pjrv : Messages : 3330-3334 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/3330?)

 15:00:33

~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#3330
 	From: "stanley01420" 
Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 7:39 am
Subject: Practice vrs Operational 	stanley01420

  	  	

Why another practice group, PJ?   People have a different attitude when they
practice.

Why not set up a group that actually does something usefull?  Set your own
targets and go for it.

trypper

Reply | Forward
	
#3334
 	From: "pjgaenir" 
Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 3:12 pm
Subject: Re: Practice vrs Operational 	pjgaenir

  	  	

> Why another practice group, PJ?   People have a
> different attitude when they practice.
> Why not set up a group that actually does something
> usefull?  Set your own targets and go for it.
> trypper

Hi Mary,

Ouch.  Sheesh!  I thought I WAS being useful, sorry...

And you put it that way because.... this field is overfilled with
tons of super-busy practice groups and everybody already sharing
sessions and personal experiences in detail with others to discuss
finer points on a daily basis? (Not that *I* see... I get tons of
PEMs from people who wish they had that but won't talk on lists where
everybody can read their stuff.)

There are different ways to answer your question.

The first is, it's none of my business WHAT people view. I'm talking
about software to let people congregate in groups and view whatever
they want. As mentioned, my ideas include folks being able to supply
each other with targets and upload info or pics through the system,
so as to encourage people doing targets of interest to the members. I
want to provide good practice target resources, but groups can do
what they like.  I am already doing what you suggest, making it so
people can supply their own targets to their group, you just didn't
pick up on that I guess.

The second is, the concept that practice isn't "useful" (as you
infer) is mind boggling to me. Joe McMoneagle's been viewing for 26
years and is awesome and he still practices very regularly.  One
reason is because practice allows very specific and instant feedback
that many 'ops' targets don't--they tend to be more generalized on
feedback (if it exists at all... or is anywhere near prompt) and/or
have so much of it it's crazy (like with media events). (The
avoidance of the harsh clarity of instant photo feedback is often a
subtle psychological reason for avoiding 'practice' targets.) Another
reason is because 'facility' comes from regular/constant viewing and
groups may not have feedbackable "non-practice" targets every day so
resources'd be there to keep people viewing.

The third is, I think it is a real problem that some viewers don't
want to 'bother' with practice as such targets aren't important
enough to them. One of the most common complaints to me from stargate
guys was that a great amount of the work was mind numbingly boring,
and getting yourself in the state of mind to really focus and take
something seriously and consider it important, so as to arrange a
decent session, is a lot of work--that is a shamanic practice to a
great degree, the ability to set yourself.

My little kid only wants to do what's most exciting for her too but I
keep trying to train her to do what she should, whether she feels
like it or not, and that includes repetitive proper practice of
things she wants to be good at. To me it's the same with RV. I
believe that learning to control one's own "intent" includes learning
to form and hold the appropriate attitude--that is PART OF intent--
dismissing practice targets because one doesn't feel like they're
helping save the world with that particular session doesn't seem like
very good practice at forming intent to me, and IMO intent is the
primary skill RV utilizes.

The fourth is, it should be noted that any real photograph IS a photo
of the REAL WORLD.  Practice photos of say, a crime scene or event in
progress, are not any different from feedback photos after your
session from the police or the tasker on an ops job.  It is all the
same world.  The only difference is the viewer's attitude. Since
that's the one thing the viewer can control, it's a pity to miss out
on the needed experience of a ton of different kinds of targets with
great instant feedback because one can't get the attitude straight.

The whole concept of "real targets" is illogical unless one is
comparing to assumed targets (like underground bases, aliens) or
representational targets (like storybook characters, etc.).
Technically anything is a 'real' target, though how good it is for
its purpose is up for debate--but certainly genuine photos are
targets just as real as 'ops'.

Though of course, ops is present-time and that tends to facilitate
things for people who haven't fully got their belief systems around
the 'time' concepts yet.  And ops has 'drama' attached--the sense of
importance--which of course is terrific for a session.  I agree
live/ops targets are great.  I think more of them should be done by
everybody.  But I would not for a second knock out practice targets.

The fifth is, I find remote viewing ANYTHING to be fascinating. I
admit, though it has some 'basic' stuff, my personal target pool is
photos but it is not your national geographic sort.  They're
interesting--that's much of the criteria I use for choosing targets,
is that they are unique in the pool or have 'depth' in some form (or
sometimes, I just wonder what on earth my mind will make of it, so
throw it in to see).  Many are pretty major events over the last
century+ -- the hardest part is defining all the targets with
violence and death in them in the database so nobody gets those if
they don't want them (as many in my pool include such). I would say
viewing a plane crash is a "higher impact" target (as I call them)
than a bridge. But in reality, even viewing a DNA molecule, the sun,
a castle or bridge are pretty interesting--I find every target
experience to be educational and a pretty neat experience.

