Ardavan's purpose? [was: history]

[Shannon Nelson]

David,

This is quite a different use of the list from Ardavan's stated purposes.
If you feel a need to continue in this vein, maybe it would appropriate to
check with him, as list owner, to see whether this suits his intention.

I am curious -- what do you think his most likely response would be, if
asked? (Or have you asked?) Do you think he'd feel okay about having "his"
list used to attack and discredit fellow list-members in this way, and what
do you suppose would be his criteria for the sort of listee who is "fair
game" for treatment? What sort of documentation should be required, before
someone is "outed"? I am genuinely curious both about what you *think* his
response would be, and about what his response would be. I hope he'll voice
his thoughts on on the matter, for all of our future reference.

Shannon
on 8/24/04 2:43 PM, David Hartley at dave@holistiq.com wrote:

[Ardavan Shahrdar]

Dear All,

If any one has forgotten the purpose of this list can
simply go to the main page at
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/minutus

If anything is going to be sent to offend anyone, the
sender will be removed from the list!

Regards,

Ardavan
--- Bob&Shannon wrote:

=====
"Life is beautiful, if you look at it in a beautiful way."

Dr Ardavan Shahrdar, MD, DIHom
President of Iranian Homeopathic Association
Website: http://www.minutus.org
Email: ashahrdar@yahoo.com
Mailing list: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/minutus
___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

[Dave Hartley]

Hi Shannon,

The problem at hand commenced with a person who is offering phoneopathy
via email, with nothing remotely resembling this list's classical /
Hahnemannian approach behind it.

So, had that problem not reared it's ugly head, and become quite
interestingly vituperous after what I considered to be a reasonably mild
rebuke about said phoneopathy, we would not be having this conversation.

I believe the "attacking" started with a bunch of pottymouthing in
response to (again) a mild rebuke about phoneopathy. (off topic,
don'tcha know..)

I really have little idea what Ardavan might think - he is both an
extremely peaceful guy, and also extremely dedicated to classical/
Hahnemannnian homeopathy. Perhaps his inaction was a form of action ?

I do know that I was astonished to see a certain person's name/info on
one of the Iranian classical homeopathic educational sites -so I tried
to bring some attention via private email to the utter incongruity of
that situation.

One down, many more to go.

Joy seemed to indicate her awareness of the situation, and I suppose
either earlier on, or by now at any rate.. quite a few will have formed
some assessments of their own.

What I find practically incomprehensible is the massive lack of concern.
Any time someone claims to be practicing homeopathy when they are
actually doing something entirely different, and taking money under the
guise of homeopathy.. that person is damaging the community of
homeopaths.

Should such activity be allowed to go on right here in the MIDDLE of a
community of homeopaths, with everyone either too busy, too blaise, too
afraid to "rock the boat" or WHAT-ever -?
be well,

David Hartley www.holistiq.com
San Francisco EastBay (510)776-5914
---------------------

[Shannon Nelson]

I'm curious, did you consider Ardavan's reply:

Dear All,

If any one has forgotten the purpose of this list can
simply go to the main page at
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/minutus

If anything is going to be sent to offend anyone, the
sender will be removed from the list!

Regards,

Ardavan

to be inconclusive, and "inaction"? I would say that
(a) Quackwatching is not among the list's stated purpose, and
(b) your posts on the subject were most certainly offensive.

Beyond that, if you want to continue this with me privately, please re-post
me privately. I'm done, let's move on.
Shannon
on 8/25/04 12:25 AM, David Hartley at dave@holistiq.com wrote:

[Shannon Nelson]

hi Christine,

Yikes, I keep trying to stay out of this and hope it will die, but this is a
good and interesting point... At what point, and in what way, should
"concern" become "public action"? And how much list time should it be
given, and under what circumstances?

I'm curious what you feel was an appropriate outcome of this? Do you feel
that David ought to continue digging up dirt on Alva and publishing it on
the list? What sort of documentation or level of certainty should be needed
before this step is appropriate? How long should it continue -- until the
person stops soliciting (at least on the list), or until s/he drops off the
list, or until s/he is arrested, or ?? To my mind the process underway was
basically a "virtual lynching", vigilante justice, and taking place in our
own living room. Is that a good thing?

