Remote Viewing RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion list archives. Dojo Psi dot com / info
Remote Viewing info page spacer

The RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion List Archives

Dojo Psi Library, Archival Material, Remote Viewing and Psi

RV Oasis / PJRV List Archives Menu

RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion, Yahoo Groups.
Source Location: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/
Filetype: Archive. Topic: Remote Viewing. Blocked: by topic detail.
Archive Storage: www.firedocs.com/pjrv/ and http://www.dojopsi.info/pjrv/
Archivist: Palyne PJ Gaenir (PJRV, Palyne, Firedocs RV, TKR and the Dojo Psi.)



begin archive





pjrv : Messages : 3945-3950 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/3945?) 2006/07/01 16:21:15
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#3945

From: "Jon Knowles" Date: Thu Apr 1, 2004 11:19 pm Subject: Gallery si, Mercy Street no jonknowles8 Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Hi PJ, ?I like the Gallery idea and agree it could be useful in providing some <> practice for people who would like to develop their skills. I think posting the guidelines by which the Gallery is to be run (if this hasn't already been done) and getting feedback would be a good step, and then post the revised guidelines and open it up. You and TKR have tried to accommodate pretty much all known perspectives in the Gallery, a very difficult task in this field! But regardless of how it is set up, the Gallery may receive criticism from various quarters. There are many opinions in the field as to how to structure practice sessions, as well as operational sessions, and opinions vary on practices to avoid. However, the way it looks to me is that no one group or technique has gained ascendancy with a demonstrated method and practice. The field is still developing and in ferment. As such, experimentation such as this should be welcomed, especially since it is part of an effort to help develop ties in the community and build it. With regards to the 'mercy street' taskings, though, I agree this would open a "can of worms". One concern is that, in the extreme case, unscrupulous people bent on discrediting RV and/or TKR/you, might find this a suitable target. Despite any and all disclaimers, attacks and charges (including legal) could be made. This could also be the case with the Gallery itself, but these taskings are more vulnerable, it seems to me. A recipient of "raw data" could act on the data and negative consequences could result such as psychological injury/trauma, loss of money or reputation, or worse. This in itself is a powerful argument not to open up the mercy street taskings. Or such consequences could be alleged and publicized. And we see how the mainstream media functions today where image/ impression/spin are all, and getting at the truth often requires going outside it. Lawsuits with no genuine basis in fact can tie up an individual, organization or movement for years, which is why they are filed. This may not seem that likely now, but if and when the field gains more currency and legitimacy, then those who don't want it to develop, for whatever reason, would have this as an attack venue. Of course there are other targets in the RV field, plenty of them. But not TKR on this issue, so far. Another concern is that giving people raw data without any interpretation is problematic from a "technical" point of view. Analysis is vital. Knowing your viewer is vital to fully meaningful interpretation of the data. Team effort gets the best results (notwithstanding the successes of Ingo and Joe McM.) Who knows what recipients with little or no knowledge of RV will make of this raw data? Although some people in the field are silent about it, some data is symbolic (in my experience, it routinely appears in sessions). All agree that some data is literal. I believe some data is both literal and symbolic at the same time. Then we have conceptual data. There is no agreed on taxonomy of data. Analysis of the data is a skill that takes time to develop. Giving people raw data absent all the above factors is asking for trouble, it seems to me - for them and potentially for RV itself. So I would favor opening up the Gallery for practice objectives (which are very valuable in its own right) but not opening up "mercy street". Jon Reply | Forward

#3947

From: "Glyn" Date: Fri Apr 2, 2004 12:06 pm Subject: RE: Gallery si, Mercy Street no glynis5799 Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Hello PJ, > Jon said... > With regards to the 'mercy street' taskings, though, > I agree this would open a "can of worms". I agree absolutely with what Jon says, including his concerns about analysis. > So I would favor opening up the Gallery for practice objectives > (which are very valuable in its own right) but not opening up > "mercy street". I second that. 'Mercy Street' is a wonderful thought...maybe some time in the future when the rest of it is off the ground, and the 'way' is clearer. Ultimately though it is up to you of course. Kind regards, Glyn -------------- Thanks Glyn. I've been thinking about this for awhile. I have responses and comments to Jon's post but haven't finished them yet, will post later. I happen to share all of these concerns, which is why I have been ambivalent to begin with of course (if I didn't share them, I'd just have done it as planned all along and never brought it up). Yet facing the concerns from someone else has made me able to think about the other side a bit more. And it may also be that nobody applies; or the people who apply, don't have the kind of questions we're willing to take on; so even if we opened it, it might not really get used... it's hard to say. I am leaving this issue open for at least another week to hear as many people as possible on it, and I have asked several people I know who actually operate an RV business for the public for their private thoughts as well. It is still undecided. Thanks again. Best regards, PJ Reply | Forward

