RE: VMs: Finding

["GC" <glenclaston@xxxxxxxxx>]

Jorge Aveleira wrote:
>
> You seem to have deliberatley ignored all the
> rationalization and
> justification that accompanies my argument and also my
> implicit suggestion
> for being careful about "not seeing the forest for the
> trees" when examining
> ornamented interpretations of minutiae.

Jorge, welcome to the list!

I'm certain Nick didn't mean anything by it.  I did want to let
you know however, that being ignored, having the subject changed,
or just being totally misinterpreted is part of the fun of the VMS
list.  It's not really being ignored - rather it is the fact that
there are multiple interpretations for many of the things seen in
the VMS, and even if you're right, you have to go a great distance
to convince others of this fact. If you've got a good idea, it
helps to hammer away at it from different angles and do your best
to relate that to context of the rest of the manuscript.

Don't take the occasional silence of the list to mean that you are
being ignored, as everyone is valuable here.  I'd like very much
to make comment on your theory, but I know so little about that
aspect of cabbalism that I am not qualified to comment one way or
the other.  Many of us do make mental note of a person's theories
for future reference, so in that sense all input is valuable
input.

Welcome, and I look forward to hearing more of your theory in the
future!

GC

______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list