To me what is important in practice is experience.  One can only view
shorelines and bridges for awhile until they've got AOL on likely
targets and are bored silly, but that has other drawbacks, mainly
that the viewer is not getting more varied experience.  A viewer with
experience on targets that are caves or graveyards for example will
be better set to understand data from any target with even a few
similarities to some of the features of those things. There is a
nearly infinite range of photo practice targets available, and many
certainly would have been 'ops' targets at the time they happened.

But as my original point noted, I am not trying to form a single
group for practice targets alone, I am trying to form software to
support any number of tiny groups (open to the whole field) in which
viewers can do whatever their hearts desire.

Hope that explains it better.  Sorry if I was unclear.

I'm open to idea on specifics, wish-list stuff etc. from viewers, for stuff to
include or make possible in this software. Speak now before it's all planned out
and there's a good chance it'll happen.

Best Regards,
PJ

pjrv : Messages : 3354-3354 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/3354?)

 15:01:49

~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#3354
 	From: Richard Krankoski 
Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 9:55 pm
Subject: Re: Practice vrs Operational 	Rich_crv

  	  	

I thought the purpose was small groups working together for a common goal,
practice or whatever.

Rich

> stanley01420 wrote:
> Why another practice group, PJ?   People have a different attitude when they
> practice.
> Why not set up a group that actually does something usefull?  Set your own
> targets and go for it.
> trypper

-----------------
Shelia has been talking about that idea on StarGate Rich -- it's a good one.  I
am talking more about facilitating something that supports that happening--a
tool anyone can use for whatever we want to do.

I think (not sure) Shelia has some ideas for specific projects to focus small
groups toward.  I don't have that. I'm willing to build in resources for
practice, but I'm not talking on my own part about anything for 'content' of the
groups purpose or viewing (the 'projects' they might work toward), other than
general ideas for a couple little groups of my own.  Only the 'structure' that
supports the 'small groups doing online RV together' idea.

Hopefully Shelia and others will give me input/wish-list stuff for how in a
perfect world this kind of software might work to best facilitate it all. If I'm
going to bother doing it, it would be nice if it well served those in the field
most likely to use it.  PJ

Reply | Forward

pjrv : Messages : 3352-3418 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/3352?)

 15:06:28

~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#3352
 	From: Weatherly-Hawaii...m
Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:33 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Practice vrs Operational 	maliolana

  	  	

Aloha PJ,

I want to play and I have no objections to the topic of any photo...
Dead or alive...naked/giving birth...I can handle it!...Riches
'Roadkill in a can' targets even...hahah

I am an excellant teem player ...when I get to pick the team...hahah

I do love outbounders though...So when do we start?

PS...I think trypper wants to do ops!...NOW!...hahaha

Love & Light & Laughter
Mali'o...aka...Dawna

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick
society."
   -- Krishnamurti

-----------------------------
I have a LOT of ops targets. What I don't have, alas, is FEEDBACK! :-) PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#3378
 	From: "stanley01420" 
Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:11 am
Subject: Re: Practice vrs Operational 	stanley01420

  	  	

> PS...I think trypper wants to do ops!...NOW!...hahaha

Hi Dawna,

It's just that once one is on a real target, there must be so much more to pick
up on than one can get from a one dimensional photo.

I mean like looking around a target site to pick up on anything odd or out of
place and focusing in on whatever people are present in order to 'see' what's
up with them.  Learniing to feel our way around.

Photos keep it all visual.  They train people to keep it all visual.

It was only a thought and not intended to annoy anyone.

trypper

------------------------
Sorry for ouching.  I'm curious, do you think about RV as if you are viewing the
photo instead of the target??  PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#3401
 	From: "stanley01420" 
Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 10:58 pm
Subject: Re: Practice vrs Operational 	stanley01420

  	  	

> Sorry for ouching.  I'm curious, do you think about RV
> as if you are viewing
> the photo instead of the target?? PJ

No PJ... I think about RV as if I'm viewing a target... always.  Because that's
how it's always been for me.

I'm always looking for whatever information will make a difference.  I always
ask myself  "what do we need to know here?", ... what will make a difference?
Why am I here?  What do I need to know here?

I'm untrained and I've been doing my own thing since I was a little girl so I
guess I've got a different way of looking at things.

But there is so much more to things than a photo can accomodate.  There are
things to smell and see and hear... people to tune into... and feelings.. just
plain old gut feelings about things... just knowing somehow.

It's like there is a reason I'm there and a reason I can see what's happening
and I just have to find it..

I don't know.. I'm not in the same league with you guys so I probably shouldn't
even say anything.

trypper

--------------------------------
I don't think you are in any different league, we're all in this together, and
if great skill were a requirement I'd be banned from my own group lol. Diff
perspectives are the whole point of a discussion group, so don't be shy.

