August 29 2023

Addendum (September 1, 2023): In the beginning of May 2009 Richard responded to the two posts (below) from the sock-puppeteer which prompted the quote-by-quote confutation. However, the exposé triggered by the ‘middle-aged codger’ event of May 09, 2009, rendered the publishment of this detailed response redundant – in something akin to a panicked frenzy of activity ‘Skye-Belle’, a 53-year-old cross-dresser immediately deleted Richard’s ‘middle-aged-codger’ emails and all of their own (vituperatory) posts and decamped tout-de-suite – and thus this detailed response has languished amidst other unpublished material, on an external hard-drive and other back-up media for these last fourteen years, and is now being published for the first time.

Message #3815
To: actualfreedom@yahoogroups.com
From: ‘skyebellau’
Date: Fri Dec 12, 2008;
Subject: Re: Jesus Christ?
Still creeps me out that Richard once thought he was Jesus Christ. I mean what kind of gullible psyche thinks like that. And that he only snapped out of it when he met another man who thought he was Jesus too, enabling him to deduce there couldn’t be two of them made me think WOW! is this a bright spark or what? Didn’t exactly instil confidence that he what he was claiming was genuine that’s for sure or that his enlightenment was any less delusionary. [...] There were a lot of things Richard said that made me doubt the validity of his claims, the Jesus trip being only one of them (and I have always thought it strange no one ever brought it up).

• creep out (slang): to make someone feel uneasy; in this usage, a noun or pronoun is commonly used between ‘creep’ and ‘out’; [e.g.]: “I’m okay with most bugs, but a centipede just creeps me out, man”; “The guy in the corner was really creeping us out, so we decided to leave”. ~ (Farlex Dictionary of Idioms).

• creep out (informal): to cause (someone) to feel fear or repugnance; [e.g.]: “The scary movie really creeped me out”. [Middle English crepen, from Old English crēopan; cf. Old Saxon criopan; related to Old Frisian kriāpa, Old Norse krjūpa, Middle Low German krūpen]. ~ (American Heritage Dictionary).

• creep (colloq.): a shivering or shuddering sensation, esp. caused by dread or revulsion; chiefly in ‘the creeps’; make a person’s flesh creep (idiom): frighten, horrify, or disgust, esp. with dread of the supernatural. ~ (Oxford English Dictionary).

Also, and just to set the record straight, Richard never [quote] “thought” [endquote] he was that specific bodily manifestation (aka Mr. Yeshua the Nazarene) but, rather, had the experience of being what is known as ‘The Parousia’. Viz.:

• [Richard]: ‘... for about a week, in the early days of being enlightened, I was ‘The Parousia’ and it was not until I met another person who was similarly afflicted that it dawned upon me it was but an emotional play in a fertile imagination ... there was sufficient rationality operating to comprehend there could not be two (simultaneous) manifestations of the ‘Second Coming’. (Richard, The Actual Freedom List, No.44g, 8 July 2004a).

• [Respondent]: ‘What do you make of Krishnamurti’s dying statement that a great energy used his body and such an energy will not re-appear for many years?
• [Richard]: ‘He was accurately and correctly reporting his experience. That Christianity has their Parousia; that Buddhism has their Maitreya; that Islam has their Mahdi; that Hinduism has their Kalki; that Judaism has their Messiah; that Taoism has their Kilin and so on all comes from the same type of experience. It is part and parcel of being enlightened (‘I Am That’ or ‘That Thou Art’).
• [Respondent]: ‘Was he delusional by any chance?
• [Richard]: ‘All enlightened beings are deluded ... the altered state of consciousness (ASC) known as spiritual enlightenment is a delusional state. I am not ‘guru-bashing’ Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti per se ... it is the ASC itself I am targeting. I can use the accredited writings of virtually any enlightened being to demonstrate my points’. (Richard, List B, No. 33d, 23 January 2001).

SKYE: And that he only snapped out of it when he met another man who thought he was Jesus too, enabling him to deduce there couldn’t be two of them made me think WOW! is this a bright spark or what?

RICHARD: Whereas the fact there was sufficient rationality operating to comprehend there could not be two (simultaneous) manifestations of ‘The Parousia’—and how it was all a massive delusion, a vainglorious megalomania, operative solely within the esoteric and/or arcane realms of the human psyche—is how come he went on to achieve what no other fully enlightened/ awakened being had before (become actually free from the human condition).

There was at least one astute co-respondent, on that discussion list, who twigged to this very fact. Viz.:

SKYE: Didn’t exactly instil confidence that he what he was claiming was genuine that’s for sure ...

RICHARD: This self-professed inability for such a salutary event to “instil confidence” about an actual freedom being echt would be because of (a) the sock- puppeteer’s nescience of matters transcendental and (b) the sock-puppeteer not reading what is freely available on The Actual Freedom Trust web site (the further above quotes regarding the Parousia, the Maitreya, et alia, for example).

In other words, as ‘Sock-Puppet Skye’s ... um ... creeped-out noetic faculty (which can only conceive of it being a specific bodily manifestation of a black-a-vised Aramaic-speaking Semite), is self-evidently quite limited in regards to the delusory stakes, it is no wonder such an imagined incarnation as that (being somewhat akin to a patient in a psychiatric ward hallucinating they be Mr. Napoleon Bonaparte or Ms. Marie Antoinette and so forth) did not “instil confidence” in regards the genuineness of an actual freedom from the human condition.

Indeed, about the only conclusion to be drawn, from such a scornfully imagined incarnation, would be to the effect that the much-revered transcendental state-of-being concomitantly spoken of could not be any less delusory.

SKYE: ... or that his enlightenment was any less delusionary.

