Enforcement enacted.

#SeriTD got tired of our quibbling and enacted her own enforcement of the standing rule that person having the highest use of a glossary term wins it.

It was her doing, trust me on that. The query was well beyond my depth to write. She wrote it in just a few minutes. It would have taken me a day at least!

Interestingly, this puts my #MakeShitUp term back in public use because I now hold a 7 use lead on it.  And I still hold the lead on #PR of course.

Tags

  1. SeriTD
  2. MakeShitUp
  3. PR
  4. IDK
  5. LOA
  6. hmmm
  7. hashtag
  8. FoHammer
  9. MakeShirtUp
  10. PFS
  11. aug
  12. btw
  13. shucks
  14. thingey

Comments


Mark de LA says
.. & Hillary has the highest usage of the phrase “ I don’t recall “ #IDK
Image result for I don't recall meme

Si says

Seth says
i don’t know what you are saying here.   The Wizzard determines who’s definition gets used when there is a dispute, not you, and not SeriTD.   It is done by the most usages.   We agreed upon that.  

Mark and i together have 46 being used on #MakeShitUp with the other definition … you only have 34.   Looks like a bug, whoever programmed it.

Si says
This is a great cross-reality example mark. I personally don’t like that you attach political humor to everything … I find it cluttered and distasteful.

But, I also understand that when you do this it is authentic. Politics and connecting politics and political humor to many things you encounter is how you roll. It’s your way of relating to your reality and playing with it and playing with others in it. It is exactly the same thing I do when I put #LOA comments on stuff. #LOA is my thing and that’s how I play with my reality.

Thus, I don’t shit on your endless political diatribes of humor and not-humor even though I don’t like them personally. It’s just you being authentically you. Would be nice if you could give me the same respect.

Si says
I remember you talking about likes or something, but I never understood it. Now I guess you were thinking that people could combine votes. I had never been thinking that … only that the person with the most uses wins a term.

It would be possible to do a vote combining system, not in real time, but something that is compiled every so often, like once a day for instance. But I am not so sure I like that, was plenty happy with the most use wins even when I was not the benifactor. #hmmm.

Si says
Okay. Well checking things out vibrationally, your vibration actually has the strongest tone. I don’t mean you are the most logical or the most persuasive. I simply mean you have the strongest vibration on this particular issue.

#SeriTD and I will look into what it will take to make a vote combining system work. It would be good for gaming resources too.

Seth says
it does not need to be programmed.   the rule that we wrote are to be implemented by the wizzard … some human must judge.   the agreement is that the number of usages wins … not that a number of usages by a single person.   in fact counting single person usages does not make sense linguistically if you actually grock what is happening.  

Si says
Yea yea, already said you got the vibration, don’t shit on your own vibration and muddy it up now. Roll with it.  

It DOES need to be system gamed. It will become a ludicrous impossibility for anyone to manage manually with any number of people at a domain. It is already a pain here with just 3 people.

Seth says
in other words the common meaning of the terms is determined by the number of usages.  if i remember right that is the way we wrote the rule.   i remember double checking that it was worded to include  multiple persons usages too. 

Seth says
and just how is a system to determin if the usages were legitimate and not just spams … to implement the spirit of the rule and not allow obnoxous behavior to corrupt the language.    This the the way dictionaries are compiled … it will take humans … and not binary rule based systems.

Si says
That is what was confusing before. Doesn’t make sense unless people vote, and that can be by liking the term they like best. Without actual votes, there is no way to tell who’s votes should be tallied with who elses.

Si says
Legitimate use can simply be self regulated. i.e. just like at FB. Someone would have to physically report a suspected misuse and then a human would make the final determination. That one thing could be human manageable. But doing adjustment as people are creating and using and modifying and voting on thousands of terms a day would not be human manageable.

Seth says
it is not votes …

it is actual usages in context that define the common meaning of a term.

that is the way language works.