And for those who wanted it left alone to continue -- if you look into your
motives, what were they -- belief that this is for "the good of the
community", or plain ol' entertainment (but is it entertaining to watch
someone getting lynched?), or something closer to voyeurism?

Shannon

on 8/25/04 5:09 PM, Dogs on Holiday-UK at christine@dogsonholiday-uk.com
wrote:

[Magda Aguila]

Shannon,

I agree.. I keep hoping this subject will die, but Christine's and your
points are interesting and of use. It seems to me that too often, on this
and other lists dedicated to Classical Homeopathy, there is way too much
time used discussing or bringing forth the use of other alternatives (which
may or may not be of use) and even more the discussion of homeopathy-like or
what Hahnemann liked to called "pseudo Homeopathy", which IMO, should have
no place in a list dedicated to Classical Homeopathy.

Thru this whole exchange, I have noticed several interesting things. First,
everyone is attacking Dave for what is being called his "attacks" on Alva,
however, very few people were offended by Alva's language or her over the
top reaction to Dave's comments. Personally, when I saw Alva's vocabulary,
my first thought was that SHE needed a remedy badly! This type of
vocabulary is evidence of deep miasmatic issues. However, with the
exception of two or three people, everyone has come down on Dave and his
"lynching" and no one has been offended, like I was, by Alva's vocabulary.

A point well made by Christine is that we should be concerned with people
who claim to practice Homeopathy but do not. Legislation is being
formulated daily to prevent Homeopaths from practicing freely. The politics
of these actions are not the topic of this email, but they are nonetheless
very real and it seems to me, those of us on this list who promote Classical
Homeopathy, should be vigilant over those who do not because in the end, no
one makes distinctions between GOOD Homeopathy and BAD Homeopathy, and when
these laws are passed, those who practice Classical Homeopathy the way
Hahnemann left it to us, will pay the price for the Pseudo Homeopaths.

Your point is well taken that we don't know to what point our vigilance
should be taken, but in this particular case, I believe it should be
followed thru, although it does not need to be done punch by punch, on the
list. I am sure Dave has not dropped the subject at his end, and when and
if he finds that the truth is not as it has been presented, he will let us
know. I believe this is important not only for us to know but also for
Homeopathy as a whole. It does Homeopathy no good when anyone is presenting
him/herself as a qualified Homeopath yet is causing harm to patients! In
these instances, our concern should be as public and as loud as we can make
it, and I feel it is not only our right, but obligation to unmask those who
are using the name of our Science to gain benefit, while making a mockery of
it!

You asked what are the motives of following with this theme. Personally, I
tend to agree with Dave in much of what he says. I believe that this list
should stick to CLASSICAL Homeopathy and that we should be discussing cases
amongst ourselves, helping each other with difficult cases and discussing
our clinical experiences. I never see, nor do I have the need to discuss
other modalities on this list, or any other, for that matter. I am a
Classical Homeopath. I am interested in discussing classical Homeopathy and
while I recognize that it is important to bring issues of diet, etc., to the
list, I see this need ONLY as it relates to a case in particular or as part
of maintaining causes in general. I did not find the exchange amusing nor
interesting, but rather insulting. If I wanted to see someone I know to be
Classical Homeopath be put down and called names, I wouldn't be here and if
I wanted to hear obscenities, I can always turn the radio on and listen to
Rap!

I also find it of much interest that in a Classical Homeopathy list, those
who do not practice it, feel the need to call those who do, names like
"purists" and "closed minded". I don't go to the allopaths's lists to argue
with them over their misguided ways, nor do I go to an allopathic list to
teach anyone about Homeopathy. That would be cause for descent and would
serve no purpose. I don't see why we, as Homeopaths should be subjected to
this kind of treatment from people who, for whatever reason, choose to go
the drive-thru way and find the quickest and fastest way to what THEY
consider healing. As Dave and Marleen have pointed out, there are many
other lists out there where any thing goes. Those who wish to discuss
"anything" can go there, and I don't see why, those of us on this list,
which IS a Classical Homeopathy list, have to put up with their attitudes,
misinformation, arguments and temper tantrums. JMHO.