RICHARD: In regards to being “delusionary” in terms of scale: when the western-style mysticism the egoless ‘Richard’ was experiencing at that stage moved, as a consequence, deeper into an eastern-style mysticism his religio-spiritual and mystico-metempirical enlightenment-awakenment eventually could not be any more delusory as it finally arrived at the experiential ne plus ultra where all there is was ‘The Absolute’ (and nothing else existed: neither creation nor destruction/ neither bondage nor liberation/ neither a seeker after liberation nor the liberated). Viz.:

• [Respondent]: ‘... the masters’ teaching is very well beyond ‘Love Agape’ and ‘Compassion’.
• [Richard]: ‘You may find the following informative in this regard:

• [Co-Respondent]: ‘What do You understand by being enlightenment?
• [Richard]: ‘There is nothing other than The Absolute’. ~ (Richard, The Actual Freedom List, No. 25c, 30 July 2001).

And this:

• [Co-Respondent]: ‘I invite all of you who have had a Self experience to try describing it.
• [Richard]: ‘Sure ... there was only The Absolute (the Self by whatever name) and nothing else existed’. ~ (Richard, The Actual Freedom List, No. 25c, 6 August 2002).

And this:

• [Co-Respondent]: ‘As an example [of a description of ‘Self’], is the description ‘a very old child’ valid in your case?
• [Richard]: ‘No, the description ‘there is nothing other than The Absolute’ is what is valid in my case (...).

• [Co-Respondent]: ‘If you can provide a brief description for your particular Self image, so as to compare notes, I would be pleased to read it.
• [Richard]: ‘Sure ... there was only The Absolute (the Self by whatever name) and nothing else existed.
• [Co-Respondent]: ‘Or is it indescribable?
• [Richard]: ‘No, it is easily described: there was nothing other than The Absolute’. ~ (Richard, The Actual Freedom List, No. 25c, 25 August 2003).

In other words, in full-blown spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment, there is only ‘That’ (the unmanifest by whatever name) and the manifest—all time and all space and all form—is but a dream/ an illusion/ an appearance ... meaning that in reality there is neither creation nor destruction, and thus, neither bondage nor liberation/ neither a seeker after liberation nor the liberated”. (Richard, The Actual Freedom List, No. 89b, 13 May 2005).

Interestingly enough, it was the very penetration into the farthest reaches of this massive delusion—this vainglorious megalomania—which enabled the breakthrough which, finally, heralds a new dawn for humankind.

SKYE: There were a lot of things Richard said that made me doubt the validity of his claims ...

RICHARD: In view of the fact that Richard did not say what ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ makes out he said (further above) it is none other than (a) their inscience of matters transcendental and (b) their not reading what is freely available to be read on the website which makes them doubt the validity of what he actually reports/ describes/ explains.

SKYE: ... the Jesus trip being only one of them (and I have always thought it strange no one ever brought it up) ...

RICHARD: As several respondents on The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list (No’s 44, 48, 68, 96, 98) had “brought it up” previously—which respondents include ‘Sock Puppet Skye’s alter ego ‘Sock Puppet Ron’ (aka ‘Xan Xuareb’)—the above comment not only further demonstrates their having not read what is freely available to review, on the website, but, in a rather self-revelatory manner, exposes them as being a bare-faced liar as well.

For here is ‘Sock Puppet Ron’ bringing it up only a little over two and a half years prior (note well what they have parenthesised). Viz.:

Put simply, it is plain to see that ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ knew perfectly well, when they deliberately wrote that misnomer into their “creeps me out” opening sentence, that Richard clearly refers to the experience of being the expected saviour of humankind as ‘The Parousia’.

As did another alert co-respondent on that discussion list (what follows is edited solely for brevity). Viz.:

And here is a completely unambiguous version of virtually the same text (it is the concluding sentence which renders the matter completely unambiguous). Viz.:

In the face of the damning evidence ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ then attempted to make out they had not read Respondent № 68’s text all the way through. Viz.:

In the meanwhile, however, ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ had sought refuge in a tenuous assertion about Richard having spoken of it differently “way back in ’98” in an email hidden away on some long lost archives. Viz.:

The astute co-respondent already quoted, much further above vis-à-vis the simple farm boy explication, was not to be put off by this blatant deployment of a neither-verifiable-nor-refutable gambit. Viz.:

As was the case with the alert co-respondent already quoted, further above, vis-à-vis ‘The Parousia’ exposition. Viz.:

Undeterred, ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ then resorted to making a blanket assertion. Viz.:

’Twas all to no avail, however, as the correspondence which ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ was referring to above is indeed there, in Richard’s very extensive correspondence with the ‘Listening-l’ mailing list (aka ‘Mailing List B’), except he spoke about it, of course, as his ‘parousia’ experience (plus simply calling it ‘madness’ and not that “mystic madness” paraphrasis). Viz.:

Incidentally, Richard never called such profound, sublime, transcendent and awesome experiences “mystic madness” but, rather, ‘divine madness’ (and then only in relation to another person’s experience anyway). Viz.:

Here is another version, a year later, on that same mailing list:

Richard also utilised the term on The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list five years after the first occasion. Viz.:

In summation: ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ is wrong on all eight counts:

1. Richard’s week-long experience in the early days of being spiritually enlightened/ mystically awakened, of being a particular culture’s expected saviour of humankind, was not that of being a specific bodily manifestation of a black-a-vised Judean of biblical lore and legend.
2. Richard did not merely “think” (like some patients in psychiatric wards do in regards deceased historical personages) he was that expected saviour as it is an inherent knowing—intrinsic to the transcendental state—and is known by different names in different cultures.
3. Richard was not possessed of an egoless (self-realised) psyche any more gullible than other egoless (self-realised) psyches of same or different cultures.
4. Richard was not deficient in intellect—such as to warrant the condemnatory judgement [quote] “a bright spark or what?” [endquote]—as he went on to achieve what no other similarly afflicted spiritually enlightened/ mystically awakened being had before.
5. Richard’s rationality in regards his experience of being the expected saviour (as contrasted to some imagined personage thinking they are a particular religious personage), upon meeting someone similarly afflicted, serves well to instil confidence about the genuineness of the resultant actual freedom from the human condition.
6. Richard did not speak about [quote] “his Jesus Christ delusion” [endquote], in an email hidden on some long lost archives way back in 1998, as he clearly used the correct nomenclature (parousia).
7. He never called such experiences “mystic madness” but, rather, ‘divine madness’ (and even then only when referring to another person’s experience).
8. The correspondence being referred to is indeed there, in Richard’s archived correspondence from ‘Mailing List B’, along with every other on-topic email he posted, without exception, to that discussion-style mailing list.

