Sign in to follow this  
MegaMind

Continuation

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, dawei said:

I would agree on the basis of creating a precedent... any group can come in here and demand a private area and THEY be moderators of practice they have no official position in, and were told by indigenous practitioners to stop talking it here.   So who do we listen to, the original indigenous practitioners or those who claim the need to run around the internet to defend themelves?

The problem isn't about original or new practitioners. The problem as you correctly state is that eventually anyone could demand moratorium about their system. Even crappy systems with fraudsters as teachers could demand it as part of equal treatment!

 

So no moratorium! Under no circumstances!

Edited by Zork

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

Bye bye

 

 

First i am petted and i am dishonest and no apology?

Good riddance!

God speed!

Troll defenders get out!

 

Edited by Zork

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Zork said:

The problem isn't about original or new practitioners. The problem as you correctly state i that eventually anyone could demand moratorium about their system. Even crappy systems with fraudsters as teachers could demand it as part of equal treatment!

 

So no moratorium! Under no circumstances!

 

 

100+ page, 1000+ post, flame wars that span years it is then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MildMouse23 said:

I certainly appreciate that, but the problem here is the community here is hostile and a FAQ isn't going to change that one bit.

 

Example:

 

Hostile neocon: Did you hear those evil LIBRUL SOBS EAT BABIES!!!

 

Liberal apologist:  As per our FAQ number 21,  We do not in fact eat babies.  We are however support a woman''s right to terminate her pregnancy.

 

Hostile neocon:  YOU EVIL SOB!!! YOU SLAUGHTER CHILDREN!!!

 

Liberal apologist:  As per our FAQ number 28 we do not see grant person-hood status to unborn fetuses.

 

Hostile neocon:  FAQ YOU!  YOU EVIL SONS O BRICHES NEED TO GET SHOT IN YER HEAD WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU KILLIN BABIES!

 

Etc..

 

It isn't going to fix this mess at all, and it will still be necessary to explain our side when the topic comes up, even having a FAQ pinned.

 

Neither a moratorium nor a private dedicated area are gonna happen, for reasons already mentioned. So we can just put those ideas aside for now.

 

A FAQ is not a fix, but I think it's hard to argue that it would not help?

 

Isn't this a third best option?

  • Houses concise responses to all common questions/criticisms in your own voice in a single location
  • Locked so no worry that it will turn into hundreds of pages
  • Helps other members make up their mind, regardless of any past trolling and misinformation
  • Saves your labor of combing topics and responding to every perceived inaccuracy
  • Assuages a primary frustration/criticism, that you're being disingenuous about why you never respond to anything

I think not wanting to do a FAQ kinda hurts your stated case.

 

1 hour ago, MildMouse23 said:

We aren't actively recruiting, we merely try and passively keep an eye out for like minded people who want to seriously pursue this practice.

 

Active or passive, what's the material difference? You are here on the forum and you are recruiting.

 

Sean

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, sean said:

 

Neither a moratorium nor a private dedicated area are gonna happen, for reasons already mentioned. So we can just put those ideas aside for now.

 

A FAQ is not a fix, but I think it's hard to argue that it would not help?

 

Isn't this a third best option?

  • Houses concise responses to all common questions/criticisms in your own voice in a single location
  • Locked so no worry that it will turn into hundreds of pages
  • Helps other members make up their mind, regardless of any past trolling and misinformation
  • Saves your labor of combing topics and responding to every perceived inaccuracy
  • Assuages a primary frustration/criticism, that you're being disingenuous about why you never respond to anything

I think not wanting to do a FAQ kinda hurts your stated case.

 

 

Active or passive, what's the material difference? You are here on the forum and you are recruiting.

 

Sean

 

 

A  FAQ would be best hosted in a PPD to make revisions easier.

 

It would still be necessary for us to quote parts of the FAQ in a discussion where it occurred, and would not be something we would only link to. 

 

Example:

 

Anti-Mo-Pai Troll:  Jim's cancer was caused by incorrect Mo Pai practice.

 

Us:  As per Mo Pai FAQ number 2 (located here) Jim's cancer was genomically linked to agent orange exposure, see studies x,y,z, and links to the VA department website for more information.

 

If that is agreeable I will post a FAQ in a PPD, but only because it is something you are requesting be done.

 

All the people we have met that expressed interest here in this forum have been told to message or email us privately, it isn't something we are actively going out and announcing.