Magda Aguila
Aquiline
Animal Nutrition and
Homeopathic Consultations
Ask me about Juice Plus
http://www.juiceplus.com/+ma21937

[Tanya Marquette]

Magda,

i am one of those people who used terms like 'purist' and
noted appreciation of some tangential topic discussion. i
have a problem with your post on a number of issues.

first, dave comes under criticism i think because of his
intransigence about changing his often disrespectful attitude
towards others, especially women. his arrogance seems to
know no bounds and he finally pushed someone's buttons
too heavily. i dont think anyone is supporting alva's expletives,
but as i stated in a previous post, professional name-calling
is still name calling and dave's persistent insulting tone and
attitude has been criticized often with no meaningful response
on his part.

second, i think you make assumptions about people's practice
and their interest in auxiliary modalities. i, for one, have a deep
distrust of practitioners, of any sort, who are so limited in what
they do and understand, that they dont know when to look
elsewhere for information. and that includes holistic healers
who think their practice is the only one that can help. i have
been involved with homeopathy for about 15 years and find it
to be the most profound healing modality--but it still is not the
only one that can help.

third, if my understanding of history is correct, homeopathy in
the united states failed due to the arrogance, self-centeredness
and individualism of the practitioners who couldn't/wouldn't
learn how to work together to promote the practice. homeopathy
became a failed practice due to this type of behavior--not due to
failure of the practice--puristic or not.

let me leave this post at this, altho, i could go on

tanya

[Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD]

I think we are confusing two issues here: homeopaths who have enlarged their vision of healing methods and have properly learned to practice other modalities, and the purpose of a discussion list with a focussed subject.

Over the years I had my share of fights and mudslinging with Dave, I will not comment further, but if this list has decided to limit itself to classical (whatever that means) homeopathy, so be it, we all have to abide by the owner's rules.

There will always be a grey zone where some immediate help or advice is needed and difficult to get with "pure" homeopathy. Some allowance should be made for it and the "Politburo" or "MacCarthist" witchhunt attitude has no place either on a civilised list.

As for the vocabulary and attitude, no comments are needed I believe.

Dr. J. Rozencwajg, MD, PhD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind""

[Shannon Nelson]

Hi Magda,

Like you and Dave and others, I too value the classical emphasis of this
list, and would not want it to become too diluted. But I also would regret
having it become so single-minded that we "aren't allowed to" share
tangential tidbits. See interspersed:
on 8/25/04 6:04 PM, Magda Aguila at aquiline@myexcel.com wrote:
I think this can be a tricky topic... In many cases it will be a matter of
opinion whether or not a subject is "on-topic". E.g. some folks will find
discussions re diet, environmental effects, lifestyle issues, vaccination,
politics, etc., to be off-topic; others feel they are *very* on-topic, as
they so often constitute the "obstacles to cure" and "errors of lifestyle"
that Hahnemann specifically enjoins us to understand to educate patients
about. How do you feel about this point?

What are the particular subjects that you're objecting to, and are you
saying you feel they should not be discussed *at all*, or just that they
should take up too much of the discussion?

Personally, I become uncomfortable when someone hands out a prescription
which seems to me too shallowly done (which may simply mean that I don't
understand the *basis* for it!), or which I feel needs to be under
supervision (What will the patient do if old symptoms return? What if
there's aggravation? etc...)
Are you speaking of the above-mentioned quick prescriptions, or
"this-for-that" prescribing, or ?? Given that this is an open list and
Ardavan prefers not to "babysit" too much, what do you feel should be done
about it?
Well, I'm sure some were offended, some were shocked, some were amused, and
some were various mixtures of all those and more. But so what? She had not
embarked on a systematic and determined smear campaign. She was on the
defensive not on the attack, her posts were fewer and shorter, and most
to-the-point, he kept going when she had dropped off.
Yeah, I was impressed too! :-/ But again, so what? It's okay to lynch
people who swear, or have miasmatic issues?
So if Alva's posts had been demure and appropriate, *then* you would have
found Dave's actions okay? I think that is missing an important point...
You mean it's okay to defame, pursue and do a smear job (i.e. "lynch")
someone if they have bad enough manners?
Yes, it is a good point. What is the basis for saying that Alva does not
practice homeopathy? Remember that there is not an established definition
at this time; legally, and in the eyes of most people, she certainly *does*
practice homeopathy, tho we don't have much basis for saying much more about
it than that. We know she practices other things too, which is quite
permissible for a naturapath. So, I'm not sure just how that concern
squares with the situation under discussion?
Ah, I completely agree. Personally I think it is urgently important that we
establish a definition of homeopathy. It's a tricky and touchy proposition,
but I think we will be absolutely strung up if we do not (a) define
ourselves, (b) stop dissing everyone who doesn't practice the way we do,
because "definition" should not become an us-versus-them thing *because* it
is also urgently important that we (c) make ourselves a credible,
compatible, cooperative place among the universe of alternative health care
modalities. Which will not happen while we're engaged in this
Hahnemann-esque thing of verbally spitting at people we disagree with...

