Talkative Jack Rabbit

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:21 am

We both agree the Burning Man event will have
a finite life span

then end your reign, hop off the bus, and let it create itself anew

live year round in a more connective, creative,
self-expressive empowering way for an entire lifetime. To do that we'll
need more than an annual ritual with 35,000 participants on a dry lake
bed.

bullshit...you just don't know how to make the ritual transformative process stable, allowing the cumulative effects to take precedence

Excitedly driven
forward? Towards what? For what?

you're a big bunny, you figure it out

Lassen Forge · Post by **Lassen Forge** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:28 am

Question...

IF this is the first post on this subject...

How do you get quotes without cross posting?

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:30 am

i was quoting the:

Burning Man Update: The Jack Rabbit Speaks
Vol 10, Issue 9
December 15, 2005

sent to my email...

cut/paste, highlighted the text and hit the quote button

Lassen Forge · Post by **Lassen Forge** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:32 am

>wink< Gotcha!

Still half asleep this morning.

bb

dragonfly Jafe · Post by **dragonfly Jafe** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:47 am

Yeah, I got a little of that also - sounds to me like the BMorg is looking at their next growth step (the other 51 weeks of the year) and is expecting/hoping that we will follow along...donate to the BRAF (for projects outside BM), who knows, maybe start buying the T-shirts, camping stuff, and food products with "famous burner" endorsements. Change is inevitable, nothing lasts forever.

Also sounds like they are no longer worried about the near-term future of the event. I'm taking this as they have agreements with BLM for the next several years and they have time to focus on the future (5,10 years from now). I think the comment about the 6 members of the board was also interesting - perhaps there are changes on the horizon. Like maybe the BMorg is haphazardly trying to become a bit more respectable...instead of just a good time in the desert. A Think Tank or Art Institute is respectable - a producer of a "Desert Rave" is not...no matter how popular world-wide. As people age, they start worrying more-and-more about their "legacy" to the next generation and what it will say. If what they are currently doing will not get them what they want, changes can occur suddenly. Just speculation, no facts. But, if I was rich and concerend about the events future, I might just start sniffing around the Patrons to see if any want out...change brings stress which brings more changes....

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:58 am

dragonfly Jafe wrote:sounds to me like the BMorg is looking at their next growth step

evolution isn't something you can look on as it's happening...

it changes the way you see...

if they're headed down that road, they'll find themselves in a cycle of endless 'future' revision

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 10:36 am

i am sooooo glad i am off that silly mailing list.

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 10:37 am

that just makes you too ignorant to argue with them properly

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 10:42 am

i have nothing to argue with them about... even if i did read it.

its their (BRC LLC) party, they can do with it as they wish.

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 10:45 am

life's such a bore without a bit of arguing now and again...

interactive adrenaline rush...

mmm...adrenaline...

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 10:49 am

ar·gue
v. ar·gued, ar·gu·ing, ar·gues

1. To put forth reasons for or against; debate.
2. To attempt to prove by reasoning; maintain or contend.
3. To give evidence of; indicate.
4. To persuade or influence (another), as by presenting reasons.

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 10:51 am

would'nt want to be unreasonable, now...would we?

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 1:20 pm

Jungfraueigerbane wrote:would'nt want to be unreasonable, now...would we?

you have not been on this board long, have ya?

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 6:31 pm

long enough

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 6:53 pm

http://images.tribe.net/tribe/upload/ph ... 5e75e63e17

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 7:37 pm

spectabillis wrote:
Jungfraueigerbane wrote:would'nt want to be unreasonable, now...would we?
you have not been on this board long, have ya?

ditto what spectbillis said

i need sleep.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 8:55 pm

Kinetic IV · Post by **Kinetic IV** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:09 pm

Jungfraueigerbane wrote:long enough

2 days, 29 posts.
And after being on here for years from what I've observed that kind of posting pattern is usually but not always associated with sockpuppets and miscreants.

Attitude also factors in...and looking at the overall tone of those 29 posts that's not looking very promising either. But I'm not a thread cop, let the board look at the posts and decide for themselves. But something smells funny here and the Camp Herring thread is not located in this space.

