Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

50002Re: Anthroposophical Guidelines & New Group

Expand Messages
  • elfuncle
    Apr 6, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      For the record: I was basically done forever with Yahoo Groups years ago, after I decided to quit discussions. and because activities had sunk to an all-time low, I suggested closing it. But the others wouldn't have it, especially not Dottie, who has long since left this forum and is now extremely active on Facebook, where she has started half a dozen groups and the number is growing. I've continued to contribute nevertheless, primarily as a courtesy to Frank, who didn't want it closed either. As far as I'm concerned, he can take over this forum with its 400 subscriptions, either dead or lurkers, and with new members coming in all the time.

      I like Facebook a lot better, because each individual may freely choose whom to include and whom to exclude (through the blocking system) without having to make a group decision of it with votes taken and endless discussions to follow, and Frank opting out of management at least twice. With Dottie also completely gone, I owe responsibility for this playground to nobody, but before I'm completely out of here, I want to make it clear that I take absolutely no responsibility for what happens. I remember what happened to your last Yahoo Group, Frank; it was shipwrecked by Adorable Darlings.

      And precisely because I've had it with Yahoo Groups and every other online discussion forum since the usenets of the nineties, I'm not signing up anywhere else, period. Terry Boardman got me onboard a website project of his a while ago, but I've done nothing with it. Small, private, closed forums may be ok, but anything in the public arena should be done through blogs, I think, or through excellent publications like Frank's and Jo Ann's SCR.

      There is a doomsday button on this Yahoo Group, but because of its history and shared management, it should require at least five senior people to consent to pushing it, I think. I'm sick and tired of sitting in a glass house with Adorable Darlings and Sugar Cherubs watching your every move so you can't share anything of a personal nature -- something I don't do anywhere except occasionally in private emails, based upon long experience.


      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Thomas Smith" <fts.trasla@...> wrote:
      > Au revoir and Hello:
      > This group - Anthroposophy_Tomorrow - has become obsessed with
      > criticizing the members of the Waldorf Critics group. And there are only
      > 3 regular Participants: Ted, Tarjei and me. So it could be that the
      > obsession has caused rejection and therefore hesitation on the part of
      > the other members to participate. As the group has no moderator - as far
      > as I know - or too many moderators, whatever, there is nothing to be
      > done except start a new group. This may open a window for some fresh and
      > real discussion about anthroposophical topics. This has now been done.
      > The group's name is "Steiner12 or Anthroposophy 101". I am the
      > moderator. The description on the home page reads as follows:
      > This group is meant to be the reincarnation of "Steiner 98" - a long
      > defunct discussion group with anthroposophy as its point of departure.
      > It seems fitting that it lives again 14 years after its first
      > birth-year.
      > "Anthroposophy is a path of knowledge which would guide the spiritual in
      > the human being to the spiritual in the cosmos. It manifests as a
      > necessity of the heart and feeling. It must find its justification in
      > being able to satisfy this need. Only those who find in anthroposophy
      > what they seek in this respect can appreciate it. Therefore only those
      > who feel certain questions about the nature of man and the world as
      > basic necessities of life, like hunger and thirst, can be
      > anthroposophists.
      > "Anthroposophy imparts knowledge obtained by spiritual means. Yet it
      > only does this because everyday life and a science dependent only upon
      > sense perception and intellectual activity lead to a boundary where the
      > human being's soul must wither if it cannot cross. This everyday
      > life and this science do not lead to the boundary in a way that one is
      > prevented from crossing it; rather at this boundary of sense perception
      > the view of the spiritual world is revealed by the soul itself."
      > From "Anthroposophical Guidelines" by Rudolf Steiner
      > Whoever may be listening is invited to join. I would be especially
      > interested in seeing some of the old and hoary Steiner 98 guard.
      > (Conspiracy theorists and neo-Nazis are requested to keep their
      > distance.) The "Anthroposophical Guidelines" will be continued there. To
      > join, go to " groups.yahoo.com/group/steiner12 ".
      > Kind regards,
      > Frank

    • Show all 8 messages in this topic