Internet Censorship: 13.2.5.6 to 34

[Fanofenka]

A leaked document reveals an executive order to censor the internet due to political bias. This will only likely backfire.

What will happen to the internet? 13.2.5.6 People in Harmony to 34 Great Vigour.
Line 2 says, "People in harmony at the ancestral temple. Shame." Will people hope that the executive order will backfire?
Line 5 says, "People in harmony first cry out and weep, and then they laugh. Great leaders can bring them together." Will the situation of internet censorship be dealt with?
Line 6 says, "People in harmony at the outskirts altar. No regrets." Will the executive order get shot down?

 

[Trojina]

Have you ever tried to interpret a reading for yourself ? It is advised especially if frequently posting threads. After each line you ask a question but that's not really interpreting is it.

For such a frequent poster of new threads it would be ideal if you aimed to put some thought into interpretation for yourself since with nothing from you, no feedback nor interpretation your threads are getting to be rather pointless.

 

[Trojina]

Here it is again some guidelines

How to get the most from sharing a reading

There are some lovely people here who'll help you understand your reading. Here's how you can make it easier for them to help you: Share... some background and context for your reading - enough for people to understand what it's about. the question you asked, word for word. the answer Yi gave...

www.onlineclarity.co.uk

 

[Freedda]

A leaked document reveals an executive order to censor the internet due to political bias. This will only likely backfire.

Fano, I agree with Trojina here.

As I have said a number of times in other posts, I take no issue with your political views. But it seems that 'your views' are the focus of all of these posts, and that they really don't have much to do with what the Yi is actually saying.

And that makes me wonder, why are you even posting these here? Because as you are presenting them here, it seems that your political musings would be much more appropriate for a politically-oriented forum, of which there are no lack on the web.

Line 2 says, "People in harmony at the ancestral temple. Shame." Will people hope that the executive order will backfire? .... Line 5 says, "People in harmony first cry out and weep, and then they laugh. Great leaders can bring them together." Will the situation of internet censorship be dealt with? .... Line 6 says, "People in harmony at the outskirts altar. No regrets." Will the executive order get shot down?

Almost all your posts follow this very familiar pattern: you make a statement, that is often slanted, and which you already have a firm opinion on; you then pose a question to the YI; and then respond to the lines with a list of 'questions' which seem loaded - like saying 'have you stopped beating your wife yet?' - or they come across as your opinions posing as questions.

So for the above, what you are really saying is:

I want the executive order to backfire; I want this situation to be dealt with; I want this to get shot down

.... and none of this seems to have anything to do with what the Yi and the lines are saying, which makes it seem like such as odd disconnect - even for a knee-jerk liberal like myself.

So it all starts to seem that it's about you and not a serious look or even an attempt to look at what they Yi might be saying. And as I've said before, this is how I expect that Trump might make use of the Yi; which makes me wonder, is this how you want to be coming across as well?

Regards, D.

 

[Trojina]

But you've said all this before and so have I and we know what will happen don't we ? He will just post another thread with exactly the same style so is it worth bothering even to answer ?

 

[Freedda]

He will just post another thread with exactly the same style so is it worth bothering even to answer ?

Well, if that's true why have you posted here three times? Good for the goose ... good for the gander as they say. Besides, I still have hope ....

 

[Fanofenka]

Freedda, you are right. My interpretation does seem to serve my own agenda.

 

[Freedda]

Freedda, you are right. My interpretation does seem to serve my own agenda.

Hello FanoF. I wonder, where you might want to go from here what that?

One thought I had - and I am not any type of expert about this - is that you might consider doing one of your politically-themed readings, but only for yourself (not think about posting it), and try looking at it from a few different perspectives: think of it as being about you and how you might be feeling about the situation (this is always a good place to start), or make believe that a reading about trump is going to tell you how he is right, or something like that. Or, consider what the larger underlying themes might be: power, truth, people's fears or need for consistency ....

So, for example, 13.2 - 'Fellowship with others only within the clan. Embarrassing (which also points to the fact that there are different inerpretations)'; could be saying, hmmm, is it an illusion to only look at things from one side - as I might do if I were only hanging out with my (political) clan? Or, what would a censored, one-sided internet feel like, or any one sided-dialog for that matter?

That sort of thing. And if you haven't already, you might want to look at the learning resources on this site - both free and fee-based.

Best, D.

 

[Fanofenka]

I thought 13 People in the Harmony meant that people will be standing up against the executive order.

 

[Freedda]

I thought 13 People in the Harmony meant that people will be standing up against the executive order.

Fan-O, how you end up making use of the Yi is really your business. But again, it seems you are making some conclusions before you even consult the Yi, and the response can then do nothing but match what you've already concluded.

One thing to note: you started by mentioning a vary specific thing - trump's leaked plans to 'censor' the interent. But then you asked a very broad question - what will happen to the interent? And that is a much larger questions than what trump may or may not do. But then you make your response all about your first statement, and not at all about the question you really asked.

It would be like me saying: 'I ate at my local diner and got food poisoning.' I then ask the Yi, 'what is the state of food safety here in the US?' (which is a much larger question), but then I interpret my response (regardless of what the answer is) as: 'the diner should be shut down. People will realize this and stop eating there.'

Or ... I want to go to LA for the weekend, and I ask the Yi, 'where should I go for the weekend?' and they Yi's response is, 'hmm, you might consider Santa Fe, or better yet, just stay home and do a few things around the house.' But I then interpret the response as, 'see, the Yi really wants me to go to LA!'

Do you see the disconnect here, and the jumping back and forth between a larger or broader question - and the actual response - when compared to how I want the situation to turn out.

So, quickly, here's what I would say about your internet question and the Yi's response: 13.2.5.6 > 34 .....

The interent is a tool that can help provide 'fellowship with others.' It is built on creativity, perhaps a higher purpose, and helps us to be curious and explore our world. The ideal might have been about having 'Fulfillment in Difference(s)' - as one Yi author calls it.

But perhaps at some point earlier in its development (re; line 2), there were errors made about how it should work and how it is owned and controlled- and now there is a danger that it might serve 'only within the clan' - meaning what? that it is 'clannish' in how it is owned and conrolled? And it can be too easily controlled by particular groups? (Think Trump's censorship plans; the Russian hacking of US elections; Facebook's bottom line profit margin ...)

Perhaps a path forward needs to start here, with 'wailing and weeping' - perhaps that people first need to wake up to the fact that there is even something wrong?, but that it still has the potential to lead to more connection and less conflict.

But perhaps to do this we alll need to leave our clans - all of our entrenced politics, and profit-margins, and nationalism, and get to a place where everyone is less guarded - to have fellowship with others on the frontier'.

And so how to move forward? That we need to be decisive about wanting the internet to change, and that it must be based on our higher ideals .... No easy task I admit, and maybe not one that will come in my lifetime.​

But that's just my quick take on it (which might not necessarily be correct) ... and you might have another, but I hope you get the idea of where I was going with this. Consider letting the Yi's response take you in its own direction, and not the one you want it to.

Best, D.

 

[Freedda]

PS - looking over what I wrote above, I'm reminded that I don't think we always need to get the question 100% correct (or even close, or phrased correctly ... ), but we should pay attention to the response and be open to it. D.