But I didn’t clarify your identity. What I did, by a slow process of elimination, may have brought me closer, in a sense, to who you might be, by pointing out who I intuit you couldn’t be.
Well, perhaps I did clarify it a bit. When they “clarify” butter, the impurities are removed from it. Words can be so wonderfully interesting, can’t they? . Take the word, “chip” for instance - both a noun and a verb, one can find one in a casino, on a floor, on the ground, in a computer and even on a shoulder.
Trying to fit the right word with the right meaning is like an exciting archaeological dig, I think. But one needs to know and understand first that there is something there hidden in the first place.
I am not sure how to respond.
Are you stalking me on ILP? Please stop, I do not like what you are doing. I do not know you and do not care to find out. Leave me alone please.
Wow - that is all that I can say to this - wow.
This is the epitome of reading too much into someone’s words, misunderstanding them and/or mistaking someone’s intentions.
Aside from that, you are a bit too supercilious for my liking. Come down from your high horse, why don’t you, before that horse throws you.
You are married in the first place. In the second place, I am not the least bit interested in you. As I said, at first I thought that you were someone I knew before. More than once, your attitiude has shown me that you are definitely NOT this man.
If you will take the time to read my posts to others, you will find that their “flavor” is more or less along the same kind of lines. I’m kind of a warm, friendly and sometimes even frisky person - it’s in my nature, TO MOST PEOPLE. But I am harmless.
But you know what, I wouldn’t want to scare you so therefore I will not respond to any more of your texts. Rest assured of that. You must love your conspiracy theories.
Oh, and one more thing - Stop Flattering Yourself!
I think the Avatar and the self can be looked at relationally, and not necessarily causationally. They can actually be relative to each other, and as one changes, the other changes with it in tandem. Therefore impressions count. Impressing one of the
other, may be taken at face value, or, not. How to test this phenomena? Testing is done not by playing the one against the other, and trying to find
significant and correlational value, where the assumption of appearance and reality could be assumed on equal footing, but as a type of verification , where doubt over correlation’s
approximate relative equality is assumed per context.
The processing of such information may be
an unconscious or a conscious process. The gut level
feeling is usually the best way to describe the conclusions people draw,until and when,a conviction develops on basis of repeated interaction. Even then,
it’s possible to deceive, and be in turn deceived.
There are numerous examples when a matrimonial
relationships turn into a battle ground of conflicts,
where often, partners become amazed that they have not actually learned to know each other. They can go on living in a world of illusion, as long as their
relationship lasts. Some people prefer it that way, for
the reason, that illusion may be more ‘real’ and ‘true’ then reality, as a mechanism to perpetuate a seemingly lusterless relationship.
I do not think people know how to deal with ambiguity. People can deal with the unknown easily but it is ambiguity that gets people confused. This ambiguity then allows a persons imagination to run wild.
It is this ambiguity which prompts people to create their illusions. But it is this same ambiguity that allows the beauty of poetry to blossom (as in the OP). We are simultaneously cursed and blessed.
Orbie, of course they have a choice. Sometimes it just takes a strong, to use your word, “shove” in the right direction to make someone aware of their illusion[s] and then a bit of practice to continue to see through their illusions as they crop up and to transcend them or dissolve them. Everything is a process.
But yes, there are some who want to live within the Matrix or better still who would like to continue to see the shadows on the wall of the cave as themselves.
True. Both views are prevalent, especially in this modern post modern world, where there are extreme reactionaries, who pine for the illusive darkness which imbued with the sense of illumination, which sought the future hope of enlightenment and hope. Now we are jaded, and cynically get lost in the middle of our confusions,narrating patterns similar to the ones on the original cave, loosing our faith. Everything is analyze le, we have become our own creators through this analysis, and we have become schizoid: we long for clarity, but are blinded by the light. We have created the illusion that we have created the light, because, when we are not to see the light of the forest, in our absence, there must not be light.
I thought you might have been some arid mathematician, without any spirit — a robot. But boy was I wrong haha good stuff, buddy. The picture is ridiculous, but funny.
CompuServe introduced the GIF format in 1987 to provide a color image format for their file downloading areas, replacing their earlier run-length encoding (RLE) format, which was black and white only. GIF became popular because it used LZW data compression, which was more efficient than the run-length encoding that formats such as PCX and MacPaint used, and fairly large images could therefore be downloaded in a reasonably short time, even with very slow modems.
The original version of the GIF format was called 87a.[1] In 1989, CompuServe released an enhanced version, called 89a,[2] which added support for animation delays (multiple images in a stream were already supported in 87a), transparent background colors, and storage of application-specific metadata. The 89a specification also supports incorporating text labels as text (not embedding them in the graphical data), but as there is little control over display fonts, this feature is not widely used. The two versions can be distinguished by looking at the first six bytes of the file (the “magic number” or “signature”), which, when interpreted as ASCII, read “GIF87a” and “GIF89a”, respectively.
GIF was one of the first two image formats commonly used on Web sites, the other being the black-and-white XBM.
The feature of storing multiple images in one file, accompanied by control data, is used extensively on the Web to produce simple animations. The optional interlacing feature, which stores image scan lines out of order in such a fashion that even a partially downloaded image was somewhat recognizable, also helped GIF’s popularity,nas a user could abort the download if it was not what was required.
may have brought me closer, in a sense, to who you might be, by pointing out who I intuit you couldn’t be.
I thought it a fine poem indeed 