Edited by MildMouse23
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/18/2019 at 3:15 PM, dawei said:

 

I'm similar in the sense that I don't use the ignore button when I can just skip over something when I want.  

 

Here is my perspective on the MP history here.   It was amicable enough at the start with interesting conversations on the system, levels and western experiences of a few who studied directly under Chang.  Its an intriguing system with surprising results (Chang is at some level around 40 out of 72?).    The western students who could study directly under Chang seemed to have gotten as far as L3 (?), but seems not without some misunderstandings themselves despite the direct training.   And some of those teachings 'leaked' to others in the west (aka: secret teachings were taught to outsiders).   

 

Some 'outsiders' to the secret lineage system were then practicing those levels and discussing them here.  Along came Indonesian practitioners who joined the Bums to say that there is no such thing as "Western Mo Pai" (WMP) and it is an indigenous system that must be practiced directly with the lineage to claim to be Mo Pai.  They asked if folks here couldn't refrain from claiming Mo Pai practice when they were already not following the tradition of direct participation with the lineage system to get proper training.

 

This started about 8 years ago.  WMP mentioning practices they claimed they were not allowed to share (not sure why because they were not under any secret oath to the official lineage nor any official master of the practice)... and the Indonesian students would come back over the years when the WMP commented, and would ask them to stop claiming to be a part of the lineage system.   Over this course, several on the Bums felt there was a kind of spamming, elitist sense of WMP who claimed everyone else's practices were stupid (other colorful words used as well) and meaningless and only their's was a path of true demonstrated power... which over 8 years they would repeat and refuse any explanation, demonstration, or talk on their actual practice.  They would repeat the attacks, victim sense, and inability to get the forum to ban all talk on MP... which mostly they were doing with a kind of hijacking way of posting.

 

Here was the problem as I saw it, over the years.  I've never been inclined to ban a particular discussion of a system.  I just replace that system with another and would I ban it?  No.  Then I would not ban the first one.   Folks come here and ask a question like, "What is this Mo Pai system I hear about on the internet"... Some discussion may start with folks here but the WMP suddenly show up singularly or in numbers and start to dismember any discussion on it.  Its a weird vulture like stance that anyone is simply watching the board for a topic to then come swoop down and interject 8 years of the same repetitive, somewhat programmed, comments.

 

It did very much become an 'us' (WMP) vs the rest of the world; but also an 'us' (Bums) vs the WMP.   And it was dubbed, The MP Wars ... because of the similarities to the previous fights with the Buddhist elitist topics (Buddhist Wars).  Maybe the Bums like a good war.   There was the Lomax Wars too, let's not forget.   And also, Jeff Light Wars if we wanted to be fair about how the 'us' vs 'others' seems to recycle itself here.  

 

I would hope this previous part would put in perspective there is something much bigger than MP Wars but if one were to look at each War, they would see a vast different in the 'fight method'.   Those who had a very strong practice and ability to back it up were never on the attack (Lomax and Light), while those who couldn't were usually more aggressive (or passive aggressive, Buddhist and MP) in putting other systems down.  

 

It seems a funny choice to say: Should the topic be banned or the members be banned? 

 

I've followed the idea that any topic is allowed till it crosses the rules... very few topics have been banned but we're talking like serious and sick topics (child pornography or pizza-gate).   To ban discussion on an energetic system and put it in the category of serious and sick topics always seemed odd to me.    So I've let discussion occur and just view member participate as following the rules or not.

 

I don't have a horse in this.  If the rules changed on banning such topics, so be it.  I'll not lose any sleep, not claim any relief, not need to worry the outcome.   It would have no influence on me today or tomorrow.  But I do see there are some where there is great anticipation for some outcome that will rescue their own anxiety over the issue.   And I thought 'practice makes perfect'  :)

 

Peace.  

 

 

https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/47734-ilovecoffee-is-banned/

 

 

On 9/25/2018 at 11:13 AM, dawei said:

I am sure some are wondering why that took so long but he did finally just create too much review on staff with his insistent cry that staff was biased, membership was biased, and he was here to be a martyr to some cause that never really seemed to be explained well enough as he claims the topic cannot be talked here.

 

The issues he caused here seemed not worth his stay.  I hope we can get a better discourse going on topics of interest to discuss.

 

 

As a brief recap a member was told not to reply further in a thread, and create another thread to continue the discussion. 

 

The member did as instructed and created a discussion in their PPD,.