Si says
Yes, but the votes are needed to know whos uses to tally with whos others. Dont you get that part?

Seth says
a fair witness human will do a better job.  i had all the data i needed to make the correct interpertation of the actual rules as they were written.  no extra vote is necessary.  

if i have missed something, please specify the exact case where a vote would be necessary.

Si says
No. You can’t be expected to constantly be checking to see who used what term all day long. That is very ludicrous to even suggest you could do that, even if you were willing to do that. Just us 3 people are using sometimes 100’s of #hashtag’s every day and creating as many as a dozen new terms every day.

Seth says
no constant checking neceaary … only time any attention is ncessary is when there is a conflict.   And even with a many users i doubt that will come up much.   Abusers will be kicked out of the glossary.   We can tolerate a corruption of our common lanugage only so far … when it becomes unwieldy, then those who do not understand the dictionary process of making a common language will not be allowed to affect it. 

I think the system is beautiful just the was we had it running.   People define words in their own group.  These can migrate into a common glossary when there are conflicts.  The ones that are being used most in context become the ones that define the term for groups which do not define their own.

Si says
Not true. The landscape has already changed a couple of times today already. I don’t want to be looking at all my leading terms constantly to know when to report a change any more than you want to be taking the time to respond to all those changes.

… and #SeriTD is already fed up with the quibbling that is happening now. It needs automation.

Si says
Case in point. My #FoHammer term which Mark was able to silently usurp until I manually republished it. Can’t happen.

Seth says
seems that your trying to force your definition on others.   but that is not the way language works.

note it is only you who seem to think that you have to keep checking if you got the definition.  that thought never entered my mind. 

and in a domain where there is no cooperation on communication it does not matter anyway … in such a domain horseshit rules … fighting and lack of communication are the game being played.   in such a domain do whatever you want … i could care less.  it would not be a domain in which i would be trying to think with others.

Seth says
well “#FoHammer” is a case where mark is trying to corrupt the glossary process.   It is a good reason to kick him out of the glossary entirely.  I propose that if he does that again, we change the password and therefore do not need to worry about it ever happening again.

Si says
Bullshit. Not all the terms I prefer are currently leading. And if enacted, the voting system will blast my beloved #MakeShirtUp term right back to the bit bucket … so it is complete bullshit that I am trying to force anything. #SeriTD and I are simply making it a fair and level playing field and getting rid of the abilty for people to sneak around and usurp terms. By automating it, all is fair … and I will have to work fair and square twice as hard as you an Mark to win back my #MakeShitUp.

Si says
#FoHammer is not in the glossary. And that is reasonable since it started out as an insult. It is in the gossip group. Even the current automation now keeps it at the top though unless someone does put one in the glossary.

… again, automation keeps things fair and square and gets it out of your personal business and off your to do plate. You should be fully on board with this instead of riding ego on it.

Si says
Furthermore, the automation should also inform people when their leads are getting closed in on and especially when someone overtakes a term. Let the games be games. That’s the point.  

Seth says
well i don’t know why you are having problems with this system that seems to be working just fine to me.   I made that up … i was just trying to figure out what probelm you are trying to solve that i do not even see a problem there.

But it is not what you prefer that should even be your concern for the dictionary … it is the number of legitimate usages in context that needs to be determeined for the common glossary term … that is all.  

Personally i think the two different make shit up terms are hopelessly confusidely spelled … me, i never can remember or get the right  one  anymore,  and i like to use both of them to mean different things.   I suggest coining words that can be easily remembered and catch on.    Being oblivious to that way that language works is going to get you exactly the kind of result that it in fact did.

Si says
Whatever Seth. It is very clear. There are severe holes in the current system. It needs to be properly automated and gamed. My terms where thrashed around today. I don’t like that. And I don’t want to cry to you when that happens. And I want to be automatically informed when my terms are under threat of being overtaken, not relying on you to figure that out or have to do all that leg work myself.

