I took some time to consider your response, and I understand that you don't wish to continue the conversation, so I was hopefully able word this response in a manner that won't cause you to feel like you need to reply.
In retrospect, I think what happened is that we weren't on the same page with the conversation. My intention with the first post was simply to make some suggestions that might offer Nicky & others ways to generate income through sponsorship. I now recognize that you were attempting to help me feel my way through some of the points I raised - I completely missed that.
I can't agree with you that I was being insincere mostly since I don't claim to be the path. As I stated in my introduction posts, I recognize that there is a great deal of truth about the true nature of love presented by AJ & Mary and I'm currently evaluating whether or not I want to make a sincere attempt to grow in love on the path, or if I want to use the wisdom the grow on the natural love path. It wasn't my intention to use this as an opportunity to grow in love, but rather to have a discussion about the principals of Divine Love.
This is one of the reasons I didn't share my feelings about how advertising is or could be loving since I was focussed on a conversation about the principals in play. There is no denial in me that I live out of harmony with Divine Love princiapls, nor is there a feeling that advertising in general is positive. The point I was trying to make is that there are some beautiful concepts at the heart of advertising and how they could possibly be made to be loving. If you don't explain why you are asking something, and the person misses the point, it's not necessary or humble to call them insincere and arrogant.
I feel you have misrepresented my views by saying this. It looks as though you have interpreted me making two claims that I didn't make. The first being that advertising IS loving. The second being that the only objection to advertising is cynisism. Instead, the points i was making are that there are core loving elements in certain advertising models. And the second that people often miss seeing the loving aspects due to cynicism. I never felt like YOU personally were cynical, but rather that you raised some cynical points. When you said used television advertising as an example, I was only trying to point out that people who want free network television are often times unconcscious that the ads are the reason they are receiving it. Watching television is not compulsary and so the ads are not compulsary or forced. My genuine assumption was that you would grant me the point, not that you were too cynical to know or understand the concept.Not only we are all surrounded by advertising, which is intrusive, sneaked in, compulsive & completely unloving in God's eyes, and I am yet to hear anyone say that they love it and want more of it, so again anyone can vouch about how they feel about advertising. Which you do not want to take notice, but wish to argue that they are simply cynical.
The reason that the principals matter to me, is that I'm considering what a loving world "could" look like. Attempting to justify the current standards or my own employment did not factor in to it for me and I certainly meant no offense to you. Also, since you said I was arrogant, I would like to add that in my heart and mind I did not feel, as you suggested, that you couldn't have known the insight as to what I was saying. Again, my assumption was that you would see where I was coming from - I was attempting to use clarifying language.
Reading between the lines, it feels as though you are saying you're disappointed you spent time trying to help me, and again repeated your incorrect belief about my view of advertising. It might be worth pointing out that I started this thread in the suggestions category as an attempt to offer something that the community might be able to benefit from, not the assistance category. I do appreciate what I feel was a sincere desire to help me, and I'm sorry I missed it, but I don't feel like I deserved this frustrated response you sent.This is as much as I would like to say, as I feel I have already spent a lot of my time trying to help you see the error bases view you have about advertising being "loving".
I hope you understand this is the best answer I'm capable of at the moment - it felt wrong to not respond and I also didn't want to be insincere - these are my true feelings. I know you have a heart of gold. I think what happened is just the sort of thing that can happen with interaction done over a computer rather than in person.
Tara - Thank you for the links to the video. I will watch those when I get time.
Mary - Thank you so much for your feedback as well. Lots to think about, I look forward to watching the video Tara suggested to get a deeper understanding of your feelings on the subject.