Thomas and Mike's Thread

Thomas Campbell wrote: "This is the first book that seriously discusses how Aikido works. Buy it." ---Mike Sigman, former editor of "Internal Strength Magazine" from the back cover

So, Tom of Seattle.... what is it that your posts tend to track me? Why don't you email me privately if you have a problem?

Who teaches this guy? Email me privately, too.

Mike Sigman

Mike of Durango,

Those words are on the back cover of Meyer and Reeder's book. For those who don't have the book in hand, you can find Mike's remark here:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1583...56#reader-link

Why do you automatically assume that your words from the past are being used against you, Mike? A little sensitive, I think.

BTW, who's your teacher these days?

Thomas Campbell wrote: Mike of Durango, Those words are on the back cover of Meyer and Reeder's book. For those who don't have the book in hand, you can find Mike's remark here: http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1583...56#reader-link Why do you automatically assume that your words from the past are being used against you, Mike? A little sensitive, I think.

I'm not sensitive at all, or I would have responded when you tried to draw my wife into a previous public post in AikiWeb, Tom. I didn't say anything and you haven't stopped with the personal references. As you know, before you were removed from the QiJing list for pretty childish behavior, you've been treated as courteously as possible up to now.

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman wrote: [snip] As you know, before you were removed from the QiJing list for pretty childish behavior, you've been treated as courteously as possible up to now. Mike Sigman

Whatever, Mike.

Why don't we let folks know exactly what it is that led you to remove me from the QiJing List? You posted about the fascial connection of an elephant's penis and made a humorous reference in connection with the fascial "body suit" idea you've been developing over the past several years. I found it both hilarious and an excellent illustration of the connections fascia weaves throughout the body . . . and posted it as such in another forum with the heading, "What Mike Sigman Is Working On These Days." You took umbrage, but played the role of elder statesman merely responding to the wishes of the vox populi on your list . . . to the hilt. Responding to complaints about cross-posting, you said. Well, forums are cross-posted all the time. I made contact with the one person who would have been directly affected, and he had no issue with it. I believe I apologized to you as well. By the way, folks, the QJ List is worth subscribing to; there are some excellent discussions and development of ideas on it happening right now (however, some people express themselves rather differently there than on public forums).

So while we're on the subject of being banned from forums, Mike, why don't we look at your track record? You used to practice Uechi-ryu karate, but got banned from George Mattson's forum. How did that happen? E-Budo's forum? Justin Cobb's Yiquan forum? And emptyFlower, where just about anyone can post, and where some of your fellow QiJingers hang out . . . my goodness, you do get around.

Don't worry, I won't post your vituperative and threatening e-mail. But please don't correspond with me in that fashion in the future. Thanks.

Thomas Campbell wrote: Whatever, Mike. Why don't we let folks know exactly what it is that led you to remove me from the QiJing List?

Same thing that led to others being removed in the last few years. You're not being specially treated, by any means.

I notice you don't comment about the fact that you made a reference to my wife, that your post to Empty Flower was purely a personal reference to me, not the subject matter itself, and so on. Basically you need to accept that it's not me posting "Thomas Campbell" remarks; it's you going out of your way to post "Mike Sigman" remarks. Period. And thanks... someone has forwarded to me the information I want.

Mike Sigman

Thomas Campbell wrote: So while we're on the subject of being banned from forums, Mike, why don't we look at your track record? You used to practice Uechi-ryu karate, but got banned from George Mattson's forum. How did that happen? E-Budo's forum? Justin Cobb's Yiquan forum? And emptyFlower, where just about anyone can post, and where some of your fellow QiJingers hang out . . . my goodness, you do get around.

Actually, this is a good topic and one which a couple of us were just talking about the other day.

Leave aside your getting dropped from the QiJing list, Thomas. That was because you were taking posts and forwarding them to other places... QiJing is a private forum, not a public one. Cross-posting is a no-no just about anywhere, but particularly on a list where a lot of people who have good information simply don't want to share it on public forums. The idea that you can arbitrarily decide to cross-post "because cross-posting happens all the time", doesn't say much to your response to the basic courtesy you were shown when you were put on.

Being "banned" for less-rigid reasons, though, is a good discussion. I could easily have been banned from this forum, based on the the amount of contention that arose when I attempted to emphasize the importance of ki/kokyu skills on the forum 2 years ago. Go back and look at the resistance that arose from a few people. Heck, go back and look at the insurmountable resistance to these topics 10 years ago. I can't remember what happened 10 years ago (and longer, also), but it wasn't pleasant. Maybe I was "banned" from a few groups back then, because I bucked the commonly held dogma and the hierarchies. BTW... let's say I was banned, just for conversation's sake. Note that I stayed away for many years. How much Ki/kokyu progress happened while people like Dan and I (and a number of others) were banned or dismissed?

The examples you held up... E-Budo, Empty Flower (the well-know "forum for immature little boys" as a friend of mine so aptly put it), and Justin Cobb. Let's throw Justin Cobb out of the mix since he doesn't know anything about martial arts, as far as I can tell. There was contention on E-Budo, but largely that was a contention about some moderators who don't know much, but who want to play god.... actually a re-hash of the old "there can't be any ki things that we don't know about because we are high-ranking dans". The point I'm making is that your attempt to compare contention with breaking the list rules is childish and it doesn't fly.

Uechi Ryu? I was banned from one moderator's thread last year (I think it was last year)... that's all in the present (there's more I'll mention below)... I'm still on the forum. But overall, the Uechi Ryu leadership is exactly in the same mode that is so commonly found.... some high-ranking dans are convinced that they know it all and anyone who says different is going to have friction. Who loses?

