A Better Truth - comment 55530

huh? … i don’t get that connection.

Comments


Si says
Well, not all things are a match between verses. No matter, it’s all good!  

Si says
1st generation comment forking is now active. In fact this thought is a forked comment. It's something that would take a page to explain, or you can just do it and it will be obvious ... and look at this thought and where the about link goes, and where the auto comment on the other end goes, etc!

Forked comments maintain the private/publish/muffle status of the original thought for security.

One interesting side effect is that forking a comment creates a new thought in the same group. In this case, the group seth. Seth can then move this thought elsewhere if he doesn't like it here ... but it does create opportunity for malicious spamming. Perhaps the comment should fork into the forker’s home group instead? But doing that will change who can see it according to the private/publish/muffle ownerships in the target group so then it would probably have to fork as publish even if forked from a private thought. Interesting issues here. pondering But the overall feeling of forking a comment is quite awesome and should declutter conversations a lot!

Forking “after the fact” is not yet implimented.
~ the tig – facilitating your changes to your reality

Seth says
another person can create a thought this way in the mind space that is exclusively under my control.   That breaks one of the primary assumptions of groups.  You forked the train … the fork should end up in a group in which you have access to write. 
 

Si says
Thats exactly what I was talking about above. All your comments this morning appear as if you didn't read any of the stuff I wrote about the new features but are just blindly using them and going on.

Perhaps you haven't had your Starbucks yet? smiley

Si says
What I was hoping was that you would weigh-in with your ideas about the permissions issue of forking private or muffled thoughts into another group, which readers may not be members of, rather than ramble about things I already pointed out. wink

Si says
***** Very important to read this!!! *****

I am leaning toward the idea of forking to your own group, since it is your new thought fork, but then what happens when you fork something in group fbi that is private? Then other members of group fbi won't be able to read it in my group nathan because they don't have membership there ... so it would have to be forked as public ... but then a fork suddenly appears to the rest of the world without their ability to see the original thought from which it was forked. It's a solid conundrum that suggests the fork has to stay in the origin group … and then Mark could bully by spamming peoples own groups with bullshit forks! What to do?


I guess it should fork in the same group if possible, if you have new thought rights there, and otherwise go to your own profile group as a public thought. That will solve the fbi group kind of problem at least because you would have to have write permission in fbi group to be reading private thoughts there to start off with. Hummm, yes, that will even work for muffled thoughts both ways too. I think that’s it! yes

Seth says
maybe some day you will realize that other peoples moments are not in the same sequence as yours … and not need to complain about it.

Si says
Maybe I only complain about it before I have had my coffee, which I have not had yet! devil

Seth says
nope … up in the middlle of the night … thinking about various things …  pieciing together your trains of thought realtive to yours.  work with it.
the toothless foodie mixing something up for you

Si says

Si says
Found the "sign it" I see smiley

Seth says
me either … was in a different world when your new forking feature hit.

your foking is great in its own right, once the permissions are fixed … it is just not moving comments … moving comments is what *i* need now. 

Si says
Well, it is not likely I will be creating that part of the feature now for I ranger today. You will have that part of the feature when your state of being is fully lined up with having it. I only facilitate creations in your verse, I don't actually create them, you do ... even though it appears otherwise when you are looking at things through the tiny window of a single universe. If you do the energy work, some grids or focus wheels etc, to line up your state of being with having it now, then what you want would instantly appear no matter what I experience or facilitate! smiley

Seth says
thinking off the top of my head here … i think you are over complicating this new forking feature.

you can only write where you have permission to write ← that is the primary rule that must always be followed.

so a person could fork to their own group (perhaps by default) … but more usefully be asked which group that they want to fork into in which they have permission to write.

their writing in that group is just like any other writing in that group … with the same access.  i don’t see a problem with that just being simply what it is.  if the forker  wants to change the access after it is forked, that is just like any other thought he ever wrote in that group.     the person forking should know what they are doing.

you could make the private/draft/publish start off being  the same as the original thought.

now i think ill go do my morning ceremony which always yields coffee smug
the toothless foodie mixing something up for you

Seth says
maybe could fork (by default) in the same group as the original thought, iff the person had permission to write in that group.

Si says
"you can only write where you have permission to write ← that is the primary rule that must always be followed."

Well, that is actually being adhered to in this single instance anyway. You wrote the comment I forked and the new thought gives you credit for that as the owner of the thought (notice it says by seth and only you can edit it) ... so effectively I did not just "create" something in group seth that did not exist before, I just forked it and all the permissions remained the same. The issue is more with the idea that malicious users could fork all your comments and clutter your group ... in this case. Of course, if someone else’s comment gets forked in your group, that’s a whole different thing! … and opens the idea that maybe other’s comments should get forked to the group of the person who created that comment … so that they can maintain ownership of it and others cant rewrite what they said.

And I for one don’t want to be bloody asked where to put things when I am in the middle of a good thought ... easy enough to move it later if it isn’t where I want it and mostly it will be where I want it with the good thoughts we are considering about it all now. 

Si says
Yep, you do need coffee, because that is almost word for word what I said at the end of the **** important **** comment above smiley

Seth says
after coffee …

you could fork in same group by default … except if you dont have permissions to write a thought there … in which case you could fork into your own group.   and since you always can move a thought to another group, you don’t need to ask what gorup to fork into. 

i think the fork should have the same status private/publish/draft as the thought from which it was forked. 

