Posts by Ryan Wilson2

Anita Moorjani decided she’d rather stack her own cash than share what she has with others.

Rules aren't applied with perfect consistency, which is frankly a normal part of human nature.

Those who actually contribute meaningful substance to the discussions are free to toss in a joke or go off on a tangent every now and then... and they won't be banned or penalized. However, if someone’s entire presence here consists of nothing but mockery and trolling, they can expect their posts to be deleted and their accounts suspended.

Your final sentence reveals everything I need to know about your attitude toward this subforum. People hold all sorts of things close to their hearts—things that might seem trivial or nonsensical to an outsider. For some, it’s tarot and magic; for others, it’s astrology. Some find purpose in starting a family, some live for the stadium atmosphere during a football game, some are die-hard Republicans, others are staunch Democrats, some have unwavering faith in Jesus, and some look to NASA for answers...

One-liner jokes and cheap little gags used to prop up tired, stale topics are being wiped away—and sometimes, they're even being flattened out entirely.

This post is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. Furthermore, the profanity used is entirely inappropriate for this discussion.

I allowed a few posts to slip through, even though I have a visceral allergy to discussions framed like, "You shouldn't look into this—I won't tell you why, but it's incredibly dangerous, and..." followed by endless, nonsensical rambling.

Frankly, I fail to see how this subject matter bears any relation to the specific subforum where it has been posted.

bluemason3 said:Look, asking for a scam not to be charged is basically an oxymoron 😁 Honestly, there’s no point in even discussing my wife 😁

To put it diplomatically, I was merely interpreting your comments through the lens of the very first post in this thread regarding this woman. 😁

You’re overcomplicating things... honestly, it might be time for you to step down and let someone else run for office. 😁

That woman didn't even graduate from college. She claims she had a near-death experience, and now she's trying to monetize it.

Look, I certainly have nothing against charging for something that was earned through actual hard work. But I am firmly against charging people for something that was essentially handed to them as a gift. Unless, of course, it's just a nominal fee meant to cover the overhead for the venue where the gathering is being held, and so on.

bluemason3 said:I can give you some advice, but you can't keep doing this indefinitely. You have to make a living. You might need to pay for certifications—networking, Microsoft, whatever else those kids are getting nowadays—and you probably need to invest in some decent gear too. 🤷

In a system where nothing is subsidized, if every single "input" requires capital, you can't expect the "output" to be standardly free; it’ll be an exception at best. And that's assuming there's actually a functional process involved beyond just setting a price. Otherwise, the only people who could afford to practice any kind of healthcare would be wealthy heirs who can just burn through cash without ever charging a dime. 😁

I provide my advice for free, but if someone is far too lazy to figure things out on their own, then I will charge them.

And, as I previously stated, if anyone dies because of that, 🙂

bluemason3 said:A lot of people would also benefit if you just went around their houses fixing their computers for free. 😁

Money 😁 para ali 🤔

Whenever someone runs into an issue with their computer, I am more than happy to offer my advice on how they might resolve it at no cost whatsoever.

And let’s be honest—it isn't as if anyone is going to drop dead just because their PC hasn't been professionally serviced.😁

bluemason3 said:Why should it be? I mean, theoretically, there isn't actually any treatment being discussed here, but speaking generally... 😁

In the American healthcare system, nothing is truly "free." It just means you pay through the system rather than out of pocket at the moment. If it's not covered by insurance or a government program, who's picking up the tab?

What's that supposed to mean? 4P? 😁

Beer, Pizza, p***a, and I can't quite remember the last one right now.😁

Every once in a while, I find myself gripped by this sudden surge of righteous indignation—a flash of pure, unadulterated anger directed at those individuals who peddle overpriced junk under the guise of helping people. It’s a recurring issue, really. Why is it that so many people are so eager to exploit the needs of others for a quick buck? It’s fundamentally dishonest. 😁

Beer, pizza, p***a, and... honestly, I can't even remember what else was on that list right now. 😁

Pforum 😁

bluemason3 said:None of that applies. 🤣
First off, I’ve never had a temper, and second, I’ve started losing 🤣

Given the current state of the US Dollar and the average salaries in the country where these lectures are held, you could actually calculate what an acceptable price for a two-day seminar would be. Though, as $17 mentioned, that might still be way too much for something like this. 😁

Not really. Every country has different social strata and different products for different target markets. You sell both a Ford and a Ferrari; that doesn't mean you're aiming for the average consumer. Plus, not everyone starts from the same baseline. I'm not just talking about spiritual seminars here—whatever those are—but speaking generally. For instance, a seminar designed for professionals in a high-profit field that offers them even more profit (like certifications) is naturally going to cost more than a workshop on backyard composting. Some things have zero market competition, so prices skyrocket. Others are dirt cheap. Some things require experts who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on their own education, while others are run by people who don't even know what they're doing.

