Adam Bauder wrote:
(in re potentially inaccurate testing methods)I'm sure I've resembled that remark. Of course, I've never had the intention of being bogus. Confused with good intentions perhaps, but never bogus.
Oh, I wasn't implying that anyone was being deliberately bogus. Sometimes we simply don't want to question any facts which might support our beliefs. And we're all guilty of that at one time or another, so I was simply mentioning the caution.
I'd hate to be labeled as someone who's saying they've "been-there-done-that."
But it's nice to hear that maybe some
of my instincts are correct when I'm attempting to apply some of the solo-training exercises I've heard described in these forums.
Frankly, I think some of the guys/gals at that Ki seminar would be able to instinctively have a somewhat accurate idea about some of the training exercises we've talked about. However, my main point... which I hope comes across... was that I think (1.) the training within the Ki-Society could be far more sharply focused (so more people could learn and learn accurately) and (2.) there's a lot more permutations of these things, so some members of the Ki Society may be needlessly dwelling on the same simple skills over and over for years. And that's meant only to express an opinion, not a negative.
All the Best.