Yet there is more to ‘Sock Puppet Skye’s the-correspondence-is-not-there email than just their blanket assertion. Viz.:

Again, being such a tangled tissue of commentitious narratives—(narratives, in stark contrast to rapportage, are comprised of spin and/or bull and/or lies)—the sock-puppeteer’s vituperative modus operandi necessitates a line-by-line or point-by-point exposé (as follows below).

SKYE: The correspondence I’m talking about is not there. Not flattering enough.

RICHARD: As the correspondence being referred to is indeed there (in Richard’s archived correspondence from ‘Mailing List B’) along with every other on-topic email he posted to the ‘Listening-l’ mailing list, without exception, then this three-word puerility (“not flattering enough”) falls flat on its face.

Note well how, having moved the locus of their initial topic to a domain they thought beyond refutation with their blanket assertion, ‘Sock-Puppet Skye’ then craftily shifts the focus onto another topic via traducing Richard’s penmanship.

SKYE: He was still learning how to correspond online back then ...

RICHARD: As Richard had spent the latter part of the previous year (1997) corresponding extensively on ‘Mailing List A’ (writing a total of a hundred-and-thirty emails to twenty-six different co-respondents) as well as on ‘Mailing List B’ (a further four-hundred-and-eighty-seven emails to thirty-nine different co-respondents over a fifteen-month span)—before Sock-Puppet Skye collected their long list of [quote] “a HUGE assortment of epithets” [endquote] from twenty-one emails posted in an eleven-day period (20 Sep to 01 Oct, 1999) to eight co-respondents—that “still learning how to correspond online” assertion is so obviously naught but a large steaming pile of bull it is patently being utilised as a shift-the-topic decoy.

Just for the record, then, Richard first corresponded on ‘Mailing List B’ on Saturday, 12 February 1998 ... here is a quote, from an email dated February 21 1998, which makes this fact clear:

• [Respondent]: ‘Thank you for your recent contributions to the mailing List. I am relatively new to the line but do not recall seeing postings by you previously. Are you new to it?
• [Richard]: ‘Thank you for your thoughtful response. I subscribed to the list four-five weeks ago and watched what came into my E-Mailer ... until I gained the drift of what was the paramount area of interest being discussed. I only started posting about six or seven days ago, which is why you cannot recall seeing any postings by me before this!
I am thoroughly enjoying myself. (Richard, List B, No. 32, 16 February 1998).

And here is Richard’s very first email, in toto, purely for the sake of illustrating how ‘Sock-Puppet Skye’s large steaming pile of bull bears no resemblance whatsoever to everyday reality. Viz.:

February 12 1998:
• [Respondent]: ‘There is no argument on my part that there is any such thing as an independent, separated self that functions autonomously.
• [Respondent No. 40]: ‘Just received this quote, which kind of links to what you said: ‘Two people have been living in you all your life. One is the ego, garrulous, demanding, hysterical, calculating; the other is the hidden spiritual being, whose still voice of wisdom you have only rarely heard or attended to’. (Soygal Rinpoche).
• [Richard]: ‘Somewhat optimistically, I have searched the written word throughout the world wondering if I will ever find, when the ‘self’ is referred to, that it is a reference to an identity in its totality, not just an ego. But apparently this is not to be the case. Just as it is generally agreed that there is no substantive ego, equally there is no argument on my part that there is any such fundamental thing as a “hidden spiritual being, whose still voice of wisdom you have only rarely heard or attended to”, either.
In my experience I have found that the self is made up of two parts: the ego and the soul. In a valiant effort to right the wrongs that beset oneself and all of humankind, one can dissolve the ego and realise oneself as a ‘centre-less being’, in unity with that which is sacred and holy. However, upon closer inspection one finds that one has jumped out of the frying pan into the fire. ‘I’ still exist—now disguised as a timeless and eternal ‘being’—and continue to wreak ‘my’ havoc upon an unsuspecting public ... albeit now a blissful ‘being’ emanating Love Agapé and Divine Compassion to all and sundry.
All the wars, murders, tortures, rapes and destruction that has eventually followed the emergence of any specially hallowed master attests to this. All the sadness, loneliness, grief, depression and suicide that has ensued as a result of following any specifically revered master’s teaching also testifies to this. All the Saints and the Sages; all the Masters and the Messiahs; all the Saviours and the Avatars have not been able to bring about their much-touted Peace On Earth. This has been the sorry lot of humankind since time immemorial.
The ‘Teachers’—and their ‘Teachings’—have been at fault all along, for they still had an identity. However, all is not lost: just as the ego can dissolve, so too can the soul disappear. ‘I’, as an ‘identity’, as a ‘being’, must become extinct. Then, and only then, is there a chance for global peace. With ‘me’ in ‘my’ entirety extinguished, the instinctual fear and aggression that blind nature endows all creatures with at birth vanishes ... along with the malice and sorrow engendered. One is then spontaneously happy and harmless; one is automatically blithe and benevolent; one is candidly carefree and considerate. Thus, for the one who dares to go all the way, individual peace on earth for the remainder of one’s life is immediate and actual.
This ongoing experience is ambrosial, to say the least’. (Richard, List B, No. 13, 12 February 1998).