So, back to the questions I asked in my post to Christine (which, of course,
is really directed toward everyone and anyone!): What do you think was the
appropriate way to handle the situation? Should Dave have continued on with
free reign, digging up dirt and publishing it here? How long? Until what
point? How does that fulfill the list's stated purposes (studying
homeopathy) and etiquette (no personal attacks, no offensive posts)? And of
course I realize that Alva bombed big time on that one; I am not trying to
paint her blameless.
??? I have no problem with *vigilance*; that should be taken to the
farthest point that each of us feels able. What I am objecting to is
"vigilantism" -- for one person to act as judge, jury and executioner to
fellow list-members.

My point is not that "we don't know to what point [it] should be taken;" my
point is that if we are going to say it's okay to lynch fellow listees in
this way, then we HAVE to establish our guidelines -- what's okay, when, how
much, and why. Then we'd better have Ardavan write it into the list
description, so that all members have a choice as to whether this is an
environment they want to be involved in, and so that we can drop the
hypocrisy of howling "FOLLOW THE RULES!" as we trash the rules ("...study of
homeopathy"; no personal attacks; etc.) into little, muddy, entrail-strewn
pieces (mm, gettin' swept away by my own eloquence here! ).
Ah, yes -- *not on the list*. That was *exactly* my point! If someone has
a legal case against someone else and wants to pursue it, *fine* by me, let
them reap and sow their own karma. But not on the list, please.
Fine. I would have no objection to a "news update". It's off-topic and
irrelevant for most of us, but I think tangential information is often
useful and interesting.
That is certainly true. If she is doing harm by misrepresenting herself,
then she *should* desist, with "help" if needed. Personally I have
compassion for her situation (I know she is dealing with several very sad
and difficult situations) and would rather have her "helped" by someone more
compassionate than our David, but that is beyond my ability to control. (No
longer as phos/caust as I used to be, I guess. Sad...)
But this really has nothing to do with this situation. If that were his
reason for attacking her, he would have attacked quite a few others in the
same way, long before this. His reasons had to do with (perceived)
misrepresentation and dishonesty. I don't know the truth of the matter, but
I gather this was his reason, not simply the non-classical thing.
Yeah, and I sure wish we'd get back to that. This takes up too #&@*$(@ much
time, and it gets BBBBOOOORRRRRIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!!
??? But you're okay with it happening to someone who's not a classical
homeopath? Personally, I go more for the "do unto others" and "respect your
fellow man" kind of approach... But I guess that's neither here nor there.

I'd be interested in seeing how you would specifically answer the questions
I posed to Christine?

Cheers,
Shannon

...

[Magda Aguila]

Hi Magda,

HI Shannon,

regret

### The keyword here is "tidbits" . There is a difference between offering
tidbits as part of one's experience and going all out about some other
alternative treatment, which may be very helpful, but totally off topic.

Shannon wrote:

of

#### I believe I addressed these topics, which are, as I said earlier part
of a particular case and/or general case management as these would be
considered in Classical Homeopathy as maintaining causes.