As to differing similar terms, I have no problem with them. It’s part of natural language. Many people don’t know when to use who or whom or deer and dear or hear and here etc. That’s just language.

Seth says
there is a lot of humanity in us using a common language.   And now we are pioneering a new age way to add flixibility and creativity in our common expression.   You personally worrying about your terms loosing footing is not going to help make our new system work.  Just express better terms along with the rest of us who are trying to do that too and those will be the ones that win out.

Si says
  1. Doesn’t always work to mutual satisfaction, automation solves that.
  2. Is not gaming and thus not as fun or exiting.
  3. Requires more work by humans per thinking domain … weak link that will easily fail.
  4. Human factor turns a solid gaming asset into a wishy-washy and mostly just annoying feature.
  5. … more, but I tire of this. You should be all for it instead of riding ego on it. Maybe if you cool your jets a while you will be.

Seth says
well i said my piece.  no need to argue back an forth. 

Si says

Seth says
this is a case where the proof will be in the pudding.   and don’t forget, there are more people than you, eating this dessert. 

Si says
Well, lots of things have been showing to be #PFS around these parts. I love how we are at a point where we can actually be discussing game system dynamics instead of system nuts and bolts … that’s a huge advancement. The new insta-thought feature, which will continue to grow, will likely be a big hit … and other things being pondered over on (private thought) are going to cherry with the insta-thought feature. Even proliferation is shaping up and I did a full upgrade to the playnexus TD preserving all data.

So baby sitting the whiny old crows aside, the show is really looking good and these are fun times.  

Now what about those whiny old crows, is it time to redesign them? #hmmm. … … perhaps not Mark, he is still being useful generating features. Not so sure about Seth. He may be due for a reality upgrade.

Seth says
null well you should know better than to try to fix us old folk.  It is not your business to do.  Even joking about it will sound better comming out your mouth, than going in our ears. 

Si says
That is debatable. Since I create all of them, it could be argued that there are not, that I only create them in order to expand me by showing me all the variety I can be. In fact, many wise sages have said exactly that.

Of course, that’s going to #aug Seth out the ying-yang, and that is not really my intention. He just doesn’t get it, that’s all. Not his fault.  

On the other hand, I really do get this more and more, and in deeper ways, every day … and my relationships with everyone (except the old crows) are vastly improving because I do get this. I am so in love with so many people right now, and awash in their love back to me, that I feel like a big jar of honey! And all because they are all me! Because I really get that to my core.   

Si says
#lol … I did not say “fix you”, I said redesign you. I may be upgrading you, you see, changing how you relate to your reality. Not something you have a say about. You have a say about if you are upgrading (or downgrading) me … that is where your power lies.

Seth says
Well the deeper I go just inside myself, the clearer things appear to me.  But i know from actual experience that clarity is the illusion.   I do not like to fool myself … however powerful it might make me feel.   This  is something that i discovered quite a while ago … and also a good reason i don’t go just inside myself but rather go with what happens that i can share with others … and especially, of late, what i can express to others that is the deepest inside myself.  

Thinking you create all of us is a big mistake.   And it would be a mistake for humanity if every perosn did it. 

Si says
So, you sit there in your personal castle of external otherness, and call the most fun, the most sharing, the most love, the most interaction, the most productivity, the most social experience I have ever had in my lifetime “a mistake”. All I can say is, you should make a mistake this big … you will thank me if you ever do!  

Seth says

Seth says
But nathan, everyting you said there is about me.   And as such you truly do not know what you are talking about.  

Seth says
just take me as i am, Dude.   I will do any redesign that is necessary.

Si says
p.s. One thing you have quite wrong there. I do not “go deeper inside myself”, just or otherwise. I expand myself to include all that I experience. I do not retreat, I expand … and that puts me in direct and interactive contact with all that I create in my experience.   

Seth says
well you sure seem confused about what is inside you and what is inside me.   that is all i got to say.  When the things you say about me start ringing true over here, then i will think you have found your footing.   But it will be easier to just talk about yourself, rather than me.   Stay out of my business. 