 

Their PPD was revoked for following the instruction provided by a moderator.

 

In a later discussion this behavior was brought up politely, resulting in the member being banned having violated no rules whatsoever.

 

It is my belief that you do indeed have a horse in this, despite the fact you claim otherwise.

 

 

posts since removed


https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/47711-mopai-only-open-to-ethnical-chinese/?do=findComment&comment=844647

"I will have to disagree with you that every voice is allowed. Others are free to trash talk Mopai and our group as much as they want, and as often as they want, however, if we respond (respectfully I might add) to their attacks we are told we may no longer participate in the thread. If I quote them to respond to the attack in my PPD, my PPD is suspended for violating some unknown rule. The best I can do now is to not quote anyone and express myself in my PPD. The best the rest of the group can do is remain silent and not mention anything related to Mopai in their posts here for fear of being targeted. "


After his post here disagreeing with you, the member was banned and the official explanation for this ban is located here:

https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/47734-ilovecoffee-is-banned/

"he did finally just create too much review on staff with his insistent cry that staff was biased, membership was biased"

 

KeemodN.png

 

dbNs6h9.png

 

Edited by MildMouse23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not trust MIldmouse23 to write the FAQ on a private space on his own. The reason? Look for yourself

On 9/12/2019 at 4:05 PM, Zork said:

What you have available in the first two levels are qigong exercises aimed at preparing the body for LDT activation.

They have nothing to do with Neigong. Mo pai is a neikung school but the alchemy happens later. In the beginning it is just qigong.

Do you remember the above?

His answer was

On 9/12/2019 at 7:02 PM, MildMouse23 said:

Hi Zork,

 

We see having 3 levels better than having 0 levels.

 

We all do the best we can with what we have.

 

At the moment we know of no better options available to us, but will continue to hope that some new teacher is willing to provide the type and quality of evidence we require.

On 9/12/2019 at 7:25 PM, Zork said:

That has nothing to do with what i asked you. Again which of your exercises and by which method transmutes the three treasures?

 

On 9/12/2019 at 7:38 PM, MildMouse23 said:

You are combining terminologies and methodologies from different systems, as such your question is non sequitur.

Now look what happens. https://www.metacenterchicago.com/2017/02/19/mo-pai-nei-kung-john-chang/

On the above link one of the 5 students of John Chang in the west claims that

Quote

general misconception in the Western martial arts world. There are 2 types of practices, Qi-kong & Nei-Kong. Qi-kong involves breathing, meditation & specialized excercise. Once the yin & yang have been joined ie Level 4, then Nei-kong training begins. “

What he is telling us is that WMP don't practice NeiKung despite their claims and furthermore there is a difference between mo pai in the East and the West. Western mo pai is qigong and eastern neigong.

 

MildMouse has claimed that mo pai is the same everywhere and he is practicing neigong when he has no proof of that and despite evidence like the above disproving him. Do you trust him on making a FAQ on his own and giving him free pass on modifying it? I don't and i would like someone neutral to compile it.

 

Edited by Zork

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Zork said:

I do not trust MIldmouse23 to write the FAQ on a private space on his own. The reason? Look for yourself

Do you remember the above?

His answer was

 

Now look what happens. https://www.metacenterchicago.com/2017/02/19/mo-pai-nei-kung-john-chang/

On the above link one of the 5 students of John Chang in the west claims that

What he is telling us is that WMP don't practice NeiKung despite their claims and furthermore there is a difference between mo pai in the East and the West. Western mo pai is qigong and eastern neigong.

 

MildMouse has claimed that mo pai is the same everywhere and he is practicing neigong when he has no proof of that and despite evidence like the above disproving him. Do you trust him on making a FAQ on his own and giving him free pass on modifying it?

 

 

We are not affiliated with metacenterchicago.com that is someone else.

 

There is no such thing as WMP, only MP.

 

MP is a neikung school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2019 at 4:07 PM, Zork said:

I do not trust MIldmouse23 to write the FAQ on a private space on his own. The reason? Look for yourself

Do you remember the above?

His answer was

 

Now look what happens. https://www.metacenterchicago.com/2017/02/19/mo-pai-nei-kung-john-chang/

On the above link one of the 5 students of John Chang in the west claims that

What he is telling us is that WMP don't practice NeiKung despite their claims and furthermore there is a difference between mo pai in the East and the West. Western mo pai is qigong and eastern neigong.