Ha! ... the above is a sample of what ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ puerilely portrayed as [quote] “he was still learning how to correspond online back then” [endquote]—back when Richard was writing about ‘parousia experiences’, ‘madness’, and ‘divine madness’—in July and August 1999.

SKYE: ... and hadn’t ‘refined’ his verbal attacks.

RICHARD: As those “verbal attacks” have no existence outside of the vituperative sock-puppeteer’s fantastical imagination then any such appearance of them not being “refined” obviously pertains to an overactive confecting capacity in their capacious imaginative faculty.

SKYE: That’s why most of those correspondents didn’t bother joining the AF list he was advertising at the bottom of his posts back then ...

RICHARD: This is an out-and-out lie for three primary reasons:

1. Richard did not advertise The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list at the bottom of his posts.
2. There was no need for any of those correspondents to subscribe to The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list as Richard wrote to ‘Mailing List B’ from Thursday, February 12 1998 through to Saturday, December 12 1998—a ten-month period—and then continued to post again, on and off, from Sunday, May 23 1999 through to Thursday, April 24 2003 (more than five years after his first post).
3. What did feature “at the bottom of his posts back then” (i.e., immediately below the signature sign-off) was a link to the homepage of The Actual Freedom Trust website.

SKYE: ... and aren’t today either.

RICHARD: As The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list ceased to operate on September 2006—more than two years prior to this December 2008 Yahoo-Groups post from ‘Sock-Puppet Skye’—that commentitious “and aren’t today either” afterthought is just gratuitous nonsense (besides which, were it to be the case, which it is not, there are only about half-a-dozen diehards left posting to the ‘Listening-l’ forum during December 2008, and quite sporadically at that).

SKYE: He was too full of contradictions it was bazaar.

RICHARD: There are no contradictions whatsoever in Richard’s rapportage—an actual freedom from the human condition, being actual, is entirely consistent, unequivocal and straightforward—let alone so full of them as to be likened to a streetful of transient stalls in an oriental market-place.

SKYE: But I was fascinated. He was using a HUGE assortment of epithets that made mine look piss-weak ...

RICHARD: Just so there is no misunderstanding the following is the way in which the word “epithet”—which generally refers to ‘a significant appellation’ or ‘a suitably descriptive term’—is probably being used (given the particular context). Viz.:

• epithet (n.): an abusive or contemptuous word or phrase. ~ (American Heritage Dictionary).
• epithet (n.): an abusive insulting word or phrase. ~ (Encarta English Dictionary).
• epithet (n.): an offensive or derogatory expression used of a person; a term of abuse, a profanity. ~ (Oxford English Dictionary).
• epithet (n.): a disparaging or abusive word or phrase. ~ (Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary).
• epithet (n.): a defamatory or abusive word or phrase. ~ (Princeton’s WordNet 3.0).
• epithet (n.): a descriptive phrase used esp. to criticise or insult a person or a group of people. ~ (Cambridge English Dictionary).

In other words, what is more commonly known, in this context, as ‘name-calling’ and the vulgar colloquialism “piss-weak” (which can also refer to ‘being ineffectual’ or ‘being unfair’) is probably being utilised in its ‘extremely weak’ sense.

As an illustration of the degree of automorphism involved in order to make such a preposterous (which literally means ‘back-to-front’) assertion—and to such a degree as to render the asserter fascinated in the process—a random sampling of the extremely-weak-name-calling, which ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ has a rather extensive public record of consistently using, are as follows. Viz.:

Message No. 00030 of Archive 99/10
From: ‘Skye Chambers’
To: listening-l@zrz.TU-Berlin.DE
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999.
Subject: Ranting Richard
[...]
[Skye]: And Lord help us. All this verbal brute bullying is but unconstructive criticism I communicate with my dog better than this, argumentative, accusing, pontificating, insulting, belittling, sarcastic, judgemental, condescending, snide, hammering repetitious bullying. This is not relating to your fellow human being without malice and sorrow at all. Rather you perpetuate it, monstrously!. I used to think you had something important to share. I realise now I am no longer deluded. I can learn nothing in dialog with you, except how to perpetuate repulsion, that is what your whole manner evokes. Your ‘belief’ in your harmlessness is just that a ‘belief’, for it reflects in none of your words.
*
From: Charlie Bragg
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001
To: actualfreedom@listbot.com
Subject: Disrespect
Respect? Richards not into respect! He attracts what he gives, just like the rest of us. Here's a load of his antisocial antagonistic correspondence to the Krishnamurti list. Its chock full of disrespect, belittlement, unfriendliness, unkindness, arrogance, callous debunking, cynicism, sarcasm, provocation, feigned exasperation, downright unpleasantness, haughty indignation, phoney gratitude eg. "and I thank you for giving me permission!" exaggerated exclamations, denial, feigned resignation, fault finding, phoney politeness eg. "If I may point out", ridicule, personal attack, browbeating and above all a total obsession with the word *YOU*. Che che che check it out.
*
Message No. 3391
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000
To: NondualitySalon
From: neemyth
Re No 36 and No 05 and ??
[Respondent No 05]: I’ll be glad to respond if you’d please point out a particular ‘attacking’ incident as an example.
[Skye]: You have GOT to be joking! Why the hell would anyone want to go back and find your nauseating, worthless, immature, silly, deluded, warped, useless, trivial, superficial, egocentric, callous, ruthless, cunning, bigoted, sterile, shallow, degenerate, irresponsible, lying, venomous, self-conceited, monotonous, self-righteous, arrogant, cynical, shallow, hideous, nasty, vicious, ugly, self-important, absurd, self-worshipping, phoney, impoverished, infantile and totally unenlightening posts!!! Only to have you run the whole deplorable, dismal, decrepit, sordid, tragic, hideous, petty, pedantic rubbish by them AGAIN! GET REAL STUPID!
*
Message No. 3821
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000
To: NondualitySalon
From: neemyth
Subject: Re passion compassion
[Respondent No 36]: [...] he asked me if I was enlightened. I say yes. [...] And he laughs and says, well, it figures if it would be anyone, it would be you! :-)
[Skye]: Awh what a load of egocentric, nauseating, disgraceful, self-conceited, self-centred, self-glorifying, self-indulgent, self-aggrandising, self-worshipping, self-important, demented rubbish. Happy freekin fantasising.
*
Message No. 4753
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2000
To: NondualitySalon
From: neemyth
Subject: Re Misses X, Y and Z
[Xan]: Have you ladies considered having a private chat? Why drag it out?
[Skye]: Oh put a sock in it. Nothing’s being dragging out, except in your filthy imagination. Don’t you think its about time you had a private chat with yourself about the way you strut around here each day with your wig and robe playing the haughty district court judge. Oh I forget, not possible, your not into looking at your own ever so subtle shit flinging. What? and recognise the hypocrite is really YOU? Oh no, no, no, your into the subtle art of laying ones self-deception on others, mmm?

And ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ is quite open about how writing “aggressively” is a matter of deliberate choice. Viz.:

From: skye chambers
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001
To: listening-l@zrz.TU-Berlin.DE
Subject: Re: Freedom and Abuse
In my offline life my natural goodwill and sense of humour never wains and people often comment on how refreshing it is [...] If my offline friends knew how *aggressively* i write to expose (mainly for myself) the hypocrisies i see they would be shocked! [emphasis added].

As well as that ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ proudly advertises how they adore being an online bully á la the notorious screen-star Ms. Bette Davis. Viz.:

From: skye chambers
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001
To: listening-l@zrz.TU-Berlin.DE
Subject: Re: good move
• [Anonymous]: Skye seems to fancy herself as a bully of sorts?
• [Skye]: :-) Bette Davis said it with more style ‘The bastards can’t handle a strong woman’ ;-) Yes on this list *i adore being a bully* [...] [emphasis added].

Also, ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ would not dream of behaving the way they do online with their work mates. Viz.:

From: skye chambers
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001
To: listening-l@zrz.TU-Berlin.DE
Subject: Re: Freedom and Abuse
I wouldn’t dream of behaving the way i do here with my work mates!

In fact, ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ did not even want to share the anonymising number (anonymised in the online correspondence archived on The Actual Freedom Trust website), from the earlier ‘Topica’ mailing list, with fellow list-members in a rare amicable moment, on the ‘Yahoo-Groups’ forum’. Viz.:

Message No. 1912
To: actualfreedom@yahoogroups.com
From: ‘skyebellau’
Date: Mon Apr 21, 2008
Subject: Re: Arise, Accept, Pass
[№ 02 to № 04]: I had a ‘hard time’ recently reading your conversations with Richard and seeing your feelings dominate your considered response. (...). You came across as someone throwing occasional tantrums who was not on those occasions able to comprehend Richard’s arguments.
[№ 04]: Looking back, that’s pretty embarrassing. I didn’t handle Richard’s relentless and uncompromising style of dialogue very well at all. I could endure it a lot better (though I often didn’t like it) when he was interacting thus with someone else ... but not with me. That’s the most striking general observation in hindsight. I see what you mean about the tantrums; the switch of emotion would be flipped, and thereafter I didn’t give a fuck what he was saying. Unless he was prepared to acknowledge my point, I didn’t want to listen. [...]
[Skye]: Ha! You think yours was embarrassing? Mine was worse! I’m not even going to share which number I was given back in 2000. No Way Jose!
Suffice to say (and more so upon re-reading) that it relieved me of any delusions that I was anything other than a lazy mediocre short-sighted intelligence. But I’m working my way out of it these days. I didn’t follow up with half the vigour you did. Ran out of puff in less than two weeks I think (on the Tropica List) though I had been reading and corresponding with Richard on the Krishnamurti Listening L list since ’98. [...]

Lastly, ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ is loquaciously frank about all such typed-out replies being a constant source of laugh-out-loud jubilance such that the neighbours must think them mad. Viz.:

From: skye chambers
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001
To: listening-l@zrz.TU-Berlin.DE
Subject: Re: Freedom & Hilarity
Do you seriously think anyone here is that pathologically angry? If they were they wouldn’t be able to see straight long enough to string two words together. What human being with half an insight into the human condition still feels that sort of adolescent anger? Who would be so stupid as to come here day after day to be a seething cauldron of fury. Are you joking?
I myself come here because its hilarious. I read a post type a letter and go into my kitchen laughing so hard *the neighbours must think i’m mad*. While i’m making tea and having a jolly good time, someone on the other side of the world is imagining i’m furious, its a total riot :-)))))))
I find it really weird the way you and [name deleted] trot out this anger trip like some sort of ammo whenever you’re losing the plot. Its sooo adolescent, sooo passe. I’d be embarrassed if this was the limit of my psychology. Why exaggerate our fleeting frustration’s, impatience and intolerance as this ridiculous conclusion, that we are this poor tortured creature? [emphasis added].

It is patently obvious, then, how the sock-puppeteer self-evidently gets their rocks off on being a bully and/or writing aggressively and/or behaving in the unsociable way or antisocial mode they repeatedly do online.

SKYE: ... and I even collected a long list of them from his posts and sent them back in during those times ...

RICHARD: As “those times” refers to the eleven-day period from 20 September 1999 to 01 October 1999 it is pertinent to point out that the sock-puppeteer subscribed to the ‘Listening-l’ mailing list, using the alias ‘Skye Chambers’, on May 18, 1999. Viz:

Message No. 01124 of Archive 99/05
Subject: Hello All
From: Skye Chambers
To: Listening-l
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999.
Hello everyone, I’ve just joined the list today (...) Looking forward to communicating with you all, Love and Light, Skye.