Shannon wrote:
#### I own a Classical Homeopathy list for Pets. Often, the discussion will
stray into Traditional Chinese Medicine, or Aromatherapy. IMO, these are
totally off topic, and when they come up, I put an end to the discussion
right away. It is not that I consider TCM or Aromatherapy not valuable
alternatives, it is simply that they have no place in a Classical Homeopathy
list.
#### I agree 100%. Going back to my example of the list I own. There is
another "homeopathy" list for pets out there. On that list, people can come
and say, "my dog has an ear infection" and immediately two or three people
will spout a remedy. I do not allow this on my Classical Homeopathy list.
If someone comes to the list with an animal with ear infections, we explain
to them that one symptom does not a case make. We then ask them for more
details, and once we get those, we guide them to the Repertory rubrics that
should be looked at, and help them learn to repertorize. Then we ask them
to read the top 2 or 3 remedies in the repertorization and see which one
most resembles their animals and if after that, they still have problems,
then I will give key notes of the particular remedies, or will point out why
one remedy may be worth checking further, or why another remedy should be
discarded from the repertorization. Spouting out remedies based on one or
two symptoms is not responsible, nor is it Classical Homeopathy, IMO.
Shannon wrote:

#### No, I am talking about sequential "homeopathy", or mechanistic
prescribing, or some of the other things that come up on the list quite
often. The posts that were exchange last week regarding LM potencies, and
medicinal solutions were excellent. The discussion of Andre Saine's
critiques of Hahnemann were also excellent because David Little brought the
discussion INTO Classical Homeopathy and what Hahnemann really taught and
what Hahnemann was really all about. These type of discussions are always
informative and teach all of us a lot. A good example would be the fact
that many here, including Dave practice craniosacral techniques. I think
that is a fascinating subject BUT NOT for a Classical Homeopathy list, and
you will note that Dave never talks about it, because it is off topic for
this list.
Shannon wrote:
and
not

#### Shannon, I think you are totally missing the point here. The original
subject was alcoholism and long distance/internet treatment. Dave expressed
his opinion on internet prescribing. I disagreed with him on that subject,
because my practice is almost 100% long distance and I have a lot of success
stories and my practice is booming. I did not insult him, nor did he insult
me. Yet Alva immediately took it personally, sent her post about her
practice being long distance, and when Dave replied further, she started
with her insults and obscenities! This is not professional, nor is it what
I want to see or read on this list, or any other list!

She was on the

#### She DEFINITELY was on the attack! In her first post back to Dave she
refered to Dave's anatomy!!!! and it just went down hill from there! Dave
never called her names. He questioned her background and her titles, but he
did not call her a bitch, which, BTW, would have been a very appropriate
response to Alva's obscenities.

and most

#### OK, so Dave maybe should have dropped the subject and he did not, but
this does not justify the personal attacks on Dave that followed.
#### There was NO EXCUSE for Alva's vocabulary! Even if Dave had insulted
her (which IMO, he did not, he just questionned her knowledge) there was no
need to use obscenities on the list!

#### I find Dave's posts to the list ALWAYS worth reading. There are many
people who post on this list, that I never bother reading their posts as I
know they will not be related to Classical Homeopathy. Why is everyone
jumping down on Dave's throat? So he is never going to win a "congeniality"
prize, but are his posts EVER off topic for this list? And have any of you
ever considered that for YEARS he keeps reminding people of the purpose of
this list, and for years everyone ignores him? After a while, even the Pope
would loose his patience!

I think that is missing an important point...

##### I did not see Dave's posts as "lynching" until AFTER Alva insulted
him, and filled her posts with obscenities, simply because Dave disagreed
with long distance/internet practices and considers them not to be proper.
Contrary to your view, I saw Dave stating his opinion, and then I saw Alva
go on the attack, and Dave retaliate.

*does*
about

##### Well, now we are getting into a subject that I have some first hand
knowledge about, but feel is not my place to bring to the list. So I will
leave it at that. However, I will say there MUST BE a established
definition of Classical Homeopathy amongst Homeopaths and there MUST BE
standards by which we can judge whether or not someone is practicing
Homeopathy based on Hahnemann's 6th Organon, or not. The standards are
there, IN the Organon, and IN all of Hahnemann's writings. More and more
each day I see so-called Homeopaths setting aside the teachings of our
Master and wanting to bring Homeopathy to our "modern" times. That is a
bunch of bologna! Hahnemann left us the FOUNDATION for us to work with, and
there is no need to deviate from that foundation to treat 21st Century
diseases. The roots are there, all we need to do is READ Hahnemann, study
his teachings and put them in practice! David Little has a huge practice in
India, where he sees hundreds of patients weekly. Do these people not show
the 21st Century diseases we all see???? He does not deviate from
Hahnemann's principles to treat these patients, so why are there so many
"homeopaths" out there trying to shove down our throats something different?