Market availability isn't the only factor. By that logic, you could argue healthcare should be cheaper, but that isn't realistic. You can try to push for lower doctor salaries, but that’s debatable since they'll just move abroad. High-tech medical equipment costs just as much whether you're buying it in Bangladesh or Germany. Sometimes, being unable to afford high costs simply means you can't access a product or service; it doesn't mean the price should be lower.

Does she really need two days to explain the meaning of life? Why so long? She must be stuck in some bureaucratic loop of spiritual searching. Truth should be simple and easy for everyone to grasp. You explain it in five minutes and you're done. 🧐

4P? 🤔 😁

And what could be worse than someone chasing enlightenment through a McDonald

It’s not even enlightenment, it’s health, so there's that.
😵

Look, we are talking about cancer treatments here. At the end of the day, this information should be free and accessible to everyone on the internet without any strings attached.

To me, it all feels like just another one of those "just relax and visualize..." techniques—as if, by implication, if you don't recover, it’s simply because you didn't want it badly enough.

Honestly, I’d love to take all these charlatans by the scruff of their necks and send them out to some rural farm in the Midwest to dig up potatoes. And once they finish digging them up, I'd make them put them right back in the ground. 😁

4P? 🤔 😁

What on earth is that supposed to mean? 4P? 😁

bluemason3 said:Nothing is inherently too high or too low. Value is entirely subjective, depending on what you're actually getting and how the market is behaving at the moment.

Take this specific situation, for instance. Even $17 would feel excessive to me; I’d just see it as a scam or plain stupidity.

Generally speaking, I used to be pretty against paying for stuff in those circles until I found myself taking advantage of certain offers—especially when things were being handed out for free. I don't have any qualms about it now, though I've developed an even lower opinion of the average consumer in the alternative scene than I did before. 😁

Hmm, either you’re preparing for a career in politics or you’re getting ready to launch your own series of lectures...😁>

Given the strength of the US Dollar and the average salaries in the country where these lectures are taking place, one could easily calculate what an acceptable price would be for a two-day seminar. Although, as $17 notes, it would still be far too much for something of this nature 😁

Does she really need two whole days just to explain the meaning of life? Why so much time? It seems obvious that she has become entangled in some bureaucratic thicket of spiritual searching; the truth ought to be simple and accessible to everyone. You explain it in five minutes, and that's that. 🧐

I don't have any scruples about saying this, but my opinion of the average alternative consumer is even lower than it was before.😁

And what could possibly be worse than someone seeking enlightenment through
McDonald
?

Given these prices, one can only reach a single, inevitable conclusion: they have developed a profound devotion to the pursuit of profit and a genuine worship of the almighty dollar. 🧐

How old are you actually? Are we talking 60? Or maybe 70?

Absolutely 🤣

To be blunt, my stance is that women possess a natural, innate predisposition toward spirituality, whereas men typically gravitate toward these pursuits merely because they find it attractive to women. 🙂

hollowpuma762 said:I’d actually argue we should lean back into that kind of thinking because intuition is a real product of the mind and it’s actually useful.

Skepticism is just what happens when you try to interpret things through a lens that’s easily fooled—especially in this current era where everything feels spiritually numb and hollowed out.

Look, a human being isn't born as a single principle; we're more like an intertwined manifestation of both, even if one side hits harder than the other.

There is no electricity, no magnetism, and certainly no human body without polarity. Period.

You’re confusing the general elements of the female Human BIC with the much deeper principles of manifestation living inside every single person.

The masculine principle is active; the feminine is passive.

For a guy, a perfect example of balancing that feminine principle would be developing various sensibilities.
Like aesthetics, empathy, and all that.

