Leo

[Natasha Tori Maru]

20 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

How do you determine who is a bad faith actor with you?

I normally steer toward that belief, if there is a systemic series of interactions or replies that take my general comments in the negative. On off comments here or there are not so indicative as a pattern of behaviour is. Everyone has their own perception and understanding of what each of us say. When a user takes all my posts in bad faith, or the majority - it is usually a safe assumption there is dislike or disapproval in some way. Or they dislike my conduct.

Often my questions will be perceived as leading them or steering them toward some conclusion *I* want them to make. Like I am trapping them. When, almost all the time, my questions are to try to understand their POV.

Sometimes I fall into traps where I am angry and it is coming through in text.

I try not to post at all in that case.

How about yourself? Are you able to discern when someone is taking you in bad faith? What do you look for?

Edited 11 hours ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Joseph Maynor]

8 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

How about yourself? Are you able to discern when someone is taking you in bad faith? What do you look for?

I can sense it right away usually.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

26 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I can sense it right away usually.

I am sure there is more to deconstruct inside regarding tells you are observing. Sometimes it's quicker and cleaner to feel into how we respond.

I go toward my gut, intuition and feeling initially - then I like to try to reverse engineer my feelings by re-reading responses, assessing exactly how I respond to certain phrases, and then recall previous context. Often I cannot put to words how I come to my conclusions. Sometimes the process is confrontational and torturous. But the pain is just in the learning. I try to intellectually understand how I respond. But there is a beauty and intelligence to feeling that the mind cannot grasp, I feel.

I practice observing my responses when I am not so charged up as to be overtaken.

Edited 10 hours ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Joseph Maynor]

12 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I am sure there is more to deconstruct inside regarding tells you are observing. Sometimes it's quicker and cleaner to feel into how we respond.

I go toward my gut, intuition and feeling initially - then I like to try to reverse engineer my feelings by re-reading responses, assessing exactly how I respond to certain phrases, and then recall previous context. Often I cannot put to words how I come to my conclusions. Sometimes the process is confrontational and torturous. But the pain is just in the learning. I try to intellectually understand how I respond. But there is a beauty and intelligence to feeling that the mind cannot grasp, I feel.

I practice observing my responses when I am not so charged up as to be overtaken.

No it is really very immediate,  I'm being honest.  You can disagree which you are doing, which is your take, which I respect as your take.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@Joseph Maynor I am not sure I am being clear - I don't feel to be disagreeing. Feeling is the first instinct - I just enjoy deconstructing it. Which comes after, for myself. Maybe I am misunderstanding you, or you me. Oh well. It is in good faith nonetheless.

In fact, I am steering toward there being no separation between thought, feeling and emotion. No clean one anyway. I am totally undecided on the matter. Thoughts aren't something we can detect with any external tools. Feelings have a body response that can be detected and felt. Are they one and the same? Can they be separate?

I go back and forth.

Edited 10 hours ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[zurew]

1 hour ago, LordFall said:

My critique is strictly operational: when internal friction gets weaponized publicly, it drains the engine.

Most of the interactions with Leo are public here including the ones where he publicly disses and dismisses people (including moderators).

No private or special facts were leaked here that wasnt already avalaible to anyone who frequently uses or visits this forum.

If you think its not okay to do this kind of behavior publicly without a bunch of qualifications where you  include and outline all the positive things about Leo before you include the negative things, then you surely also have issue with Leo dissing and dismissing people here publicly (unless you think that its reasonable to apply a higher standard for moderators than what you apply to Leo)

[Natasha Tori Maru]

"You shouldn't publicly criticize or summarize a person's negative behaviour unless you first provide extensive context, qualifications, and positive traits."

Does this need to then apply to everyone? Else it becomes rules for thee, not for me... or anyone else we arbitrarily feel we should apply this ruleset to..

[zurew]

its also important to repeat that moderators are not getting paid for any of this.

I understand that you wouldnt want a person in your team (who is again there to provide service for free) to make a public thread like this about you, but I personally wouldnt want to be an employee or part of a team where the group leader can publicly diss me and I am not allowed to do the same or to raise concerns publicly about his public behavior.

[Jirh]

I feel like there's an important distinction that's not being highlighted enough. There seems to be two different, but equally valid issues here:

1. The capacity to receive genuine positive criticism.
2. The conviction that one's own truth is the universal truth for everyone.

I think both issues belong to the same category of wanting to be right while lacking proper boundaries.

You can have your truth, and I can have my truth, and everyone can have their truth, and that shouldn't be a problem. We can have these boundaries and respect each other and learn from one another in a safe healthy environment where criticism is allowed. We can practice open-mindedness and vulnerability without compromising on individuality and sovereignty. And that doesn't make us stupid, rather it adds to our psychological strength. These intellectual exchanges should feel like a doing team sports, all in good faith and fresh sporty spirit. Not like battle or narrative control wars. Ideally, we should feel like we're doing collective discovering at best, or friendly competitions at worst.

[Wilhelm44]

This whole thread was started mostly because of Leo claiming to have realized stuff that no one else has. I'm not saying that it's true, but have you considered the possibility that it might be true ?

[Wilhelm44]

On 15/03/2026 at 6:58 PM, Carl-Richard said:

I have 16030 posts on this forum. So yes.

Have you released any content to a wider public audience ?

[Yimpa]

5 hours ago, Wilhelm44 said:

Leo claiming to have realized stuff that no one else has.

You can become so conscious that you realize you are imagining Leo and all that there is is GOD.

[Wilhelm44]

3 minutes ago, Yimpa said:

You can become so conscious that you realize you are imagining Leo and all that there is is GOD.

Nice, that should solve all our problems here 

[LordFall]

8 hours ago, zurew said:

Most of the interactions with Leo are public here including the ones where he publicly disses and dismisses people (including moderators).

No private or special facts were leaked here that wasnt already avalaible to anyone who frequently uses or visits this forum.

If you think its not okay to do this kind of behavior publicly without a bunch of qualifications where you  include and outline all the positive things about Leo before you include the negative things, then you surely also have issue with Leo dissing and dismissing people here publicly (unless you think that its reasonable to apply a higher standard for moderators than what you apply to Leo)

Correcting customers and managers are usually handled differently in a business. If the point is to strip everything of authority and just put it all in the open I guess that's one way of going about it.