We know she practices other things too, which is quite

#### Well, Naturopathy is NOT Classical Homeopathy, for starters...

.
we
proposition,

#### No, it is not! This only becomes a problem when we want to be "nice"
to everybody and "accept" other views. This is NOT what Hahnemann taught
us! He had no problems calling those who did not follow his teachings and
who wanted to go off in other directions, PSEUDO HOMEOPATHS! What is it
about American society that we feel we must compromise our standards (and
morals many times) to "accept" everyone??? WE have our guidelines, they are
clear and well defined. They are clearly set out in the Sixth Edition of
The Organon, and The Chronic Diseases and all of Hahnemann's writings. Who
came up with the idea that we MUST accept anyone else's deviations from
these standards? Why do we have to keep our mouths shut when someone is
preaching something that is not what Hahnemann taught us? I just don't
undersand this attitude! People get upset with Dave and many others, often
because they clearly say what they see and think. What is the problem with
that? Why do we have to be wishy washy when it comes to the FOUNDATION of
Homeopathy? or have we forgotten that people's lives are at stake here when
someone is not using Homeopathy properly? Have you not heard of people
dying because someone prescribed a remedy in a mechanistic manner? Have you
never gotten a case that is totally confused and the patient is in terrible
shape because some "pseudo" prescribed a remedy in too high a potency, or
too large a dose and when the aggravations appeared, they saw them as a
"good thing"? Should we keep our mouths shut and allow this person to
continue to harm people? What happened to Hahnemann's goal to STOP
HUMANITY'S SUFFERING???????

it
care.

#### But we will NEVER achieve that goal when we continue to turn our heads
when we see damage being done, and our SCIENCE misued!!! There comes a
time when people MUST stand on their values and what they believe in! We
see this attitude all around us. Our society no longer has a sense of
moral. Our children are being raised with no responsibility, sense of duty,
valor or values, because we, as a society are too damned "understanding"!
There is NO PLACE amongst a group of Classical Homeopaths, committed to
healing people using the Science and Art that Samuel Hahnemann clearly
defined for us, to be "understanding" of those who are not practicing
Homeopathy as he left it for us to use! By this I don't mean that we should
not help those misguided people to learn the foundation of Homeopathy, but
once we have guided them there, if they continue to defame and misuse that
foundation, then there is no place for us to continue to excuse their
behavior!
#### I am not justifying bad behavior, but, would you explain to me this?:
If we are Homeopaths, whose teachings do we follow? Ghandi's???? Did we
not get our Science from Hahnemann????? Was Homeopathy not founded by Samuel
Hahnemann? Did Samuel Hahnemann not write the six editions of The Organon?
Did he not write the Chronic Diseases? Did he not spend ALL his life
perfecting the science he founded in order to alleviate Humanity's
suffering???? So, if we do not practice what Hahnemann taught us, then what
do we practice??? This is exactly what I refer to, when I say that this
list spends way too much time discussing things that have NO PLACE on this
list! Yes, we have a rich legacy of excellent Homeopaths, but ALL of them
practiced what Hahnemann taught us! There is no place in a Classical
Homeopathy list for any deviation from what Hahnemann taught! Otherwise, it
is no longer Homeopathy list!

Shannon wrote:

So, back to the questions I asked in my post to Christine (which, of
course,
the

#### The subject should have been stopped immediately by the list owner or a
moderator I would have sent a private reprimand to Alva IMMEDIATELY and if
she had sent one more post to the list with her obscenities, she would have
been unsubbed from the list, without another chance. That is what I would
have done, it it had been my list. But this is NOT my list, so I should not
be saying what ARdavan should or should not have done.

