Re: History of Karma?? .... was Re: [PEAR-QA] Re: PEAR Account Request: sean

Anatoly Techtonik wrote:

LS> Now I really wonder if you are getting off making circular arguments or LS> if its also a language barrier thing, but wasnt it you that objected LS> using karma to denote accessrights (which you thought was a PEAR LS> invention, which in turn prompted Alan's history lesson)? I'm a little confused. "Get off" has too many meanings in the dictionary I use. If I understand you correctly, in my earlier letters

"get off" in this context means if you "finding pleasure" .. Since the phrase has a negative connotation I was also trying to voice the fact that I am getting increasingly annoyed.

I mentioned an idea, that access to PEAR development should be controlled by karma system. There's no contradiction with any of my letters and that one is no exception. But karma system in the wide sense, like I described it in the answer to bertrand. I've never taken message "you don't have karma" on CVS error too seriously, because it is subtle way to say you don't have access to that part of repository. In buddhizm that also means that after rebirth you will have another karma, which in this case might allow you to do the things you can't do now. So you need to experience this "rebirth" first.

Well I dont remember that we have revoked anyone karma. However we have added karma for people based on their deeds. So we dont need a rebirth to stay within your methaphor.

The main point in karma system is that karma is independent of everything, except person deeds (there can be a difference with buddhizm in the way, that karma might be independent of everything at all - feel free to correct me).

No karma is giving to you based on your deeds (these include convincing promises).

I really have some language barriers and I'm writing such long letters because I don't want to be misunderstood.

Yes, this is actually the first email from you in recent times where I felt you were not trying to insult everybody.

If meanings of "circular" and "contradiction" in your context are not the same, then I don't understand what are "circular arguments".

no, they are the same in this context. regards, Lukas