Take a real-world scenario: a man feels this overwhelming urge to go beat someone else's legs in, just because they did him wrong. If he taps into empathy in that moment, it doesn't make him "girly"—it allows him to see the weakness and misery in the other guy. It lets him balance out that heavy fire and active energy within himself, cooling his own rage and finding some semblance of internal harmony.

= No skirt required. The idiot stays with his intact legs and waits for his own karma to deliver a better lesson to his soul, while our hero avoids landing in a jail cell for intentionally causing pain to another BIC.

Quote:.

Ryan Wilson2 says: Look, we aren't even physically close to women most of the time, so how on earth do we expect to bridge that gap spiritually? Unless, of course, we just latch onto some vague, murky principles that some guy scribbled down thousands of years ago and slapped a label on called the "feminine principle"

Listen, achieving harmony between those inner masculine and feminine energies doesn't mean a man needs to start wearing skirts; it’s about finding a way to balance his own internal world.

Nobody just "assigned" these things arbitrarily. It’s more like—back when people actually had a spiritual backbone and weren't just chasing the next dopamine hit—they gradually realized how the universe actually functions. They wrote these truths down for future civilizations so we wouldn't all be living in total idiocy. It wasn't meant to make us restart the search from scratch every generation, but to let us build on what was already discovered so human progress on this planet could actually move forward.

As for myself, returning to that particular mindset is simply impossible. I have come to realize that such reasoning is merely something one absorbs from textbooks—it lacks any genuine connection to reality. At least, that is how reality presents itself to me. I won't bother quoting the rest of the post because, quite frankly, I find it incomprehensible.

Sam Robinson said:Look, Dana Davis5, Ryan Wilson2 is a man, just like you.

And there’s actually a link to a study I posted in a related thread that confirms the whole thing: men tend to be quieter, and when they do speak, it's mostly just garbage and mindless chatter... some guys—my ex, for instance—actually brag about it like it's some kind of virtue or proof of male intellectual superiority. 🤦

I was under the impression that Dana Davis5 was female 🤔, but fine, everyone is entitled to choose whatever screen name they desire 😁

Sam Robinson said:Look, Dana Davis5, Ryan Wilson2 is a man, just like you.

And there’s actually a link to a study I posted in a related thread that confirms the whole thing: men tend to be quieter, and when they do speak, it's mostly just garbage and mindless chatter... some guys—my ex, for instance—actually brag about it like it's some kind of virtue or proof of male intellectual superiority. 🤦

Look, if we are being serious here, I haven't noticed any pattern suggesting women talk more than men, nor that men talk more than women. It has always been entirely dependent on the specific social circle you're in, the topics at hand, and, frankly, how much alcohol has been served.

Besides, there isn't really a direct correlation to spirituality, regardless of how one chooses to define that concept. 😁

hollowpuma762 said:The title of this thread is a bit clunky, let's be honest.
While intuition is huge, having it doesn't automatically mean someone is a deeply spiritual person.

Man and woman are just complementary physical manifestations of the spirit in Man.

When you balance both principles within yourself—and then extend that balance to your inner circle (your partner, your family) and eventually to the wider world (your community, your city, your nation)—you actually increase that sense of "spirituality." By consciously optimizing the flow of energy across all those different levels humans can access, you allow for a much more complete manifestation of the spirit.

...

Hmm, I used to think along those lines myself, but I find myself becoming increasingly skeptical of this notion. Why should anyone be required to develop both principles if we are born inherently embodying just one? Why wouldn't our primary purpose, for instance, simply be to cultivate the specific principle we were born with? Furthermore, how is a man even supposed to connect with his feminine side when he lacks the fundamental physical predispositions—such as the innate instinct of motherhood, menstruation, or a direct connection to lunar cycles, and so on? We aren't even physically aligned with women; so how can we possibly expect to achieve this spiritually, unless we simply latch onto vague concepts that someone attributed to a "feminine principle" thousands of years ago?

The reverse is equally true.

Lawrence Torres56 said:I don't think you're quite seeing the full picture here; I know some folks out in rural Oregon who have kids and live exactly like that... I mean, even the geniuses at the local social services were sending them checks because of child neglect cases.🤦

As for the whole spirituality debate, it's not like men are any more enlightened than women; they just love to hear themselves talk about how "spiritual" they are😁...unlike women, who usually don't have the luxury of sitting around chatting all day.🍿

Look, I am more than willing to defend feminine spirituality, but this? Honestly, I just couldn't let that slide.🤣