The target would be the space-time-mass vector so to speak, whether the target
or feedback are generated from a practice pool, or a practice tasker, or an
operations tasker, and no matter what feedback (or none) were avail.  It would
be the SAME target either way, right? What am I missing?

I know that so-called 'real' targets ARE "higher impact" targets, even if they
ARE the same target as a practice target.  There may be 101 reasons for this,
who knows.  I can think of several logical reasons but most come down to viewer
psychology in a variety of ways.

A photo of an event that happened 8 years ago vs. one that happened 8 days ago
vs. an artist's sketch of a building that won't exist until 8 years from now, it
shouldn't matter.  Time isn't an issue.  Feedback shouldn't be an issue (but
probably is).  The source of the target (practice vs. tasker) shouldn't be an
issue (but probably is).

But all those targets are equally real, right?  Whether one came from a practice
pool and one came from a casual ops tasker and one came from a paying ops
client--the only thing I can think of that would make the same kind of target
different from another, based only on how it was generated and/or the feedback
received, is the viewer's psychology.

Which isn't a bad thing.  Just something for me to think about I guess.  PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#3418
 	From: "stanley01420" 
Date: Sun Jun 29, 2003 9:39 am
Subject: Re: Practice vrs Operational 	stanley01420

  	  	

> PJ says:
> The target would be the space-time-mass vector
> so to speak, whether the
> target or feedback are generated from a practice pool,
> or a practice tasker, or
> an operations tasker, and no matter what feedback
> (or none) were avail.  It
> would be the SAME target either way, right?
> What am I missing?

Well I can see your point but to me a piece of paper in an envelope is way
different than actually going to the target site for a specific purpose.  To me,
the emphasis was always on purpose.. why am I here.  Practice is practice..
however you look at it.

At what point do we move on?   When does practice become a goal in itself
defeating the whole purpose of the exercise?

I mean, it's like religion... at what point do the protocols.. the ceremonies of
the
religious service .. replace the religion itself for so many?

It just seems to me that there is a purpose to this stuff and it isn't  guessing
photos .. like endlessly playing solitaire.

I mean... when is it time to move on to a higher level?  Maybe there are those
who are better at the itself game than they are at practice.  And I do realize
that practice sessions are important for the scientists to draw conclusions from
but still.

> But all those targets are equally real, right?  Whether one came from a
>practice pool and one came from a casual ops tasker and one came from a
>paying ops client--the only thing I can think of that would make the same
>kind of target different from another, based only on how it was generated
>and/or the feedback received, is the viewer's psychology.

... the urgency of the operation or situation would be a factor.  It's like the
fire
drill we all experienced in school.  Being in a real fire creates a whole
different dynamic.   I mean... so much is a factor.. there is so much we don't
understand.  It just seems that hitting the target pools have almost become a
goal in themselves and I don't think that's what it's all about.

I don't know...

trypper

----------------------------
Everybody's better at 'ops' targets. They're easier usually, they're higher
impact, who the hell knows why--viewer psychology I guess. That's a good reason
for practicing IMO since anybody who can do well at basic practice can do
usually even better at ops.

But I'm with you and I understand what you're saying about doing 'real' targets.
My original post suggested several 'real' target types that I wanted to make a
point to work on.  I do think that having some of both--practice with hard
feedback and ops with the psychological boon--is healthy.

But practice isn't designed for the science lab. The best in the world at
this--several I know of, though only one well--practice VERY consistently, with
feedback even more specific and focused than the average photo (usually a
modified photo, showing only one specific aspect of a target).  They've learned
over 15-25 years the importance of the fluidity that constant viewing, and
viewing with such specific feedback, and viewing what granted does bore you but
one's "intent" needs to be harnessed and that's a practice too -- brings.

Maybe they've been wasting their time.  But they learned from experience. I
usually make every mistake and learn little vicariously alas, but since in my
cycles of finally buckling down and practicing regularly I see the same positive
results, I'm tempted to believe them.

Well, no matter.  We all do whatever we want to do, and what works for us.  I
still think you're talking about viewing paper-photos for 'practice' and not
actual target locations with feedback that is a photo, by the way you keep
phrasing it--and I certainly wouldn't be interested in that either.  Thanks for
talking with me about it.  I think I better understand what you mean now.

PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#3392
 	From: Weatherly-Hawaii...m
Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 11:02 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Practice vrs Operational 	maliolana

  	  	

Aloha Trypper,

> Photos keep it all visual.  They train people to keep
> it all visual.  It was only a thought and not intended
> to annoy anyone. trypper

I am not annoyed...just pulling your chain...hahah...Liten up
girl...... I feel I enter  the real deal...that is when I hit...hahah

Even with ARV...I pick up energy lines...from photos...supposedly...

but then ...there are the energy lines...and I can tell the
weather......and some
other stuff...But I do love outbounders myself...

I do set a task for myself to view my future photo pick/feedback...but I
go
far past the photo...I think...

Love & Light & Laughter
Mali'o...aka...Dawna