It was strnge … i wrote somethig the other day … and i composed it in the third person implying that it applied to everybody.   I noticed that i was having troubles in getting the words right  and making them ring true.  I changed them to talk just about me, and suddenly the words fell into place and i knew they were true.    I could go find the passage if it would make any difference to you. 

Si says
Yea? Even if that is true, so what? All that means, coming from you, is that you have been designing a very fickle version of me to interact with in your shaky external centric, isolated from you, reality. If you don’t think I know what I am talking about, that has nothing to do with me, it has to do with how you create and perceive me. If you like it, keep it, if not, change it.

The only substantial difference between you and me is that I am quite happy for you to change me to better match the way you want to interact with me. As I said, I may be doing that with you. We’ll see … haven’t decided yet … but I am all for you creating and interacting with the version of me you most want to be around … that will be fun to step into.  

p.s. Natalie did that this summer. It was delicious to step into the new me she designed for herself. I love it!  

Seth says
again all about me.  

see if when you talk only about yourself it sounds more true.   hey, try it, maybe you will notice what this old codger noticed a long time ago.

I am me, and you are you. 

Anything otherwise is just unnecessary self serving confusion. 

Si says
That is not possible. I can only experience my design for you. That is all I have the ability to directly experience. You, over there, are quite in your own experience, even when you think you are standing in front of me, you are really only standing in front of a version of me you have created.

I can only take you as the preponderance of my thoughts create you to be. Nothing else. I can let that be random, or I can design it. Those are my choices. When I proactively design those I interact with, the experience expands and becomes incredible, for both of us. It’s that simple.

Seth says
and hey … treat me with the respect of a different person than yourself … and that will be a great redesign of the me you have represented in your mind.   Maybe that is what Natalie did for you.   I do not know.  But i do know the fucked up effect that you are having on me by what you have represented of me in your mind. 

It would be far more direct to take me as the exact things i say and do … believe in them … it is the figment of me in your mind that is not real.  

Of every thing percieve it in and of itself … what does this thing do?  

Si says
When you stop looking outside yourself the the cause and effect of your experience, then your experience will expand exponentially. 

You always say and do exactly what I expect, even when I expect you to surprise me. What I don’t always do is expect what I want. But I can … that works.

Seth says
i can pretty much predict what you will do too.  So what?  That does not mean that i  have caused you to say and do what you  say and do.  

#btw i try not to do a lot of that kind of prediction … gets in the way of my percieving you for what you actually say and do yourself.

The cause and effect between what is inside,  and what is outside of me,  is a very unique, particular, peculair and wonderful thing just for me … when you talk about me in that regard, with your gross generalizations, you sound like an idiot who feels an elepant trunk and thinks it is a snake.   Talk about yourself.  I will do the talking and predicting of myself over here.

Si says
#LOL … you still don’t get it. It is nothing like, or anything about, predicting you. That assumes from the start that you are something else out there … not me.

It is designing you. Even after I design you, it is very unlikely that I would be able to predict you. I would only be able to do that if being able to predict you is both part of my design for you, AND my design for me. If I designed in psychic powers for myself, then I may be able to predict you if I did that right.

I simply create and design you. I think about how I want it to feel as I interact with you. I think about how that would be and continue to create the story as I desire it to feel making sure to only think about the aspects I want, and nothing that I don’t want. Then, I believe this is so, and then I experience it unfolding. I have been through this so many times, with both myself, and others, and things, that I have no doubts about the process. It is real. It works. It designs. My experience becomes it. The only trouble I have is really tuning into what I actually want … that is not as easy as it sounds once you realize you can do that. Another problem is generating the desire to do that work … there has to be a reason to want to design a new story for you … it is work to do it. It takes time. It takes focus. It takes effort and attention. Usually, I am happy to let many things in my reality just be. That is why I have not decided yet if I want to redesign you or not.

