RHD said:
Wow Dan, sorry you're so offended.
1) I am deeply concerned with the quality of CMA's being taught. People are free to practice what they like and believe what they like.
2) This is a discussion forum. It's a place to express opinions, if you don't like mine then don't read my posts. Would you rather that people who read this forum simply nod and say "that's great!" to everything people post here?
3) If I'm breaking forum rules then the moderators are free to ban me.
4) You're right, in my little world I could care less whether you respect me or not. Who are you that I should be so concerned with your respect?
5) Hung Gar has a clearly traceable history and training structure. I think you would be hard pressed to find a practitioner of that system that wouldn't be glad to answer questions about it or about thier own backgrounds.
6) I seriously doubt that one joke thread will discourage others from participating in this forum. It's an online forum...Are you taking things too seriously? Are you sitting in front of your monitor anxiously awaiting the next "outrage"?
7) No, I won't be attending Taiji Legacy because of career demands. I am not however, sitting in front of my computer pouting about anything. If that's the perception you have, then I'm sorry to inform you that I am not unhappy, jealous, or pouting...
:uhyeah:
Mike
Mike, my concern stems from the ridiculing that people are taking in this thread that seems to be nothing more than satirizing the beliefs of another human, who, as you say, is
free to practice what they like and believe what they like.
If they are free, then allow them to be so.
1. If you are so concerned, then change it as best you can. From within your own organization. Discrediting others does not add credibility to you. Why the concern over the training others recieve? At least they are learning something. If it truly has no value, they will learn that in their own way, in their own time. You must agree that nothing you say will 'do it' for them. Change comes from within.
2. Good point. But, who are you to attempt to discredit? I understand the emotion behind it, but, given the likelihood of affecting change in this venue, I fail to see the value of the effort. Particularly when you resort to schoolyard tactics.
3. Again, good point. But I'd rather it not have to go that far. Why push the envelope?
4. Nor should you require me to. But wouldn't the world be that much of a better place if we could all just get along?
5. I seem to be talking to one, so, go ahead.
6. I don't doubt it at all. I wouldn't stick around if I was being ridiculed. There's tons of other boards to check out. I'm partial to this one. I've been treated pretty good here. I'd like others to be able to share that without having to put up with insecure lashings out. Therefore, I do what I can to help out.
7. I am glad of that.
Basically, Mike, I think the problem that I have here is your intolerance. The way an artform is legitimized is through it's application - not documentation. I could tell you I know the art of Dan-Fu. Is it legitimate? Who cares what anyone thinks. I can move in effective ways. Good enough for me. My instructor moves well. I don't care what he's teaching me, I'm learning. I know more than I did before. Thus, it's legitimate to me. That's it. That's my point. Can we (you and I) be cool with that?
Dan.