#3948

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Fri Apr 2, 2004 1:45 pm Subject: (Guidelines) Re: Gallery si, Mercy Street no pjgaenir Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Howdy Jon, Thanks for the thoughtful and multi-point response, I appreciate it. Some of your points apply to RV field-wide, not just this project, and as such are doubly valuable to address. As there are many diff points to respond to, I'm breaking this into three separate topic emails.
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group-------------------- Re: You mentioned Galleries Guidelines > I think posting the guidelines by which > the Gallery is to be run (if this hasn't > already been done) and getting feedback would be > a good step, and then post the revised > guidelines and open it up. Each Gallery has an info page. As the system is automated, ~anything the system lets you do you can. There's a lot more to say about options than rules...there aren't many rules outside typical online membership stuff. There's a Q&A/FAQ in each gallery for questions. Most "Guidelines" are either already built into the programming or aren't up for debate. How things work had to be decided prior to beginning it all. As for management, folks in this field don't agree on anything, so while the project is free and open to everybody it's not a democracy. Its base rests on my "founding intent" and detail rests on the leeway found within the path of that intent, and how the staff running the project feel about the details. Guidelines always stem from intent. I'm not waiting til everybody agrees and approves... basics have been run past a ton of people on the backend already. There is 'something' for everybody, but not everything there is. That's impossible, there are so many different approaches. So, if someone wishes some aspect were diff, they can let us know, and if we think it's workable we'll add that option in. That kind of stuff can shake itself out over time I think. > There are many opinions in the field as to how to > structure practice sessions, as well as operational > sessions, and opinions vary on practices to avoid. Aaack. A perfect example of Core Intent drives Guidelines. It's not just built to allow all methods of RV (and dowsing) but all kinds of psi too, done in an RV protocol (abbrev as d-blind w/FB where possible). So it's _nobody's business_ how anybody else structures sessions, or what practices they engage in when they do. It certainly isn't OUR business how people get info. That kind of thing is not in the scope of any "set of tools" to dictate to anybody. We couldn't support all viewers and all psi if any such parameters were put on things. (We do NOT do training. TKR is about tools-info-community only.) As far as tasking goes, practice is generic. The Missions Gallery will have several diff people tasking, their own ways, so sometimes we'll like the approach, or not... we'll learn from that. Then we'll gripe about it on the MBC thread for that tasking. Missions is an area where the diversity in the field is all pouring into one place, not just for viewing but tasking too. If people don't want to deal with that, they can stick with practice. > The field is still developing and in ferment. Especially ferment. LOL! :-) > As such, experimentation such as this should be welcomed, > especially since it is part of an effort to help develop > ties in the community and build it. I agree of course, and I'm glad you support the idea. I feel the strength of the field and its future requires some degree of community, somewhere. As we are not competing for training monies, nor operational monies, nor clout as experts, there is nothing overtly offensive about the project. Free tools. Diff viewers from all over helping run it 'cause it's a good cause. How bad can it be? It'd take a major personal problem on anybody's part to pick on it, and I think that'd be obvious to anybody in the field who sees such a response. So I expect that enough serious viewers will appreciate the existence of something free and useful for viewers, to help weigh against any critique on the details. Best regards! PJ Reply | Forward

