Greetings to all (The Path Without Resistance)

Actualism
,
121

Thanks for that explication @emp.

However it presumes that, ehm, Pompously Wielding Righteousness wasn’t lying when they said that their IP had been tracked (as in leaked through the VPN they use) and thus their privacy invaded.

To take it from the top, here is what Professional Woe Repeater stated as their reason for wanting to remain anonymous:

The stated effect of “anastasis” is that the victim will gradually lose their health while being unable to perceive this happening:

The stated cause of “anastasis” is given as physical phenomena, propagated physically (and notably that non-physical “psychic” phenomenon do not exist):

The stated requirements for this physical phenomenon to occur are: knowing someone’s name and/or address and/or knowing their “fixed location” to be able to be aimed at accurately:

And here is what Perceiving Wrongs Repeatedly accused me of:

Now, here is how Performative Wailing Routine started this thread:

The following is a list of countries, with their populations, that meet these criteria:

In other words, they already narrowed their location down from being one of any of the ~8.3 billion people on the planet, anywhere in the world, to one of these ~650 million or so people on the planet, in these particular countries. They were not concerned at all in this ~93% reduction of possible locations and people that they may be!

Now, when faced with a suspicious new participant to the forum, the moderator duly did a bit of research, used the forum tools for moderation and administration that are already built-in to the Discourse software, and was eventually presented with the following analysis from ipqualityscore.com (re-accessed now for the purpose of this post, and with sensitive information blacked out):

image
image694×744 76.8 KB

Which is what prompted that moderator’s initial response (emphasis added):

Evidently this person did not want their actual location and IP address known. However, intriguingly the given location by the IP quality score checker, did match their stated criteria at the start of the thread – i.e. the hidden/fake/artificial VPN location (which is not their actual location), was in one of the countries listed above.

It did appear that someone was busy constructing a persona, and taking such care to do it that they matched their VPN location to their persona location!

Thusly did it catch my eye when they started signing off using a language other than the one typical of countries from the location of the VPN above:

In other words, it did appear like this person messed up and used the wrong language than the one they were initially planning on pretending to be. Hence my off-hand sign-off on one of my messages:

To put it simply: this is not a mistake a native Portuguese-speaker would make. In other words: this is compelling evidence that they are not who they say they are, but are rather a manufactured persona.

When thus caught red-handed, they of course deflected and accused the diligent moderator of nefariousness. Yet, as is shown by the above:

  • Their actual IP address was not leaked or exposed by this moderator; rather, the location of the VPN they use is what was used to make the above assessment.
  • As their stated reasons for privacy are to avoid giving a “visible body with a fixed location and address” as well as avoiding giving “a name and address”, to which physical [sic] psychic emanations can be aimed at and reach them, the above narrowing-down from several Spanish- & Portuguese-speaking countries to merely those Portuguese-speaking ones does not even violate their stated reasons for privacy at all.

In other words, Perceived Wrongs Rocketing is making a mountain out of a molehill – all as part of their quest to cast aspersions on, denigrate, slander, & etc etc those people who are sincere and have a high standard of facticity and sensibility and clarity such as not to lead their fellow human beings astray, so as to lead people away from a better and more enjoyable life that is now eminently possible for anyone to attain.

For those still reading, the following should be noted:

  • Pettiness With Resolve never confirmed or denied they were using a VPN/proxy
  • They never confirmed or denied they were initially born in a Portuguese-speaking country
  • They never confirmed or denied they were initially born in a Spanish-speaking country
  • They never confirmed or denied they are a native Portuguese speaker
  • They never confirmed or denied they are a native Spanish speaker
  • They never confirmed or denied the location of the country they are in was accurately narrowed-down to one of those Portuguese-speaking countries

They left all this unsaid and open-ended, such as to allow people to fill in their own blanks and guesses (such as that they “forgot to turn on their VPN, and claudiu noticed that” or that their actual IP was leaked) – and to give them maximal flexibility with how they address things in the future. The less they say explicitly, the more wiggle-room they have later – a true mark of a seasoned troll if ever there was one.