‘Sock Puppet Skye’ continued to post—sixty-one emails all told—through to Monday, 4 Oct 1999. Viz.:

Message No. 00218 of Archive 99/10:
Subject: Re: Awareness
From: ‘Skye Chambers’
To: Listening-l
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999.
I am reading from Nisargadatta’s ‘I Am That’ (...) I’ll away for a few weeks, best to all Skye.

As already mentioned it was actually during an eleven-day period (late-September/ early October) in 1999—and not [quote] “way back in ’98” [endquote]—wherein ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ collected the long list from [quote] “a HUGE assortment of epithets that made mine look piss-weak” [endquote] and sent them back in.

And, just for the record, Richard had recommenced writing to ‘Mailing List B’ on Sunday, May 23 1999, until pausing again on Tuesday, Nov 30 1999, posting a total of a hundred-and-sixty-eight emails (seventy-six of which were sent during that five month period ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ posted sixty-one emails).

SKYE: ... to prove his malice was still alive and very much kicking ...

RICHARD: A fully-referenced duly-annotated quote-by-quote confutation of that particular long list of [quote] “epithets that made mine look piss-weak” [endquote] can be viewed, along with the snippets of text (i.e., the so-called “epithets”) in their original online format, at the following link ‘Assortment of Epithets’: Confutation.

Just by way of a brief sampling here are the first ten snippets in that long list (numerals added; not in original):

Message No. 00030 of Archive 99/10:
From: ‘Skye Chambers’
To: listening-l@zrz.TU-Berlin.DE
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999
Subject: Ranting Richard
Richard wrote:
01. This is what a freed intelligence looks like.
02. My writing is flowery
03. This is ‘knowledge’ that you are spouting here ... and pathetic ‘knowledge’ at that.
04. we are here to investigate, are we not?
05. Why do you ignore!
06. Okay then: why!
07. is not reasonable!
08. It is a bit rich to try and tell me ...
09. Stick around on this Mailing List!
10. Are you saying ...

Yet even with the fraudulently added exclamation marks those three snippets (06, 07, 09) do not [quote] “prove his malice was still alive and very much kicking” [endquote] anyway.

Incidentally, a total of twenty two had an exclamation mark gratuitously added (some even replacing a question mark)—and several had the first word of a snippet capitalised (so as to make it appear to be an exclamatory sentence) whilst some others had a word, or two, either gratuitously added or arbitrarily deleted ... or even their order reversed.

Moreover, more than a few of the snippets were actually stitched-together composites comprising of either sentences and part-sentences, or questions and part questions, formed by extracting them from either different parts in an email to a co-respondent or from different parts of different emails, on different days, to a co-respondent and sometimes from different parts of different emails on different days to different co-respondents, and, on top of that, all were jumbled together, sometimes out of chronological order, and never with any references for verification (let alone any acknowledgement of the misleading modus operandi).

SKYE: ... to which he fobbed off some silly explanation ...

RICHARD: That so-called [quote] “silly explanation” [endquote] can be accessed, in its entirety, at this link to the archived post in question: (Richard, List B, No. 40, 2 October 1999).

Suffice is it to say, here, that it is neither a “silly explanation” nor something which “fobbed off”—as in ‘attempted to satisfy with an excuse or pretence’ (according to the Oxford English Dictionary)—the faux accusation made by ‘Sock Puppet Skye’, in their “Ranting Richard” email, about how he was [quote] “argumentative, accusing, insulting, belittling, sarcastic, judgemental, condescending and snide” [endquote] and, furthermore, how his writing was [quote] “hammering repetitious bullying” [endquote].

SKYE: ... and just kept on at it.

RICHARD: As the long list of (unreferenced) snippets did not “prove his malice was still alive and very much kicking” what Richard actually ‘kept on at’ was writing in the same way he had been doing in the previous hundreds of emails to ‘Mailing List B’.

Which is what he clearly explained on the mailing list, in his follow-up email to ‘Sock Puppet Skye’, the very next day (Sunday, October 03 1999) after this long list of (unreferenced) snippets appeared in the ‘Listening-l’ Berlin archives. Viz.:

• [Skye]: ‘You constantly attack and counter attack.

• [Richard]: ‘I do not suffer fools gladly ... if someone is so foolish as to think that by entering into a discussion with me with an adversarial attitude—and thus turning it into a debate and then an argument—to defend the status-quo, so that their ‘I’ as ego and ‘me’ as soul can stay intact, they will find themselves being progressively driven into a corner of their own making. I am relentless where it comes to dismantling the Human Condition. 160,000,000 people have been killed in wars this century alone ... that is where [quote] “attack and counter attack” [endquote] have substantive meaning.
I write trenchantly, saliently ... honestly’. (Richard, List B, No. 40, 3 October 1999).

SKYE: Very interesting is our blindness of ourselves.

RICHARD: As that long list of (unreferenced) snippets did not prove malice was still alive and very much kicking in Richard there is no such “blindness” on his part for ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ to find very interesting.

Here again is a very useful word which serves well in explicating how the vituperative sock-puppeteer sees such “blindness” in that phantom ‘Richard’ who has (apparently) a squatter-type abode in their imaginative faculty. Viz.:

• automorphism (n.): the ascription of one’s own characteristics to another, or the habit of judging others or explaining their acts by means of analogies furnished by the knowledge of one’s self. [as automorphic + -ism]. ~ (Century Dictionary and Cyclopaedia).