What if Dan, Rob, and I had gotten tossed from AikiWeb for saying things about Ki and its training, just as a thought problem.... who would have lost if the subject had been closed down because it caused friction? Me? Rob? Dan? I don't think so. The only winners in tossing these Ki discussions are a few in the current hierarchy who don't want the boat rocked, because their status is in question if there are some basics that they really don't know. Everyone else loses. Ikeda Sensei might not have gotten the curiosity and support he currently has if everyone who contended on behalf of Ki skills had gotten tossed.

Back to the Uechi Ryu list. A long time ago, I wound up in a discussion about the ki skills as a different way of movement. Bill Glasheen and some doctor buddy of his swore there was no way anyone could move differently than they did, friction resulted, and I was gone (I'm assured by many that Glasheen is known for being this type of pompous ass, anyway, so it's not all me). At present, the Uechi people are beginning to suspect there are things out there that they didn't know, in the earlier prideful days. Some of the ki things, not surprisingly. And there are some "we're open to learning" remarks recently made, but only in the context of no implications being made that they didn't already know most of the good stuff already in Aiki.... oops, karate).

But how many years did they throw away by blocking the discussions? How many students did they add to the already big number of wrongly trained UR students during that time? I have a soft-spot for UR because I studied it briefly, but it's almost impossible to correct the robot-stiffness of the Mattson group when some of those guys show up at a workshop. I.e., a lot of people are now so habituated to wrong movement that it will be almost impossible to train them to move from the hara.

The subject isn't me or Rob John or someone getting "banned" from a list... the real subject is what happens when a list becomes dominated by a "hierarchy" and a mindset. "Banning" is not usually a big deal... it's an owner's call. E-Budo, under George Kohler, is the worst example I can think of... none of the moderators know spit about ki and kokyu things, yet some of them attempt to assert their opinions in as the word of god on the subject. On QiJing there are people who oppose a lot of the current discussions and they're allowed to stay on, even though I get complaints from some of the good posters, simply because I think we have to have more than a singular mindset on a productive list. Do we need dissent to the point that people are cross-posting and thereby endangering the input from productive posters? No. That's why you were removed.

BTW, if anyone on some other forum feels like they were wrongfully slandered about "not knowing ki and kokyu things", they're more than welcome to set the record straight on QiJing. Everyone will listen and if they make valid points, those points will be recognized by some fairly competent people. But frankly, whether it means getting "banned" or not, a lot of these forum people like Glasheen, Mattson, Kohler, and others, need to know that the same basics of ki abilities that Tohei, Ushiro, and others show should be something they can do, too, before they have a right to hold court in such kingly ways. But if they could do those things, the conversations on their forums wouldn't show so clearly that they don't know how to do those things. Waves need to be made; progress needs to be made.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman wrote: [snip] BTW, if anyone on some other forum feels like they were wrongfully slandered about "not knowing ki and kokyu things", they're more than welcome to set the record straight on QiJing. Everyone will listen and if they make valid points, those points will be recognized by some fairly competent people. But frankly, whether it means getting "banned" or not, a lot of these forum people like Glasheen, Mattson, Kohler, and others, need to know that the same basics of ki abilities that Tohei, Ushiro, and others show should be something they can do, too, before they have a right to hold court in such kingly ways. But if they could do those things, the conversations on their forums wouldn't show so clearly that they don't know how to do those things. Waves need to be made; progress needs to be made. Regards, Mike Sigman

The QiJing List is worth subscribing to; I made that point in a previous post, despite whatever misplaced rancor may be expressed on this thread. There are thought-provoking insights and good discussions there.

I'd suggest it's less the ideas and analyses you offered in those other fora, Mike, and more the style and manner in which you put them forth that led to the owners' decisions regarding your continuing participation. Conventional wisdom can be challenged and progress made without slander or diminutive rhetoric. But you know that full well. It's your choice of mock-heroic "confrontation" of the "establishment" that interests me.

This is my last post on this thread. We both know you'll have something else to say; you always do.

Thomas Campbell wrote: I'd suggest it's less the ideas and analyses you offered in those other fora, Mike, and more the style and manner in which you put them forth that led to the owners' decisions regarding your continuing participation.

Sure. Give me an example, Thomas. You appear to be quite the hit and run guy, based on your posting history. I don't claim to be any saint about posting, but I'm willing to bet that in 99% of the cases, just as in the case with you now, that I quite frankly didn't initiate the exchange. Notice that your personal comments about me were not related in any way to anything I said to or about you. In the case of many forums... I ask you for an example where I initiated the friction. I think what you'll find is that the actual "attitude" comes from "high-ranking dans", not me.

And yes, I think you'll find that I respond meaningfully if someone initiates an attack on me.

Mike Sigman

Thomas Campbell wrote: It's your choice of mock-heroic "confrontation" of the "establishment" that interests me.

BTW.... what "mock-heroic controntation" are you talking about? The only "mock" I tend to see is people with some practice and a colored belt pretending they already have the answers... the pretense of knowledge, in the face of this unique situation of the ki/kokyu skill, is the only "mock". I don't know anyone that has all the answers. But I know a lot of people who want to pretend some sort of protocol is required because they are "high ranking". That's the sort of game-playing I ignore, whether you call it "confrontation" or not.

Mike

I agree, its a good book.
Thanks for reminding me, I'll reread it.