#3949

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Fri Apr 2, 2004 1:46 pm Subject: (Team Analysis) Re: Gallery si, Mercy Street no pjgaenir Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Howdy Jon, ----------- Re: You mentioned team analysis > Another concern is that giving people raw data without > any interpretation is problematic from a "technical" > point of view. Analysis is vital. Yes, I agree. But there is no open evidence that anybody in this field is really competent let alone good at RV analysis (although 'data-matching' and 'interpretative analysis', anybody can put their hand to). Everyone is re-inventing the wheel in this area and doing their own thing. If we DID analysis we'd have the argument about which of 101 opinions in the field on that topic should be the one used! And then if we picked someone to do analysis, they'd be going, "OK now, everybody needs to use the same method to make this workable!" -- which is the opposite of the whole point of TKR to begin with. > Knowing your viewer is vital to fully meaningful interpretation of the data. Team effort gets the best results Yep, I agree. But "fully meaningful" and "best results" does not preclude getting ANY meaning or SOME results without it. Sure, more confusion, too. But one chance in a million of it being useful, is one more chance than the recipient had without it. The recipients would be fully aware that it's an entry-level group and likely to have a lot of wrong and just plain confusing stuff involved. Taskings that are "large potentials" for harm wouldn't be cases to begin with. > Who knows what recipients with little or no > knowledge of RV will make of this raw data? That can never be controlled. Not with a team, even. Not with a paying client, even. You can work to educate the client, you can work to filter out the type of taskings with large potential for harm. Aside from that, one simply cannot control or even predict every other person and possible circumstance. So, you're right, it's a risk. But little is accomplished in life without some degree of risk. > Although some people in the field are silent about it, > some data is symbolic (in my experience, it routinely > appears in sessions). We've had talk about symbolic data on this list, going way back. I agree that Symbolic data taken literally is wildly wrong, and the recipient will not know what is symbolic, and they will have to deal with that. Symbolic data seems to be (my opinion only) an indicator the viewer couldn't get the concept-translation along the with symbol, or they'd know it was symbolic and what it meant when they got it. If the viewer doesn't get it during session, it's a helluva analytic+psi stretch for anybody else to anyway (though FB helps lol). I agree an analytic team would see more benefit from this type of data that appears in sessions, than a clueless client would, who not only won't benefit but will likely just be confused by it. Well, it's a bummer. Life's hard. This is, in effect, a fun viewer project which is bottom of the barrell for the clients, because it allows novice viewers, there is no one methodology required, and there is no analytic team. So it does not represent RV's potential; but since it's a nifty project for viewers, we offer it. Potential clients are told that up front. If they are still so out of other options that they want to try it anyway, well, I figure that's their choice. In the end I don't want to make decisions for the whole world, that nobody should be given it because it isn't as good as it could be. It's not. But maybe on occasion it'll be good enough. I figure only time would tell. You've voiced my own concerns Jon. So it's been really useful to me, to have them from someone else, so I can play the opposite debate role with myself. ;-) I really, really appreciate your input, and having the courage to post it publicly as well. PJ Reply | Forward