My guess: they prepared the VPN location of a country speaking one language, didn’t realize this had been noted, later continued with a sign-off using the wrong language, was caught red-handed, and diverted away from this by castigating the spotter of the inconsistency.

But there is no way to know for sure with such slippery characters. Luckily they have said enough such that their own words are evidently inconsistent, self-contradictory, and non-sensical, so there is enough to go on there for anybody to accurately make up their minds about them.

Cheers,
Claudiu

3 Likes
122

Dear emp moderator,
As you can see, the real problem is not tracking an IP address but rather threatening to reveal the city where the IP address is located.
And I have repeatedly requested that I have the right to remain anonymous and yet not even the nickname I chose is being accepted… And here the real problem is not the malicious alliteration of a nickname, but the distortion of the messages of the person writing to you here.
In short, it is up to each member to evaluate my words for themselves, whose message is very simple: be your own teacher. Start with your objections. The path is always open, all that is needed is to remove the obstacles that nature and culture have created.
My life story and my experiences do not need anyone to validate them or give their opinion.
Thank you for your attention,
PWR

123

Good day, @scout.

PWR here, but you can just call me Pi.

I also investigated whether there was anyone else before Richard who went beyond Enlightenment. I mistakenly thought that U.G. Krishnamurti was that person, although the term “Calamity” he gave to the process indicated a different end. I only understood this after carefully reading the analyses that Richard made about his condition.

Transcending the “I” is useless, because immediately a “Superego” will take over the empty throne… It is vital to dissolve the synapses of the ego and the Superego at once otherwise the hallucinations will continue as in cases of Altered States of Consciousness.

For this there was only the method proposed by Richard and the Direct Route derived from it and of which Peter was the pioneer.

Now there is a third methodology which I have called the path without resistance. It worked for this author and two other members have already started applying it last month.

The path without resistance is very simple because half of the task has already been completed: on the AFT website, 99% of the objections have been clearly explained and answered and the remaining 1% is up to you to find and resolve. And this is a task that is exclusively yours, which no one else can complete for “you”.

“OBJECTION: a reason why you do not like or are opposed to something; a statement about this.” (Oxford Dictionary)

In this case, the objections to not becoming actually free by living perpetually with pure consciousness are the ones that must be removed first.

Pure consciousness: processing sensory stimuli and thoughts without the filter of a subject (a body sans identity).

Objections, with some exceptions, arise naturally from healthy minds. They are the result of critical thinking applied to a given issue. The particular objection my former intellect had was answered by a voluntary effort to investigate it. Although this investigation began with just one objection, the response to it created a new objection, and so on…

How to stop that vicious cycle?

Previously, the reserves of willpower to complete such an intellectual effort were quickly depleted (the human brain has energy limits) and it was necessary to wait for a “recharge” before continuing. And these plateau periods could last for years… Fortunately a solution was found for this problem: it is enough to unite the senses (especially touch) to induce an experience of proximity and there will never be a lack of willpower and stamina to demolish the “mindspace” and dislodge those beasts that hide there. It is this willpower that separates us from animals.

Without resistance (i.e., without objections), the wide and wondrous path to actual freedom reveals itself immediately. Abandon this free-falling single-winged plane called “Humanity” and leap into the open sky of anonymity flying safely on the two wings of native intelligence…

…And be welcome to the actual world!

124

Since the moderator added that warning above, this author will reply with another warning:

The path without resistance is indicated for those who have already tried and tested the method proposed by Richard and who are on the plateau of virtual freedom (or on the threshold of it).
Richard was the pioneer, but his method is not perfect, just as the path without resistance is not either. Everyone has the freedom to dare and try (or create!) another different approach if the previous one did not work. There is no free will, but fortunately willpower is always available to those who want to dare and go beyond where others have stopped. Anyone who still wishes to depend on the manifestation of a greater life-force (“Pure Intent” or any other higher universal power), and/or on the ready answers of third parties (actually free or not) will also be at their own risk.

Readers be advised.

125

Hi Presenting Warped Representations,

One thing you fail to grasp is that in order to properly critique a method, you do have to understand it and accurately depict it, first. Here is how you have previously (mis-)characterized the actualism method:

Yet nothing is further from the facts. Here is a proper conveying of what the actualism method is:

(The whole article is worth a read.)

