal.


Peace

[GodsDaughter1]

Well, it sounds like you two have settled this, that's great. It's through the use of honesty that concludes an ending to this strife.

Honest communication is a feat for everyone, good for all of you!

[Kunga]

Thank you GodsDaughter,

Yes, being honest is the first step in communicating effectively. I think I get angry when someone is lying , (because I instinctively ((subconsciously)) know the truth.)

BTW...you've been sounding a lot better yourself, (more honest/natural), relaxed.

[Dennis Mahar]

mind loses the plot at times doesn't it?
restoration of sanity is always/already present at hand fortunately.
a conversation has transformative power.
it's where transformation shows up for the most part.

One Mind
experiencing squabbling between the parts of itself
as a surface activity,
depends on the misconception of a separate I and a separate We.

A marraige is basically 'a fuckin' about with the delusion of a separate We'.
It depends on mental imputation, make-believe, mental trick.
a trade-off to get relief from the delusion of a separate I.
out of the frying pan into the fire.
unless understood,
interdependance gets lost in co-dependance.