#MyMeme - comment 68623

Mark de LA says ...
what happens” having nothing to do with your doing except with the illusion of sharing or your noticing or... etc.


Nicely said mark!  

Well experience is relative to the experiencer ← somtimes that confuses egos if they are not quite so sure what is them and what is not them.

There are ways to verify a share.  For example ask the other whether they experience the happening as well.  For example mark, fart and ask Tina if it happened.  If she says “yes” and you believe she said it honestly, then you have verified that both of you have shared the happening.

If you ignore responding to the base phychology of the  “i know, you don’t” transaction of this message … i think you might understand it’s content.  

When I fart in T’s presence she may eventually get the smell maybe hear the sound but she will not experience what I experience in my anus as I tighten it up to give contour to the sound she may or not hear. She can never experience all of my farting. She will always only get the external part – not mine.
Your word happening is just a smoke screen so that you can be vague about what you are talking about. 

Well I agree with all of that for the most part. I would add that happenings only appear vague because they are actually different for each person. It’s only the maps we make between us where happenings can be shared, and
map making is somewhat vague by nature. More of an art form than a science.

See About: Law of Attracting (comment 68643) and the comments that follow for the rest of the story.

Something that strikes me as odd mark, is that you advocate for art and even for art as communication. But in all your actual dealings with communication, what you actually do is not even like science, but more like accounting … about as far on the other end of the spectrum from art as one can get.

For instance, what you say above … and also, all the stuff you call #PileOfWords which I see as wordforms in art. There is a big gap in what you say you like, and what you do, IMHO.  

nathan maybe stick to your own facts & quit gossiping about others. Break the habit & contribute something new . Notice the nature of the word happen in all of its synonyms such as the major one 
occur – they seem devoid of actors (someone doing something) SVO style. 

#hmmm … seems I contribute massively. Made a big contribution of original thought right here About: Law of Attracting (comment 68643) this morning.

Seems like most of what I contribute is new too … even when I am speaking about you mark.

OTOH, just like your last comment, most of what you contribute is either cross-referencing something already there (accounting like) or just shitting on something you don’t like.

mark, i can indicate a specific happening to another just as precisely as is necessary in the context and just as precisly as the listening agent requires.  That is just science. You broke down my fart into finer detail than was necessary for the simple verification event to have happened between me and denise.  That is not me being vague.  That is not a happening being unverifiable in separate stories.  That is you being stupid.  ← that last sentence is a gross vague simplification of what is actually happening here in my story.   I am going to go with how you write the story of why you think that switching levels of details makes any real difference here.

nathan copied Seth’s meme & always contributes by touting the #LOA !!! (outside of technical shit) null

#RWG notwithstanding maybe you don’t understand English; the old XOR in logic deems that only parts of a happening (event?) will be shared.

Well yes of course … only part of a happening is  experienced as  shared.  In the case of the fart it was just the sound … which was quite loud … and the verification took place prior to the stink which i do not remember.

I am still not getting your objection. 

Incidentally you ven diagram does not indicate an XOR but rather the white intersection of an AND.  For there to have been an XOR situation the circles could not have intersected.  It is the intersections of experiences in the scattered verses of which is the topic of our discussion.

See https://www.google.com/search?q=Venn+OR&espv=2&biw=1832&bih=930&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj_yeG64IDRAhVIhlQKHbqqDzUQsAQIMQ#tbm=isch&q=Venn+exclusive+OR 

So? #LOA is my primary experience. What’s wrong with that? If I were a jock, I would be touting football or baseball or some sport. If I were a politician, I would be touting smoke and mirrors. We each “tout” what is closest to our attention, what is wrong with that?

The point here is not about the system that things are touted in, but in how authentic and new the content is. For the most part, my content is very authentic and new, well channeled, except where I need to reinforce something that was missed by another the first time around.

great reference … note how XOR is illustrated in this picture

Adios MF’s #RWG to thick to stomach; mostly a boring waste of words. null

Can’t really see how you bring right and wrong into this. I am right, and you are right. No wrong has been talked about or implied … other than your rwg labeling … but that’s my point, why the label here? Things are not either right OR wrong … there are many possible states.

It doesn’t seem like you are talking about right and wrong at all, but simply about your own personal taste and using the rwg label for things you don’t like.

Yep, false dichotomy notwithstanding, I say the absence of distinction is usually this dilemma:

Blurry lines cause blurry minds 

What can one attract in 17 seconds with a blurry mind full of blurry feelings & blurry excitement. 

the trick here is to #UnBlur the lines … to do that, sometimes we need to redraw the lines.

#TrickyBozo’s profoundness leads to confundity – eventually one might have to end up with unblurred lines, eh?

well, yes exactly … but we are all free white and 21 here … it is not a  necessary sitituation that we must unblur our lines.   Me, i like to see things clearly … hence i move to unblur where i can … but that is just me … unblurring lines through multiple realities is a real tricky business.  eh?

keep on redrawing blurred lines ?

well sure, ok, i will keep drawing lines … it is what i do. 

you will keep trying to blur my lines … apparently that is what you do.


Pretty much exactly what the average person attracts. A random life experience.

nope I do NOT blur your lines – you in your not wanting to draw distinct lines create blurred lines.

well every experience is relative to the experiencer … even the bluriness of others lines. 

there is a thing about the lines that i draw … they are negoitable … if they look blurry to you, simply ask me to go into finer detail … i think you will find me always at your service in that regard.

Yep, “every experience is relative to the experiencer” is just exercising the selfie – yet declaring again “I AM!”  truth? maybe, or maybe not.

“every experience is relative to the experiencer” is describing the situation of selfies … mine, yours, everybody’s.    Do you disagree with that ?  If so then i will be glad to go into finer detail.  I am at your service in that regard.

I do not know what you mean by “just exercising the selfie”. 

I am!   … that #RingingTrue … no maybes about it.

Restating the same thing over & over does not make it any more true. Try a retweet loop somewhere else – maybe that will help.

Depends where you draw the lines or unconceal the distinction  of what an experience IS! Yours may be all confined to your selfie experience.

#sethhmmm … got to go ship some fuck you’s.

Hmmm seems like you have found your mission in life! null

null  … mark, do you  want one?  … i will be glad to ship one to you … just go put your order in here.

#NAH – already got the message – save the shipping costs & keep it for your selfie! null