Your attempt to set the bar for what level is necessary to participate in the conversation is shameful. This is not the voices of experience section. Have you no common courtesy?
Common courtesy is the self-regulation to post and contribute to threads which pique your interest and further the topic of the thread. The common courtesy missing here is to answer the questions of the thread and talk about an exercise that helps understand the feeling of 6 directions. Michael mentioned that drift are organic movements and I understand that people want to positively contribute to a topic. But this thread has now reached a point where probably the majority of the posts are not about the topic.
This thread drift hits close for me because several years ago I turned to Aikiweb in my search to check out "IP". In reading the threads, I would read a nugget of knowledge piled under many posts of drifted conjecture. Eventually, most of those posters left Aikiweb and even the nuggets started drying up. I think this thread was a great opportunity to provide the community some information about a basic exercise that introduces a core concept of internal power. Instead... history repeats itself.
Michael talked about a period of time where several IP posts drifted thread topics. My participation in many of those threads also commented on thread focus. Many of those posters were asked to leave the forum, or left of their on accord. This is not my first, nor will be my last (sorry Jun!!), comment to call out a significant thread drift that in my opinion changes the nature of the thread.
And to be clear, I am not setting a bar. I have no moderator status; I cannot delete posts. I am simply asking to keep our focus on-topic. I have read several posts that are relevant to a debate over the role of IP in aikido, but probably not germane to describing an exercise that by its nature requires consent that internal power exists and have a role in aikido. I think they would (and should) be excellent threads to contribute [to].
To your point about my comments establishing a quality of participation, we all should be speaking with a voice of experience. Some more than others. If we are not learning something from a contribution, can we still call it that?