And here is how you now (mis-)characterize the vital role pure intent plays:

Yet here is the role it properly plays:

The quotes at [*] are essential reading:

The newly-revised library page on pure intent may also be helpful to anyone reading along who is not fully certain what it refers to yet: Pure Intent.

The following quote also speaks to the vital role pure intent plays, while also incidentally readily defeating your “and/or on the ready answers of third parties” mis-characterization:

You are in a bit of a pickle, though. Because if you were to actually understand the method and portray it accurately, you would have no ammunition and no complaint, as the method actually works and does what it was designed to do.

Alas, I am sure this will not stop your persecution mania to attempt to goad actualists into being malicious and sorrowful and paint them as such in an effort to stop the spread of peace-on-earth in its tracks. I rate your chances of success as very low, however!

Given how jam-packed your posts are with mis-characterizations, aspersions, misinformation, smears, etc., and how it is far easier to generate such than it is to rebut it, the moderator warnings do appear to be a good time-effective way to properly frame your, ehm… “contributions” to the forum. Perhaps they ought to place more emphasis on this aspect of your writings, however.

Cheers,
Claudiu

  1. ↩︎
  2. ↩︎
4 Likes
126

Hello everyone,

The moderators have decided to take the step of permanently banning @PWR from the forum. This comes after a lengthy private correspondence between PWR and one of the mods that shows his behavior here has no sign of stopping or changing.

All banning decisions are made “on a case-by-case basis” (FAQ) with the overarching goal being to enable the forum to fulfil its purpose, which is “to further peace-on-earth via enabling sincere discussion of and experiential engagement with actualism” (Terms of Service). After stepping back it’s clear that PWR’s participation has consistently worked contrary to this purpose and is ultimately detrimental to the forum.

The overarching cause of the ban is their persistent false claiming to be actually free, first made ambiguously[1][2] and only made explicitly over 70 posts later[3]. From this self-constructed perch of false authority, they then continuously misrepresented actualism and actual freedom[4][5] and, rather than sincerely engage with the multitude of raised points, questions, and contradictions pointing to the fact that they are not actually free[6], they deflected by labeling good-faith questioning and fact-checking as “censorship” (#93, #95) and attempts to “dogmatize” (#60), refusing to provide evidence for their claims[7], resorting to condescension[8], and engaging in semantic games[9]. This refusal to engage sincerely and productively derails productive discussion and works against the forum’s purpose.

They further made serious and unfounded accusations against moderators, claiming an “invasion of privacy” and “threat of revealing my private address and compromising my security” (#95) via tracking their IP address. A clarifying post (#121) showed this to be completely false, with no private information revealed or threatened to be revealed.

Their conduct even crossed the line into unacceptable abuse when they compared actualists taking due and appropriate care with facts, definitions, accuracy, and a sensible approach to actualism with “a sophomoric fundamentalist wing ready to engineer the next holocaust.” (#99) This type of rhetoric is grossly offensive and has no place in a sincere discussion forum dedicated to peace-on-earth.

In short, from the counterfeit authority of masquerading as actually free, they promoted a self-proclaimed superior[10][11] yet contradictory[12] and ill-defined method[13][14][15] replete with unsubstantiated claims[16], all the while denigrating the actualism method[17][18] and those practicing it [19][20][21][22][23][24] whilst also engaging in provocative and often abusive communication (as detailed above).

This conduct is incompatible with the forum’s goal of fostering the sincere exploration and experiential putting of actualism into practice. That they have been doing this while simultaneously claiming not to be[25][26][27][28][29] is just a demonstration of the depths of their insincerity. As the FAQ states under Moderation guidelines: “However if somebody is simply intent on “disproving” actualism and/or has no interest of applying it to their own life, to the detriment of the other forum-goers, we will eventually suggest they spend their time elsewhere.”

After taking all the above into consideration and putting it into perspective, the decision was an easy one.

Although the moderators do not want to set themselves up to be an arbiter in general of who is actually free or not, in this particular case there is ample evidence that PWR is neither actually free, nor virtually free, nor even has had any experience of actuality in a PCE that they can currently recall clearly. This whole episode can be taken as a case study of how to approach somebody claiming to be actually free and what are the ways to find out that they are not, whether it stems from genuine confusion or malicious intent.

