Moderation Questions

I knew about those all those threads even before CN mentioned them.

I actually like talking to very religious people. It's is sometimes interesting to hear how such people arrived at their beliefs and how their beliefs guide their daily lives. I am capable of having such discussions respectfully. I did so with lagtight. But lagtight was very open and clear about what he believed, and he was happy to answer questions about his beliefs.

craig's mystical opacity and his refusal to engage with discrete questions make real discussion impossible, at least for me.

The path is risky and difficult. If your faith is not strong enough to stretch and struggle, then you don’t belong on the path.

There is a feeling which I describe as the feeling that there is something more you should be doing but are not. If you know this feeling, then engage it and grab hold of it.

If you don’t know this feeling, then we don’t know each other.

I’m not going to stop trying to complete the mission, which is to get everyone into the promised land. IÂ’m incapable of doing otherwise because the journey transforms you.

Assume there are reasons for everything I do. If it feels like I’m intentionally denying you, provoking you, or frustrating you, it’s because I’m giving you what you need to progress along the path.

Rococo,

Engage me through my posts in the Religion or Philosophy subforums.

Conducting interviews, when I perceive the questions as not being productive to the mission, I quickly become disinterested.

This is wildly off-putting to me. I am not interested in a discussion that is premised on me accepting that you are what you say you are. There is a difference between respectful discussion and uncritical discussion. The former is fine. The latter does not interest me at all.

I’m gonna kink-shame this ^

I was going to snip quote that but you beat me to it.

Bro, you are not prostrating yourself before the world's greatest prophet, how the **** you expect him to react?

The church (whichever one) was divvying up internet forums to send their members to, and craig was sent to tiny internet forum 2+2.

Craig, I think they might be trying to tell you something.

Why I stopped ever playing c5

The prompts from participating in forums have been essential in articulating what I know. Like I said, this hasn’t even truly started yet.

Except you don’t ever actually articulate what you know, so… ?

You should try it with white. Loses you a couple of centipawns and the game.

The reason I play a lot of Scandi is it's really the only e4 response that white has a hard time steering me into a game that makes me want to jump into a wood chipper. I'll sac the centipawns.

It was the move that I played in our game, that you hated, detective.

e4

Best by test

Whatever you do, g2

Black just gets a solid structure but there must be some way for white to exploit it because it's not too respected at higher levels.

I am often speaking more to the subconscious when talking about this stuff.

You're not too respected at higher levels.

Yeah anyone under 2300 probably isn't going to be able to exploit too much. I'm never getting anywhere near that so I don't care. 2300s will beat me into oblivion in many ways besides me playing the Scandi.

My memory is you played e4 and I played d5, yeah? I don't hate the Scandi. I quite like it. I usually follow up exd5 with Nf6.

I played c5 with white, it was the move that ultimately lost me the game.

So you're like the explorer sent ahead of the pack of missionaries?

It's fine against the Nc3, f4 closed systems but d2_e4 plays this really ugly e4, c4 where black can get a reasonable positional clamp with Bg7, Nd4 and Nc6 but it's not really in the style of Sicilians.