The End of Indecision

Hey thanks for that. ‘No one’.

I offered dialogue. Perhaps that’s not actually what you want?

It would also be worth bearing in mind a few basic practical factors. This has traditionally been a one-author/in-depth site, and even high-traffic, indexed sites of that kind tend to have a very low reader>responder ratio. Participation is also very much about momentum, and people come and go as their interests and schedules motivate, unless there’s really a shared and mutually felt drive/culture which has already developed over time as a prerequisite to more more structured engagement. You’re kind of throwing up an unformed, unclear challenge to the few people who you’ve personally linked here in accordance with your assumptions that they might be suitable to engaging, or who’ve come here via your blogging comments. You getting little response really isn’t surprising, or personal. It’s a product of how you’re doing things, and what you don’t know.

If you wanted this– really wanted to make a collaboration or interaction out of whatever it is you’re doing here– you could make it happen. But you’d have to hunt harder. You’d have to set things up to give people a clear route in to what you’re doing, a clear route in to participation that would increase over time, and you’d also have to open it all up a lot more, and be prepared to take a lot more contradiction/flak/irrelevant noise. That’s the price of finding the few, very rare, competents who can relevantly contribute to the beginning of some kind of original social action.

You haven’t structured things like that partly because you’re stuck in the first stage of your Peaking cycle. You’re living out a very distinct cognitive story unconsciously, and this site as a whole excessively protects that story from being shaken. From being thrown off the scent it’s chasing, which you haven’t yet clarified fully enough to yourself or others to really make it groundable. Something others could walk on and build with, independent of the flux of your personal oscillations. (Essentially: not a blog).

Everything that’s happening has a sense to it, and isn’t tragic, and doesn’t actually mean anything fatal for the story you were trying to initiate here. You’ve realised things have come to a head and that it’s really time for another phase. But you’re doing it all wrong. What you have to now do– if you actually want this– is ground your experience and insight into something designed for the next phase. Just throwing all your shorthand, personal and self-referential research notes at people and then saying ‘fuck you I quit!’ when they don’t know what to say is nobody’s failure but your own.

Almost everything you do is about initiating a particular kind of social story. Fishing in a very particular perceptual field, and then trying to get others to live the patterns you find there. Most people are not like this (they are built for other stories), and those who are have a very distinct and predictable and complex and manipulable behavioural/cognitive structure. You are lost in yours. You don’t know yourself in this regard, and your insights/attempts get lost in long-term holdups in that process you’re built for. You’re reacting to, held up by, and trying to form the fluctuations of an ordered energy whose native language you’re not versed in. You’re getting everything in fractured, hand-me-down translation, and feeding everything up by a jittery uplink.

I offered to explain to you about that (all I can do in this context is reach to verbalise relevant parts what’s actually a whole-system and mathematical way of thinking), and about how it related to my interpretation of some of the personal research you’ve undertaken here. How my attempts at that research led onto it. Tbh that seems to me like a pretty good turnout.

Again, it’s all about how much you actually want this, how much you actually believe in the worth of what you’re saying, and in exploring it, dialoguing about it, living it and evolving it. That is the only thing at issue here, as I see it. If all of that’s unclear, that’s, again, about you, not your readers.

That I believe in it is why I’ve chosen the course that I’ve taken.

I won’t allow my personal needs and feelings to compromise what I believe to be right — that’s just allowing one set of them to dominate another.

I prefer to acknowledge both. Without that, I lose part of my humanity, and I would no longer be the person that people believe me to be.

Why give them an illusion regarding who I am, when the point is to do the opposite?

(Edit: WRT “no one has answered,” it should have been readily apparent, given that other people have commented here over time, that I was referring to something else.)

There’s also the even more personal side, which deserves to be said separately.

I’m trans-.

Insisting that I act in certain ways sets me at war against myself.

I’m not asking for a response from anyone in particular. Not from anyone in any position, not from someone who necessarily represents — not some, not all. It’s not necessary that they represent anyone other than themselves.

Just a response.

Voice to voice, even just to say “hello.” From just one person.

Is that really too high of a price to ask?

I mean… I’m patient, when I can be. But patience, in addition to its pain, also tends to erode hope. There are things that can renew it. But sometimes, it’s a battle to hold on.