• automorphic (adj.): framed or conceived after the pattern or form of one’s self; [e.g.]: “The conception which any one frames of another’s mind is inevitably more or less after the pattern of his own mind—is automorphic; and in proportion as the mind of which he has to frame a conception differs from his own, his automorphic interpretation is likely to be wide of the truth”. (Herbert Spencer; 1820-1903; Study of Sociology, p. 114). [from Greek αὐτόμορφος, ‘self-formed’, ‘natural’ (taken as ‘formed upon one’s own self or pattern’), from αὐτός, ‘self’ + μορφῄ, ‘form]. ~ (Century Dictionary and Cyclopaedia).

• automorphically (adv.): in an automorphic manner. (Herbert Spencer; 1820-1903). ~ (Century Dictionary and Cyclopaedia).

Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) was an English philosopher, psychologist, biologist, anthropologist, and sociologist. He originated the expression “survival of the fittest”, which he coined in Principles of Biology (1864) after reading Charles Darwin’s 1859 book On the Origin of Species. The term strongly suggests natural selection, yet he saw evolution as extending into realms of sociology and ethics (...). 
He developed an all-embracing conception of evolution as the progressive development of the physical world, biological organisms, the human mind, and human culture and societies. As a polymath, he contributed to a wide range of subjects, including ethics, religion, anthropology, economics, political theory, philosophy, literature, astronomy, biology, sociology, and psychology. During his lifetime he achieved tremendous authority, mainly in English-speaking academia. He was the single most famous European intellectual in the closing decades of the nineteenth century (...). 
The only other English philosopher to have achieved anything like such widespread popularity was Bertrand Russell, and that was in the twentieth century. ~ (2023 Wikipedia Encyclopaedia).

SKYE: When the old Listening-l archives could not be transferred it was amazing to see him suddenly jump out and DENY! they were his when they appeared on the AF list a few years later.

RICHARD: First of all, as they were re-posted on The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list by ‘Sock Puppet Skye’s alter ego ‘Sock Puppet Chaz’ (aka ‘Charlie Bragg’) on Wednesday, June 27, 2001—and again on Sunday, October 24, 2004 by another of their multiple alter egos ‘Sock Puppet Ron’ (alias ‘Xan Xuareb’)—then to baldly state that the long list of unreferenced snippets [quote] “appeared” [endquote] as if thaumaturgically on that mailing list demonstrates the true sock-puppetry nature of all those aliases inasmuch the key difference between a sock-puppet alias and a regular ‘screen-name’ pseudonym is the pretence that the puppet is an individual who is not affiliated with either the puppeteer or the other puppets.

Second, Richard did not [quote] “DENY!” [endquote] they were his—he pointed out they had been doctored so as to make them appear to be exclamatory/ impassioned—and his patently obvious lack of denial can be viewed online via this link to the archived post in question: (Richard, The Actual Freedom List, No. 87, 27 October 2004).

Here is but one example (edited solely for brevity), from the above online link, which clearly shows how he most certainly did not [quote] ‘suddenly jump out and DENY! they were his’ [endquote]. Viz.:

• [Ron aka Skye]: Here is an excerpt ‘of excerpts’ posted to this list a few years ago. (...) They are nothing the vain self protective attacks of an ignorant fool.
• [Richard]: As your conclusion is drawn from doctored quotes (more on this below) and imputed passion/ emotion it has no substance.
(...)
• [Ron aka Skye]: Richard wrote: (...) ‘What you are going to come up with next in your on going objection!’
• [Richard]: Here is where that quote came from:

• [Richard]: ‘It does not seem to matter what I say or how I say it ... you are going to find a way to object to it. However, I am only too happy to re-phrase the paragraph in a way that even you should not be able to find fault with. Viz.: [snip rephrased paragraph]. *I do so look forward to what you are going to come up with next in your on-going objection to being happy and harmless*. [emphasis added].  (Richard, List B, No.36, 25 Sep 1999).

Thus not only is there nary an exclamation mark to be seen but my words ‘I do so look forward to ...’ are missing, the lower-case ‘w’ has been capitalised, the hyphen has been taken out of ‘on-going’, and my words ‘... to being happy and harmless’ are also absent.
Apart from the obvious doctoring (inserting an exclamation mark where there was none) it is the pointless doctoring—especially the rather odd removal of a hyphen—which indicates, perhaps, something somewhat out-of-kilter about such a person’s state of mind. (Richard, The Actual Freedom List, No. 87, 27 October 2004).

In view of the fact that ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ was then currently asserting that Richard was in denial about them being his (i.e., on Sunday, Dec 14, 2008) then the latter comment above—about something being ‘somewhat out-of-kilter’ regarding such a person’s state of mind—was quite perspicacious (e.g., upon considering their obsessive, if not persecutory, bizzarro-land endeavour to prevent a few felicitous and innocuous peoples from having their happy and harmless way of life become a world-wide trend and thereby ushering in global peace and harmony in our lifetimes) and especially perspicuous regarding the ‘middle-aged-codger’ exposé, some five months later (May 09, 2009), whereat current-time witnessing of this 53-year-old cross-dresser, in something akin to a panicked frenzy of activity, immediately deleting Richard’s ‘middle-aged-codger’ emails and all of their own multitudinous posts from the ‘Yahoo Group’ archives, before decamping tout-de-suite, was quite the instructive spectacle for those privy to its sequential unfoldment.

SKYE: He could feel safe doing so because the old archives were no longer accessible for verification ...

RICHARD: As those (unreferenced) snippets were so obviously doctored these “old archives” of the Berlin ‘Listening-l’ mailing list are not needed for verification.

SKYE: ... that list has also been ‘selectively’ removed from his correspondences on the AF list ...

RICHARD: That full list—a total of a hundred-and-two (unreferenced) snippets—never was in his correspondences, on The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list, in the first place (let alone selectively removed) as there were just too many to go through, one-by-one, at the time.