 

MildMouse has claimed that mo pai is the same everywhere and he is practicing neigong when he has no proof of that and despite evidence like the above disproving him. Do you trust him on making a FAQ on his own and giving him free pass on modifying it? I don't and i would like someone neutral to compile it.

 

 

I don't feel a FAQ will help the situation.

 

The only reason I even agreed to do it is because Sean wants it done.

Edited by MildMouse23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MildMouse23 said:

 

I certainly appreciate that, but the problem here is the community here is hostile and a FAQ isn't going to change that one bit.

 

Example:

 

Hostile neocon: Did you hear those evil LIBRUL SOBS EAT BABIES!!!

 

Liberal apologist:  As per our FAQ number 21,  We do not in fact eat babies.  We are however support a woman''s right to terminate her pregnancy.

 

Hostile neocon:  YOU EVIL SOB!!! YOU SLAUGHTER CHILDREN!!!

 

Liberal apologist:  As per our FAQ number 28 we do not see grant person-hood status to unborn fetuses.

 

Hostile neocon:  FAQ YOU!  YOU EVIL SONS O BRICHES NEED TO GET SHOT IN YER HEAD WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU KILLIN BABIES!

 

Etc..

 

 

 

And if that did happen. you are supposing Sean  would not act on such response ?

 

-even after he has just offered to 'bend over backwards' for you ?

 

It seems your plan is to try and get an overall ban on a subject here  .... a very  specific   subject ....  that became problematic due to the way your past members  'played tactics'  here .

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2019 at 5:06 PM, Nungali said:

 

 

And if that did happen. you are supposing Sean  would not act on such response ?

 

-even after he has just offered to 'bend over backwards' for you ?

 

It seems your plan is to try and get an overall ban on a subject here  .... a very  specific   subject ....  that became problematic due to the way your past members  'played tactics'  here .

 

 

 

 

 

I don't think it will help at all, but I am willing to do a FAQ because Sean wants it done.

 

Sean said to drop the request for a moratorium, so it's dropped.

Edited by MildMouse23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Nungali said:

And if that did happen. you are supposing Sean  would not act on such response ?

Of course he would.

 

By the way since there is faq already in the form of "the magus of java" writer's interview on this site, why doesn't someone clean up and formalise the answers he gave into a FAQ about mo pai?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zork said:

Of course he would.

 

By the way since there is faq already in the form of "the magus of java" writer's interview on this site, why doesn't someone clean up and formalise the answers he gave into a FAQ about mo pai?

 

I actually volunteered to help author an FAQ with ilovecoffee before when we talked offsite. My proposal was that I would interview them and edit and revise as necessary so that their answers are both respectful and satisfactory to them. I would also throw in a side commentary as an internal student who is familiar with martial culture to explain in a manner that I hope is satisfactory to the rest of the audience here in the forum.

 

I prefer to work with ilovecoffee as we have more of a personal understanding and respect between one another, but as for MildMouse23, until I see an apology for the bait and switch that turned a conversation addressing me specifically in the original thread title about video learning to one about Mo Pai despite my insistence that I did not want to talk about Mo Pai or even allude to it, I have very little interest in engaging with him at this point. 

 

Contrary to what he may think, I have no problems with his cabal or the indigenous group in Indonesia that birthed his practice. My issue is his conduct and interaction with me on this thread, in spite of earlier interactions on the forum and even attempting to build bridges as a middleman for him and the forum here. Sadly, he chose to be dismissive and associate me with the individuals who have historically developed animosity out of irritation towards him and his cadres. 

 

Also, ilovecoffee didn't agree with an FAQ being a good idea, so I dropped the subject. 

Edited by Earl Grey
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Earl Grey said:

 

Also, ilovecoffee didn't agree with an FAQ being a good idea, so I dropped the subject. 

The only way a FAQ can work is if the community posts the questions, the WMP answer and one like Sean mediates so that it can have some usefulness.

 

1)Saying things like WMP is not qigong is not an acceptable answer because it is misinformation and deception.

There is one of the five original western students of mo pai quoted above clarifying that neigong happens after level 4. Which means that westerners practice some preparatory form of qigong mo pai.

 

2)Saying that they don't believe in supernatural entities and then having Chang in video with possessed swords, exorcisms and talking about yin spirits, isn't exact or true either.