Doesn’t that cover everything?
the toothless foodie mixing something up for you

Seth says
now checking my sequence of notice with your sequence of creation to see what i may have missed laugh

Seth says
not true.  when i first looked at this I went … OMG, nathan has my password and wrote a though in my group.   Nobody should be able to write a though where they have no privileged to write a thought (period).

if you want to fork from my group, fork it somewhere you have prividledges to think.  then if i want to move it to my group, i will. 

incidentally i see that i wrote the comment … but i wrote it as a comment and not as a primary thought.  i get to choose what is a primary thought in my group … not some potential spammer for his own intent.

Seth says
i totally agree on no need to ask where to fork … fork by default …. then move as permitted and/or desired. yes

Seth says
or, in other words ….

I guess it should fork in the same group if possible, if you have new thought rights there, and otherwise go to your own profile group as a public thought. That will solve the fbi group kind of problem at least because you would have to have write permission in fbi group to be reading private thoughts there to start off with. Hummm, yes, that will even work for muffled thoughts both ways too. I think that’s it! yes

nathan

that works fine smug


except i think that if it keeps the same status as the orginal from which it was forked, that will be what is desired most of the time … if not, then i can be changed.

Seth says

Seth says
doesn’t declutter something that hass already been cluttered.   but yes, knowing that you can fork, should permit people who are cooperating, not to create clutter.   thing is, frequently sombody who is cluttering relative to the thought’s creator, is probably not “cooperating” with the autor.   ← so we still need the ability for the autor to move whole comment trains to another thought.

Seth says
yep, found it.

Seth says
you will create the feature when you are darn good and ready to do it …. when you do has nothing to do with “my state of being”.   you are confusing my state of being with you own will to create. 

fact is you already know i want and need it … and I have been expecting it for quite some time now …  that what you know about my state of being  … the rest is totally up to you.

← so very strange that you are not clear about that.  You are confusing what is inside you that you have control of (in this case your own will), with what you want to happen outside of yourself (in this case what you presume about my state of being)  … and projecting your confusion on to me … perhaps so that i will act in some way that you want. ← but i don’t know what the fuck you are doing … and sorry, i don’t absorb that kind of confusion from others. 

but shucks, if it takes me changing state to  get it done … i will go do it myself … tortuous that that may be for both of us.

Si says
The spamminess is the issue yes, but not the supreme beingness in your group. That doesn’t matter if it is your thoght. Besides, it is already covered by your own supreme beingness in your verse. wink

Si says
I’m not confusing anything. I do this stuff daily now. I have changed virtually anything at all this way, there are no limits I have found yet ... it works for anything as long as you are willing to go deep enough to find the operating belief.

I have no idea HOW it will happen for you and right now can’t think of a way other than me doing it. But I absolutely know that, if you change your state of being to be fully in line with having that feature today, it will HAPPEN ... it has to happen ... somehow circumstances will conspire such that it will happen. I have done this many thousands of times now ... it ALWAYS works. smiley That is why I know to the depth of my being that we each create our own verses, because this always works, even when I have no idea how it will work.

Si says
Yea yea yea, I know, but that is a whole different feature with different paths though the system. If your so hot on it, line up with it on your end, find the sticky point in your energy that you don’t know is there yet, and shift it, and it will happen. smiley

I will get to it when it blooms on my end.

Si says
***** One last thing to figure out. *****

Moving our own comments to our own group if necessary is fine, but some else’s requires our taking ownership of it, other’s thoughts cannot be in our own group. That means it will look like we wrote it and we can also rewrite it to our whim. Don’t see a hard coded way around this though.

I can add the original owner at the top to make it clear that someone else wrote this, maybe even put it in a block quote, but I can’t prevent bullies from removing or editing it after it is created in their own group. Probably will simply have to rely on the honor system for this last point.

Seth says
look at what you are saying to me, in and of itself. 

you are saying that if i align my thinking with your thinking, then you will do it.  and apparently if i do not, then you will not.   that is the essence of your communication to me.

Si says
No. I am saying that if your thinking and state of being is aligned with it happening now, it will happen now. I may, or may not, be a part of that. I have seen both happen. Sometimes the multiverse totally surprises us in where the solution comes from. But when you are aligned with it fully, the multiverse has no choice but to produce it somehow, always, no exceptions to that ... or at least I have found none and those who teach this teach that there are none. It really works, magically sometimes, mundanely others, but always, it works.

Seth says
Conversation forked to thought 21227

Seth says
you keept controrting this … it is far simpler if you just respect the hard fast rule that a person is not able to write a new thought in a group in which they have no privilege to do so.  respect that and the logic is clear and simple.  and that is what most users will expect. 

Si says
Yes it is. This final point is simply an MRE point. The code has to work as we have now decided (and is almost ready). The end result will be that if you can’t write there, then it will go into your group, and must go there owned by you, and now will be block quoted to the originator of the comment.

Mark can still edit it afterward to say what he wants it to say though, change your words. That is the honor system part that there is no way to fix in code.

Si says
Conversation forked to thought 21228