06-13-2011, 07:05 PM
i agree. and it's not negativity to experience frustration at someone not providing a source for stuff they keep repeating on threads, interesting stuff but no way to validate or explore when the person doesn't reply to queries. what point is to provide information when noone can poke a stick at it? we're meant to be discerning and questioning and that's a good thing, to explore stuff together without getting offended by honest interest. which is what i felt towards vbaba's stuff. i wanted to know more and where it came from. because i don't just believe every fairy story without some sort of logic behind it. such as where did the information come from. a lot of Ra material is something that is outside outside validation, therefore the only validation is that it's part of a reliable in many ways material, which is the whole Ra material. the only reason i consider some of the LOO is because of the validated and discernable parts of it. when someone introduces stuff without any ties to an existing channel or work, then how are we supposed to determine if it's trustworthy? cuz it sounds cool? no, then there really is no way which renders the information mostly unusable and that's a pity. that's just my take on it.