 

3)Claiming that WMP is the same as the MoPai Chang teaches isn't correct either. Jim McMillan claims that he pushed the cardboxes in the video using Chang's yin field. So he is clear that the presence of a teacher affects the results.

 

I am OK if they don't mention everything in the FAQ but telling blatant lies like the above isn't OK at all!

 

PS: Will the purpose/end result of the system be included in the FAQ?

Edited by Zork
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/22/2019 at 1:43 AM, Zork said:

The only way a FAQ can work is if the community posts the questions, the WMP answer and one like Sean mediates so that it can have some usefulness.

 

1)Saying things like WMP is not qigong is not an acceptable answer because it is misinformation and deception.

There is one of the five original western students of mo pai quoted above clarifying that neigong happens after level 4. Which means that westerners practice some preparatory form of qigong mo pai.

 

2)Saying that they don't believe in supernatural entities and then having Chang in video with possessed swords, exorcisms and talking about yin spirits, isn't exact or true either.

 

3)Claiming that WMP is the same as the MoPai Chang teaches isn't correct either. Jim McMillan claims that he pushed the cardboxes in the video using Chang's yin field. So he is clear that the presence of a teacher affects the results.

 

I am OK if they don't mention everything in the FAQ but telling blatant lies like the above isn't OK at all!

 

PS: Will the purpose/end result of the system be included in the FAQ?

 

1 There is no such thing as WMP, there is only MP.


MP is a system of neigong, not a system of qigong.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2  ""Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." -Arthur C. Clarke

 

There are many things modern science lacks paradigms to explain,  we in fact are not nearly as advanced as we give ourselves credit for.

There is nothing supernatural in the entire universe, and there can be nothing that is supernatural.

 

If a thing exists, or an event occurs it must be by definition natural.

Supernatural as a description of a thing or an event exists only because we lack the necessary scientific paradigms to explain it.

 

If you were to show handheld CB radios to people from the 1400s you would be burned at the stake for witchcraft.

They would lack the paradigms necessary to make sense of the technology.

All of John's abilities, and yin spirits are purely natural.

We encourage people to base their beliefs off objective video evidence, and their own first hand observations, and not accept things as true on faith, a book, or the personal testimony of other people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 The teachings for the levels we have are the same,  if Jim had been allowed to continue his training, and he progressed to level 4, he would have been able to do such a demo without John providing a dense field of yin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

PS If you have critically read Kosta's books this should be crystal clear.

This question is best not delved into as it has been the cause of many arguments.

 

Our purpose for pursuing the system is to practice something with good objective video evidence, showing doctors and scientists doing their best to rule out fraud occurring.

We want to practice something with good evidence behind it, and we want to see for ourselves from our own training the reality of it.

Edited by MildMouse23
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/21/2019 at 8:21 PM, MildMouse23 said:

@sean

 

I placed a FAQ in my signature, I hope this is ok.

 

If you think of any more questions I need to put there please let me know.

 

Fine by me.

 

I was originally proposing that we'd solicit questions from the community. But if you'd prefer to just incrementally update your FAQ as you encounter common misconceptions or whatever that's fine.

 

My other two cents, "Is Mo Pai Qigong?" seems like it could use a bit more explanation, e.g. from your school's perspective what is qigong, what is neigong, why specifically is your system neigong, why do you mix Chinese romanization spellings 😜, etc.

 

Sean

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sean said:

 

Fine by me.

 

I was originally proposing that we'd solicit questions from the community. But if you'd prefer to just incrementally update your FAQ as you encounter common misconceptions or whatever that's fine.

 

My other two cents, "Is Mo Pai Qigong?" seems like it could use a bit more explanation, e.g. from your school's perspective what is qigong, what is neigong, why specifically is your system neigong, why do you mix Chinese romanization spellings 😜, etc.

 

Sean

 

 

I will create a new thread asking for questions.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sean said:

 

Fine by me.

 

I was originally proposing that we'd solicit questions from the community. But if you'd prefer to just incrementally update your FAQ as you encounter common misconceptions or whatever that's fine.

 

My other two cents, "Is Mo Pai Qigong?" seems like it could use a bit more explanation, e.g. from your school's perspective what is qigong, what is neigong, why specifically is your system neigong, why do you mix Chinese romanization spellings 😜, etc.

 

Sean

 

 

I updated the FAQ with more info on qigong vs neigong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sean said:

My other two cents, "Is Mo Pai Qigong?" seems like it could use a bit more explanation, e.g. from your school's perspective what is qigong, what is neigong, why specifically is your system neigong, why do you mix Chinese romanization spellings 😜, etc.