Best regards,
Claudiu & the mod team

P.S. Although the above is sufficient for a ban decision on its own, a few points are worth voicing with regards to the theory that PWR is Chaz/Sky/Skye/lexej etc. (see Richard’s confutation for context), as to be forewarned is to be forearmed:

  1. Chaz did come onto this forum in March 2023 as the sock-puppet @lexej (as exposed by @rick in 817/#9, so we know he is still recently active.

  2. Chaz is capable of orchestrating long-term sock-puppet campaigns, as he admitted to in 2001:

  3. The moderators have uncovered some evidence that Chaz has pre-seeded the forum with various latent sock-puppet accounts that he can press into service when needed.

As taking advantage of a ban such as this to play the victim and stir chaos is very much in line with Chaz’s modus operandi[+], this note is merely presented here such that people can be on the lookout for accounts without much participation here starting to post and vent about this moderation decision. This note alone ought to be sufficient to forestall any such campaign from gaining traction, hence the reason it is being included.

[+]: For example, in October of 2014, on the Yahoo! actualfreedom group, Chaz, posting as synaptic.cleft, spoke out viciously against then-moderator Claudiu’s decision to “turn this place into a forum dedicated “to those in alignment to what is actual”” such as to “disallow people who criticize with a demonstrable history of having no intention of being in alignment to what is actual” such as by doing “nothing but find imagined faults, ignore responses, refuse to follow logic and reason, simply deny facts without any evidence” (#18121), on top of the obvious outright verbal abuse, and insults and such that was prevalent at the time, noting that if someone chooses “to repeatedly troll and derail discussions, then it has consequences, and there’s no reason for us to have to put up with it or allow it” (#18126). Here is a handful of Chaz’s replies at the time:

  1. ↩︎
  2. ↩︎
  3. ↩︎

  4. For example, they falsely equated pure intent with personal willpower, stating ““Pure” intent… what is the reason for such a superfluous adjective? If the intent is not pure, then it is not intent. And no intent arises when there is not enough willpower to sustain it. Intention and willpower, two sides of the same coin.” (#95).

    When this was pointed out in no uncertain terms (#96, #98), they went even further, dismissing definitions and descriptions of the actually-existing and vital-to-success pure intent as "dogma", "one of the sacred cows of [Richard’s] actualism" and mere “poetic metaphors” (#99). ↩︎

  5. As another example, they misrepresented the qualities of the actual world, calling the term “universe” an “insidious term” comparable to “God,” (#99) and denied its fundamental, experientially-ascertained-by-those-genuinely-free characteristics like infinitude and stillness: “There is no infinite matter and much less immobility/stillness in the universe…”. (#119) ↩︎

  6. ↩︎
  7. ↩︎
  8. ↩︎
  9. ↩︎
  10. ↩︎

  11. Implying they have “better explanations” and that any rational person would follow their method and not the actualism method:

    ↩︎

  12. it is called a path “without resistance” and yet there is “resistance to be overcome” (#72) ↩︎

  13. ↩︎
  14. ↩︎
  15. ↩︎
  16. ↩︎

  17. Grossly mischaracterizing the actualism method – the consistent enjoyment and appreciation of this moment of being alive – as “a frantic search for happiness”, viz.:

    ↩︎

  18. Calling virtual freedom a “no man’s land” and “plateau”, viz.:

    ↩︎
  19. ↩︎

  20. Calling virtually free people intellectually poor and incapable of/uninterested in independent critical thought and taking pride in being dysfunctional, viz.:

    ↩︎

  21. Impugning actualists as distorting their words and being biased (ie engaging in bad faith), viz.:

    ↩︎

  22. Denigrating actualists as having a lack of intellectual integrity:

    ↩︎

  23. Maligning actualists as trying to prevent and hinder the spread of peace-on-earth:

    ↩︎

  24. Slandering actualists as bullying and being malicious, viz.:

    ↩︎
  25. ↩︎
  26. ↩︎
  27. ↩︎
  28. ↩︎
  29. ↩︎
4 Likes