Should Dave have continued on with

### I am sure that Dave would not have continued with the dirt digging
publicly, if Alva's obscenities to him had stopped as soon as they started.
What I see here is a common antagonistic attitude towards Dave because he
seldom keeps things to himself. Many people on this and other lists have
had their arguments with Dave, and many more dislike him tremendously. So
when the opportunity arises to come down on him, everyone jumps in, feet
first, relishing the opportunity to give Dave "a dose of his own medicine".
Maybe if I did not agree with Dave's attitude towards true classical
Homeopathy, I would feel the way many on this list feel, but luckily for me,
I learned classical Homeopathy from some of the same sources Dave learned,
and I agree with him 100% on his view of what Classical Homeopathy means,
and what things are and are not on topic on a Classical Homeopathy list. Do
I always agree with Dave's approaches to communicate his feelings? not
always, but does this mean that he is wrong for being passionate about
Classical Homeopathy and about what he truly believes in? And does the fact
that he is not always pleasant and congenial in the ways he uses to
communicate make him wrong about what is and what is not Classical
Homeopathy and what should and should not be discussed on this list, IMO,
NO!!!

How long? Until what
of

#### In reality Shannon, how long the subject went on should not be placed
on either Dave nor Alva. The subject should have been stopped by someone
in charge and I amnot by any means putting the blame on everyone!

##### Well the reason for that is because Dave is one of the FEW people on
this list who is not afraid to be unpopular, and passionate about what he
knows to be appropriate Classical Homeopathic approaches! There are a LOT
of people on this list, me included, who object to many of the discussions
on the list that deviate from Hahnemann's teachings, it just so happens that
Dave is the ONE who is always happy to open his mouth and let it all hang
out!
This is a Classical Homeopathy list. Period. There is no place for off
topic issues once the purpose of a list has been clearly established. Is
sequential Homeopathy CLASSICAL? Absolutely not, yet it is discussed here
time and time again. Is Naturopathic or CTM Classical Homeopathy, NO! but
it is also discussed at times. Are Herbs Classical Homeopathy? NO. But
they are discussed on this list often. Is nutrition Classical Homeopathy?
NO. But there have been discussions on the list about certain nutrients,
and supplements, etc., which are not related to how a person's nutrition may
or may not affect their Homeopathic cure. So WHY do people get upset when
Dave or anyone else reminds the members of the purpose of the list?
my
how
of

#### I agree that mud slinging has no place in this or any other list, but
my point is and has been all along, that the exchange earlier was NOT all
Dave's fault, and that while he may have taken it a bit too far, publicly,
I was in no way insulted, nor shocked by his words. It was, IMO, once
again, Dave being Dave. But my point also is that Dave was not the first
one to start with the shocking behavior, and that many people have used this
episode to vent their penned up dislike of Dave because he insists that this
list be held to the CLASSICAL Standards that Hahnemann left us! And I am
sure that Dave does not need me to defend him, which some may think I am. I
am defending his standards for this list and for the quality of Homeopaths
and Homeopathy list, as a group should endorsed. And I am now off my
soapbox!
#### If I understood the exchange correctly, Dave expressed his opinion that
internet/long distance treatment was not good Homeopathy. Things escalated
from there, with Alva being the first one to refer to Dave's anatomy and
Dave taking things from there.
#### I do not like seeing any kind of obscenities on any list. However, I
am fed up with the attitudes (which many times include insults) that appear
in this and many other lists I belong to, when anyone with a Classical
Homeopathic education, expresses dissaproval of "pseudo" Homeopathy. It
seems to me that Classical Homeopaths who demand the purity of following
Hahnemann's teachings are held in contempt by those who have either chosen
to or have not been able to achieve the standards of Homeopathy. So they in
turn, call us narrow minded, claim to know that Hahnemann was senile, and on
and on, simply because they can't accept the foundation of Homeopathy. This
is what I see as the main reason why we find ourselves accepting the
anything approach to Hahnemann's science!

Personally, I go more for the "do unto others" and "respect your
there.

#### So do I, but please, go back and re-read the exchange. I know few
people who would have been nice in responding to a comment that eluded that
their brain was the same size of another part of their anatomy!

Magda Aguila
Aquiline
Animal Nutrition and
Homeopathic Consultations
Ask me about Juice Plus
http://www.juiceplus.com/+ma21937