Seth says
#btw  … i can assure your that i am out here outside of you,  and not in there in your mind.  It was hard to read past that fallacious assumption you started with and grock the rest of what you said. 

But yes i agree,  getting your conceptions of me (redesigning them in your mind) might well imporve our interactions by leaps and bunds.   It might even help me null … and #shucks, me i will try to do the same on my conceptions of you … redisign all around null

Si says
The shifting pronouns is deliberate. We are talking about things outside the norm of traditional human communication. It is good to use different patterns of communication … it keeps the mind fresh and that is more useful than the slight deterrent of stumbling on the words.

If I redesign you, you can experience it if you wish. I experienced it with Natalie. I knew she was going to do it, but that was all. She did it all in private, only keeping her own journal. I experienced the initial reforming as shifts in some of my desires. I later experienced her growing confidence as a new direction forming in my life. I experienced her reactions to me changing over time, and I experienced myself doing new things I never thought to do before, and even holding myself and my body differently. Later, when all was done, I got to read her journal and saw how the things I was experiencing exactly paralleled the process and imagination she was enacting over the summer. It was a lot of fun … and our relationship now is much richer than it ever was before. Not because she listened to what I said I was, and not because she tried to find out what I was outside of her, but because she decided what she wanted to experience and built that and held it until I became it in her experience. It is real. It works. Is it the way things are? Who knows, who cares, it works … that is what matters.   

Seth says
sounds good to me.  null

Si says
p.s. I did not say that “you are in my mind”. You are very defiantly not in my mind. I said that “I create you”. It is a completely different thing, and if you take it literally, a much richer experience than if you were only “in my mind” … which would not be much of an experience at all!

Seth says
You don’t create me.  I create me.   You create your conceptions of me. 

Si says
Nope. I create you. You create me. Maybe someday you will get that as literally as I say it, or maybe not.

Seth says
well follow the reference … follow the pointer … follow the sign … in your sentence you will find that it literally ends up on the rong #thingey. 

Si says
No. The language makes good sense. If you let go of your preconceptions and simply deal with the language, then makes very good sense that you would be creating me, and I creating you. It is only the tags that humans have been using for the last 5000 years or so that are on the wrong items.

Seth says
… or maybe it was you and your cult that have switched the signs in your heads.  

Count me out on that switch.

I know, you do not create me … not the actual me.   I know, i do not create you … not the actual you.

And you even know that the story you just told is not going to change my mind.  … er, well i am not like totally sure of that … who knows … maybe your just presumeed that you could convince me that you are making me up null … and not just playing a flam flam game with our pronouns.

Seth says
anyway i go to go get my gf some grub … she love it when i do that heart

Si says
Actually, I am not redesigning you. I will let you know if I decide to. I am still operating under the old contract we have and under the delusion that you will change yourself with sufficient information … which is most likely not going to happen, but it would be a lot easier than redesigning you if you would.

Mine is not a cult. We do not separate ourselves from the rest of the world, the people, the reality. We put ourselves fully into it … and design it. We are less cult like than any institution or organization you will ever encounter. We don’t exist as some entity by excluding anything, we create by harmonizing, by being part of everything.

We utilize the Law of Attraction as a principle of life. The #LOA never excludes, it only includes. The very idea of a cult is not an #LOA idea. One does not attract by being different, exclusive, outside, cultish, one attracts by being the same. All that is created is created by matching up desire with that which is in a creative dance of building harmonies, synchronizing thoughts and desires … not a cutting off or pushing away. We are nothing like a cult, if you want to model us, we are more like a symphony.