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 8:19 am

prior to those days and posts, you will find me expressing myself through the names of:

the fire elf
elf's ride
elf's sword

while i was using those avenues of expression, playing a game which i am still learning the guidlines for, FungusAmongus expressed "stoooooooooooooooooooooops"

cited 12th post down:
http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... start=1140

at which point i found myself obliged to discontinue use of those personae

the last post from the consecutively running personae became the name of a new personae, citable from the same page

i agree that the overall tone of this latest mode of expression can be described as miscreant...

i am beginning to think that is the intention

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 8:21 am

Jungfraueigerbane wrote: the last post from the consecutively running personae became the name of a new personae

the last post prior to the "stoooooooooooooooooooooops" expression, of course

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 8:52 am

Simply Joel wrote: i need sleep.

lazy lotus-eater

philosopher · Post by **philosopher** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 3:53 pm

Jungfraueigerbane disgustedly quoting JRS wrote:We both agree the Burning Man event will have a finite life span

Well, I can't imagine who would agree to the contradictory proposition that the Burning Man event will not have a finite life span, so there must be more going on here than just stating the obvious.

A burner friend wrote to me recently to ask what I thought of it that his wife (whom he met in BRC not that long ago) had asked him when he was going to grow out of Burning Man. The gist of my response to him was that I didn't see how one could grow out of something of such complexity that no one has even grown into it yet.

There may be some folks who are getting burned out, so to speak, but I don't think there is any widespread illusion about the archetypal power of what has become for many an annual pilgrimage. This general power is the substance of the much-debated "spirit of Burning Man," which only most oblivious can fail to sense.

I can imagine three good indicators of when the finite life span of Burning Man should end, however:

(1) when the current organizers want to kick back and ask for new board members to perpetuate the current LLC and no one of reasonable competence comes forward; or

(2) when everyone who does anything for the event wants to get paid for it; or

(3) when the only people who show up are frat boys.

At this point, the only way the Burning Man event is anywhere near the end of its finite life span is if someone with the will and the means intentionally tries to kill it. To which I'd begin my response with the observation that it wouldn't be the first time human beings have chosen tragedy over comedy when it could easily have been otherwise.

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 5:41 pm

Well, I can't imagine who would agree to the contradictory proposition

i completely agree with the contradictory proposition

there are certain fundamental forces in this universe which lie beyond the finite

in my personal perspective, i feel this event is an expression of such a force...

such expressions may be obscured, perhaps even dormant...but never will they cease to be.

no one has even grown into it yet.

from your perspective, in your experience, that may be the relative truth...

there is more to life than relative truths...

if someone with the will and the means intentionally tries to kill it.

someone with the will and the means will defend it

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 7:25 pm

go try convincing these 70 million people to start worrying about the end of their event:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kumbha_Mela

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 7:38 pm

philosopher, the lover of wisdom, wrote:This general power is the substance of the much-debated "spirit of Burning Man," which only most oblivious can fail to sense.

i would point to this particular definition of 'spirit':

A supernatural being inhabiting or embodying a particular place, object, or natural phenomenon.

Post by **Eric** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 9:30 pm

Jungfraueigerbane wrote:there are certain fundamental forces in this universe which lie beyond the finite

like what?

Really.

I'd really like to hear what in a finite universe isn't finite.

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:59 am

teeny tiny Eric wrote:a finite universe

and how have you determined the universe to be finite?

if your premise is faulty, you have no grounds for further discussion

philosopher · Post by **philosopher** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:39 am

Jungfraueigerbane presents us with a set of ideas that are metaphysically and epistemologically challenging. Part of the challenge lies in their vagueness and logic, which I think need to be cleared up so that the conceptual content of the posts above, whatever it may be, can really come into view.

So, could we have a little more clarity on--correct me if I am misconstruing anything--this infinite spirit that inhabits the eternal event, which can be grasped in its entirety (or, what I would intend to be the same thing, can be fully grown into) by someone Jungfraueigerbane apparently is or knows or knows of or can imagine?

This thread is reminding me of a discussion topic I used one evening to start off a philosophical cafe discussion group: If you or someone else were an eternal being, how would you know it? Perhaps Jungfraueigerbane can start us off with an unequivocal answer to that before proceeding on to the more complex question further above.

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:45 pm

philosopher, assuming a lock would need a key, wrote:If you or someone else were an eternal being, how would you know it?

i choose this definition of 'know':

~To perceive directly; grasp in the mind with clarity or certainty.

and this definition of 'eternal':

~Continuing without interruption; perpetual.

as such, one would require an authentic direct perception of being that had the qualities of a perpetuator

Jungfraueigerbane · Post by **Jungfraueigerbane** » Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:51 pm

philosopher humbly wrote:--correct me if I am misconstruing anything--
can be grasped in its entirety
(can be fully grown into)

neither can it be grasped in its entirety, nor fully grown into
(neither of these qualities should be construed as a limitation)