Their definition of Neigong is nonstandard and tottaly incorrect.

There are many qigong systems that use yin qi.

That doesn't make them neigong!

MoPai by Chang past level 4 is neigong.

Pre Level 4 it is qigong.

If crap like that makes it to their terrible FAQ* it has no place here.

 

*Seriously people, which FAQ in the entire history of FAQs starts with information on where to find the instructors?:lol:

No info on what mopai is? No mention of MoZi? <_<

And instead we get random info on ad hominem attacks aimed at Jim that no one mentioned in years!

Edited by Zork

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Zork said:

And instead we get random info on ad hominem attacks aimed at Jim that no one mentioned in years!

So what, theyre important misunderstandings. Are you saying a mopie group shouldnt address that misunderstanding of practice at all?

 

Im not part of this group and I wont be. 

I have a serious question to the naysayers.

Is this group doing more harm than good to our society/civilisation? Why do you shun them?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Zork said:

Their definition of Neigong is nonstandard and tottaly incorrect.

There are many qigong systems that use yin qi.

That doesn't make them neigong!

MoPai by Chang past level 4 is neigong.

Pre Level 4 it is qigong.

If crap like that makes it to their terrible FAQ* it has no place here.

 

*Seriously people, which FAQ in the entire history of FAQs starts with information on where to find the instructors?:lol:

No info on what mopai is? No mention of MoZi? <_<

And instead we get random info on ad hominem attacks aimed at Jim that no one mentioned in years!

 

To be fair, the FAQ isn't here, it's only a link in someone's signature. Otherwise, beneath the distracting sense that you're yelling this entire post, LOL, I think are some legit criticisms of the FAQ, even just from a basic marketing perspective.

 

Would love for it to start by answering basic questions, like What is Mo Pai? Who started it? Who holds the lineage now? Are there multiple schools? How does Mo Pai compare to other living neigong traditions?

 

Instead we're thrown into the deep end about anus wires and an unintroduced character named Jim's cancer. 😳

 

Hopefully constructive criticism.

 

Sean

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Zork said:

Their definition of Neigong is nonstandard and tottaly incorrect.

There are many qigong systems that use yin qi.

That doesn't make them neigong!

MoPai by Chang past level 4 is neigong.

Pre Level 4 it is qigong.

If crap like that makes it to their terrible FAQ* it has no place here.

 

*Seriously people, which FAQ in the entire history of FAQs starts with information on where to find the instructors?:lol:

No info on what mopai is? No mention of MoZi? <_<

And instead we get random info on ad hominem attacks aimed at Jim that no one mentioned in years!

 

Maybe because it is  not really a FAQ but a masquerade  to be able to say the usual  stuff and make defences without anyone being able to dispute it .    ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sean said:

Would love for it to start by answering basic questions, like What is Mo Pai? Who started it? Who holds the lineage now? Are there multiple schools? How does Mo Pai compare to other living neigong traditions?

That is what i mean Sean. FAQs start like the way you mention. They don't start with : "to contact us ....."

And obviously if and how they use wires isn't or at least shouldn't be a frequently asked question by sane people!

I mean come on, how many of you that teach internal systems gets asked on how he uses wires? :lol:

 

On whether they were taught everything, i can only say that i sincerely believe that they have everything that Jim and Kostas told them. The only one who knows for sure whether they were taught everything for their level, is Chang and for obvious reasons he isn't available. That creates the problem that their claim can't be verified in any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Zork said:

That is what i mean Sean. FAQs start like the way you mention. They don't start with : "to contact us ....."

And obviously if and how they use wires isn't or at least shouldn't be a frequently asked question by sane people!

I mean come on, how many of you that teach internal systems gets asked on how he uses wires? :lol:

 

On whether they were taught everything, i can only say that i sincerely believe that they have everything that Jim and Kostas told them. The only one who knows for sure whether they were taught everything for their level, is Chang and for obvious reasons he isn't available. That creates the problem that their claim can't be verified in any way.

 

Jim recorded the instruction by his teacher John, of course you can create some new theory that it was deep-faked if you like.

 

Also I agree with you that we shouldn't have to mention the wires bit, but unfortunately it seems that we do as it is something that repeatedly keeps coming up.

Edited by MildMouse23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this