The only ones he did address are all still online at that above archived post ... for example:

• [Ron aka Skye]: ‘Here’s a load of Richards antisocial antagonistic correspondence. They are chock full of, belittlement, unfriendliness, unkindness, arrogance, callous debunking, cynicism, sarcasm, provocation, feigned exasperation, downright unpleasantness, haughty indignation, phoney gratitude eg. ‘thank you for giving me permission!’ exaggerated exclamations ...
• [Richard]: ‘Here is where this quote comes from:

[Respondent]: ‘Since ‘compassion’ in this forum is far more likely to be used in the sense Gautama Buddha (according to his supposed transcribers) used it in another language, if you insist on playing the scholar feel free to analyse the etymology of the original word Buddha (allegedly) uttered.
[Richard]: ‘Of course I am free to go chasing about through etymological dictionaries to ‘analyse the etymology of the original word Buddha (allegedly) uttered’—*and I thank you for giving me permission*—but I rather fail to see any reason to do so. As any sophomore worthy of their salt should know, this argument you put forward would easily fall under what is generally classified as ‘The Fallacy of Irrelevant Purpose’. [emphasis added]. (Richard, List B, No.36, 25 Sep 1999).

The relevant words have been highlighted and, as is patently obvious, there is nary an exclamation mark to be seen. (Richard, The Actual Freedom List, No. 87, 27 October 2004).

Just as a matter of related interest: when ‘Sock Puppet Ron’ reposted the email which ‘Sock Puppet Chaz’ reposted from ‘Sock Puppet Skye’s initial post they even altered their own words when doing so. Here is that above ‘Here’s a load of ...’ paragraph as it was when ‘Sock Puppet Chaz’ posted it in 2001.

Viz.:
From: Charlie Bragg
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001
To: actualfreedom@listbot.com;
Subject: Disrespect
Here’s a load of his antisocial antagonistic correspondence to the Krishnamurti list. Its chock full of disrespect, belittlement, unfriendliness, unkindness, arrogance, callous debunking, cynicism, sarcasm, provocation, feigned exasperation, downright unpleasantness, haughty indignation, phoney gratitude eg. "and I thank you for giving me permission!" exaggerated exclamations.

Here are the alterations juxtaposed for convenience:

• [Chaz aka Skye]: ‘Here’s a load of his antisocial antagonistic correspondence to the Krishnamurti list’.
• [Ron aka Skye]: ‘Here’s a load of Richards antisocial antagonistic correspondence’.

And:

• [Chaz aka Skye]: ‘Its chock full of disrespect, belittlement, unfriendliness ...’.
• [Ron aka Skye]: ‘They are chock full of, belittlement, unfriendliness ...’.

Again, it is the pointless alterations—especially the rather odd removal of the word ‘disrespect’ (whilst leaving its comma in place)—which is indicative of something being somewhat out-of-kilter in such a person’s state of mind.

SKYE: ... heaps has of course ...

RICHARD: No emails whatsoever have ever been removed—either “selectively” or otherwise—from Richard’s archived correspondence.

SKYE: ... man you guys are gullible.

RICHARD: As no correspondence whatsoever has ever been removed there is nothing for anyone to be “gullible” about.

SKYE: That’s when I finally knew for sure that Richard was still capable of massive deceit ...

RICHARD: As no correspondence whatsoever has ever been removed there is no “deceit” (be it “massive” or otherwise) to finally know for sure.

SKYE: ... and I’ve been smelling that rat ever since.

RICHARD: Hmm ... as “that rat” is entirely a creation of ‘Sock Puppet Skye’s fantastical imagination it is their own stench which they have been smelling ever since.

*

It is instructive to note how not one single item out of what ‘Sock Puppet Skye’ wrote in these two emails addressed, hereinabove, line-by-line and/or point-by-point (i.e., Message № 3815, posted on Friday, December 12, 2008, and Message № 3840, posted two days later on Sunday, December 14, 2008), bore any resemblance to anything of a factual nature.

In other words, those two emails were nothing but meretricious fabulations—known to all in the post-modernist world (a creative mind-space where ‘truths’ not only trump facts but where facts are ‘truths’ to be dissed at will, or even whim, at times) and its ilk as “narratives” rather than the ‘spin’, the ‘bull’ or, even, the ‘lies’ they indubitably are—in their entirety.

As those two emails are typical of the vituperative sock-puppeteer’s modus operandi (=‘an unvarying or habitual method or procedure’; lit. ‘mode of operating’)—and as a way of rounding-out this edifying blackwash of such practise—an observation made on October 28, 2004, is well worth repeating here. Viz.:

• [Richard]: ‘...the more that certain persons doctor and/or misrepresent my words and/or read things into them which are simply not there, and so forth, in order to find fault the more they demonstrate that what I do report/ describe/ explain is indeed actual/ factual and, thus, irrefutable (else why resort to it).
As such a sterling PR service for actualism is being provided ... gratis’. (Richard, The Actual Freedom List, No. 87, 28 October 2004).

Ha! Ain’t life grand!

RETURN TO FACTS AND GROUPTHINK INDEX

RICHARD’S HOME PAGE

ACTUAL FREEDOM HOMEPAGE

The Third Alternative

(Peace On Earth In This Life Time As This Flesh And Blood Body)

Here is an actual freedom from the Human Condition, surpassing Spiritual Enlightenment and any other Altered State Of Consciousness, and challenging all philosophy, psychiatry, metaphysics (including quantum physics with its mystic cosmogony), anthropology, sociology ... and any religion along with its paranormal theology. Discarding all of the beliefs that have held humankind in thralldom for aeons, the way has now been discovered that cuts through the ‘Tried and True’ and enables anyone to be, for the first time, a fully free and autonomous individual living in utter peace and tranquillity, beholden to no-one.

Richard's Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust: 1997-. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer and Use Restrictions and Guarantee of Authenticity