#3950

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Fri Apr 2, 2004 1:47 pm Subject: (Vulnerability) Re: Gallery si, Mercy Street no pjgaenir Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Howdy Jon, -------------------------------- Re: You mentioned vulnerability to critique and attack > regardless of how it is set up, the Gallery may receive > criticism from various quarters. Yeah, I imagine it will, and that a few folks will be in there quick looking for ANY tiny thing they can find to rant about. Oh well. :-) I think I'm knowledgeable enough about remote viewing science and methodologies "in general" that the primary people with clout in this field for criticism are unlikely to have much to engage. We are not claiming training or science. We are merely a toolset and community. I expect the most experienced and expert viewers in the field are going to really like it. Even if they don't have time/need for it themselves, I think plenty will appreciate it exists--and how cool it might have been if it existed when they'd just begun in all this. There are of course, people with little clout in RV but strident voices, who will attack much anything and anybody, because that is their nature. I'm sure anybody looking hard enough will find SOMETHING to stalk. But, I can't fix the personal problems of anybody else. I can remain aware of them, but I'll not base serious decisions solely on them. I have worked to take such things into consideration as part of planning. For example, getting an advanced target, a Missions Gallery target, or being part of the Mercy Street viewers, is such a pain in the butt to get to the FIRST time, that it'll be a miracle if we get many people very fast, as there are lots of different things to read, write some comments about (so it's recorded by the system with their IP for posterity), etc. I think most viewers will understand why this is necessary; why we can't, for example, offer advanced targets that may have violence/death, without requiring a multi-step serious effort be made by people to "hunt down and get them"--we don't just hand them out automatically. That is a big help legally. This can't entirely prevent folks wanting to sue for trauma or wrong data, but it can go a way toward it, since enough info/warnings combined with project and me having no profit to TAKE means even PI attorneys aren't going to care. > With regards to the 'mercy street' taskings, though, > I agree this would open a "can of worms". One concern is > that, in the extreme case, unscrupulous people bent on > discrediting RV and/or TKR/you, might find this a suitable > target. Scoffers might love to try something like this, and then claim that the info was wrong, or there was no target, or whatever, typical stuff scoffers do. Hopefully, a multi-step, personal contact and rather laborious process of getting something to case status would cut down on the quantity of this. The reality is that NO RV group, including all those which already exist, can 'prove' something exists if the police themselves aren't asking, and we wouldn't be doing anything super serious there (not appropriate for entry-level, non-analytic-group viewing). I guess it's possible a few rare people in the RV field might try something to discredit TKR. Which would be a little torqued, given it's free and open to them and their viewers too, but that doesn't mean nobody'd think of it. (Plenty of people destroy the parks in their own communities, for example.) But I guess if so, we'd just have to deal with that when the time came. I think enough viewers are getting sick of the political BS and bad behavior toward others in this field that they're not buying into it anymore and are seeing it for what it is. It's also possible a tiny number of people who cause trouble in the field just for the hell of it, might try something just to discredit me personally. But this has to be about what is good for the core intent and project, not me. The factors weighing against it, would need to be things that affect the viewers, or affect TKR. > Despite any and all disclaimers, attacks and charges > (including legal) could be made. This could also be the > case with the Gallery itself, but these taskings are more > vulnerable, it seems to me. [...] Lawsuits with no genuine > basis in fact can tie up an individual, organization or > movement for years, which is why they are filed. Yes, you're right. Truly, you know, the RV field is a walking example of the fact that RI has serious limits, or several people in the field would no longer be walking around. ;-) As for the lawsuits thing, people who behave this way for the sheer evil delight of it serve no purpose to our species. Since I'm not an assassin though, I'll just have to deal with it like every other mortal: take it into consideration, do everything I can to avoid the situation, be as prompt and honorable as possible in dealing with any such complaints, and hire Guido if all else fails. I'm just kidding. I think. Since there is no funding for psi science right now, and that's ignored by scoffers anyway, the only actual evidence for psi will have to come in the way of real world applications. No, I don't actually expect that an entry-level project like we're discussing is going to provide much of that. But the experimenting by doing and psyche interest involved could contribute to viewer development, and they might as a result eventually be part of providing that. If we can't study it scientifically 'cause The Science Elders prohibit funding, AND we can't study it in school 'cause gov't-academia has deemed it forbidden; and if we can't do it in the layman's field in an applications sense no matter how small, 'cause someone might get mad or try to foil our plans; Then... what? We take up knitting instead? We resign ourselves to viewing pictures till we die 'cause anything else might make someone mad? There might be problems, challenges, even dead ends. But sometime-somewhere, someone has to be proactive, make the effort. As the saying goes, you can't steal second with one foot on first. > Of course there are other targets in the RV field, > plenty of them. But not TKR on this issue, so far. Right. I think any person, and any project, who does pretty much anything of note in this field, is going to have detractors. Whether they're scoffers from outside the field, or the few free-radical-scavengers inside the field, or other viewers with different ideas, that's life. I realize that 'detractors' and 'stalkers' are two different things. But, what can be done... I feel like it isn't fair to be too afraid to try. If we try, and run into some insurmountable problem, then we'll know. The field at large will learn from our experience. > This in itself is a powerful argument not to > open up the mercy street taskings. Or such > consequences could be alleged and publicized. They could be. And that is a strong argument weighing against the positives of the idea. On the other hand, if we base our viewing and our personal work on what non-viewers or people hostile to viewers demand or how they act, then we are not really living our own lives. We are living in the shadow of their tyrant ways. I don't know that I can do that. (I grew up under tyrants; as an adult, I can't be that imprisoned.) I have to feel, in my life, that I am doing the best I can within the situations I have and that my decisions are based on what I feel is right, just and true--not on how worried I am that some psycho will try to sue me, just to ruin RV, and TKR, and me. The only actual issue with lawsuit would be TKR's operation. At this point, due to a snowball of issues that all hit in the year 2000, the IRS pretty much has claim on every dime I make until I die. Nobody else will ever--ever--see a penny of it. Including me. So I am not actually real concerned about someone suing me, especially since few attorneys will bother with a zero-dollar case. I am more concerned about harrassment to RV-TKR, one via the other. Besides. The last eight years has seen *so much* horrible stuff on the radio, on websites, including public projects and predictions and stuff that really DID mess up people's lives... TKR is not only innocent by nature, but comparatively is nearing sainthood. If all the lies and lousy intentions and hoaxes and libel/slander and more, over the last 8 years, has not done RV in already, then I tend to doubt that--even if challenged--this good-faith free toolset for RV, even with a non-crisis RV project is going to destroy it. Although such negatives are real in our world and in our field, I can't expect the worst. I've thought about this a lot overnight. I think, I have to expect the best, and deal with the worst. If I don't expect the best, I think I set a lot of reality-experience up for myself and the project. As founder and driving intent, I have to have faith. Faith that a lot of people will like it, that it will eventually be well used and appreciated, and that despite any issues that may arise from time to time, things will be fine and it will be a good thing for RV and for viewers. Fortunately I have realists to give me feedback though. ;-) PJ

// end archive

Top of Page

Remote Viewing info page spacer

RV Oasis / PJRV List Archives Menu

Dojo Psi Library, Archival Material, Remote Viewing and Psi

The RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion List Archives


Remote Viewing RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion list archives. Dojo Psi dot com / info