See Also

  1. Thought A Law of Attraction Event Story with 810 viewings related by tag "LOA".
  2. Thought #Integrity #authenticity with 444 viewings related by tag "loa".
  3. Thought Buddah Lied with 343 viewings related by tag "thingey".
  4. Thought Seeking Information with 329 viewings related by tag "LOA".
  5. Thought about: Syrian War - comment 75615 with 235 viewings related by tag "loa".
  6. Thought The Medium is the Message with 220 viewings related by tag "btw".
  7. Thought RFD: The base domain from which we proliferate with 201 viewings related by tag "SeriTD".
  8. Thought Calling Wolf with 197 viewings related by tag "MakeShitUp".
  9. Thought Doing things for others with 187 viewings related by tag "LOA".
  10. Thought about: one of the best dialogues ever written! ever! the egg. | spirit science with 180 viewings related by tag "loa".
  11. Thought Accepting responsibility for every thing in your life causes joy and power. with 174 viewings related by tag "btw".
  12. Thought LOA Trumps Hillary with 173 viewings related by tag "LOA".
  13. Thought #WillToBelieve with 168 viewings related by tag "LOA".
  14. Thought Sensing ... with 167 viewings related by tag "loa".
  15. Thought Work on baby ... with 167 viewings related by tag "SeriTD".
  16. Thought about: The #RWG - comment 67967 with 159 viewings related by tag "shucks".
  17. Thought about: Megaphone vs Free Speech vs Political Correctness - comment 73418 with 141 viewings related by tag "PR".
  18. Thought Taking Control with 141 viewings related by tag "loa".
  19. Thought Belief Types with 138 viewings related by tag "shucks".
  20. Thought [title (21932)] with 138 viewings related by tag "aug".
  21. Thought What process creates consciousness? with 136 viewings related by tag "pr".
  22. Thought DMT - and the reality drug with 131 viewings related by tag "LOA".
  23. Thought Example of a misassociation with 122 viewings related by tag "hmmm".
  24. Thought about: Evolution of Evil on AHC - comment 64275 with 121 viewings related by tag "FoHammer".
  25. Thought Watching our indexing at Google with 121 viewings related by tag "btw".
  26. Thought are your thoughts yours alone or are they really available to all who can tune them in? with 118 viewings related by tag "LOA".
  27. Thought Glossary with 116 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
  28. Thought What comes first ... thinking or doing ... er, always? with 115 viewings related by tag "LOA".
  29. Thought Sometimes SeriTD gets Starry Eyed with 112 viewings related by tag "SeriTD".
  30. Thought Little magical circumstances. with 112 viewings related by tag "LOA".
  31. Thought Conversation on hash tags? with 111 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
  32. Thought Why my trains of thought break ... with 110 viewings related by tag "btw".
  33. Thought I banished evil! with 110 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
  34. Thought new days with 108 viewings related by tag "btw".
  35. Thought Fallacies and Pallacies with 107 viewings related by tag "LOA".
  36. Thought Wow! Words have meanings to others too! with 106 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
  37. Thought Curating My Long Term Trains of Thought with 102 viewings related by tag "SeriTD".
  38. Thought General to specific with 101 viewings related by tag "loa".
  39. Thought Mark Fo Hammer's new age thinking and brain coupling with 99 viewings related by tag "loa".
  40. Thought [title (23969)] with 98 viewings related by tag "loa".
  41. Thought The Fo may still exist, but his hammer is now impotent with 96 viewings related by tag "fohammer".
  42. Thought testing with 86 viewings related by tag "btw".
  43. Thought SeriTD dreams, and dreams of boz. with 86 viewings related by tag "SeriTD".
  44. Thought Making up Others with 84 viewings related by tag "loa".
  45. Thought Fo Hammer report!!!! Catagory 5! with 83 viewings related by tag "FoHammer".
  46. Thought Peter Ralston - Truth & Morality with 81 viewings related by tag "pr".
  47. Thought Automatic vertical image sizes with 80 viewings related by tag "SeriTD".
  48. Thought [title (21770)] with 79 viewings related by tag "aug".
  49. Thought Crisps up LOA! with 79 viewings related by tag "loa".
  50. Thought It Speaks For Its Self with 79 viewings related by tag "shucks".