I react primarely on the content of a message, without taking too much notice -or notice at all- of the person behind the message. This can be seen as neglecting the messager, it can also be seen as a recognition of the messager. It is contrary to people who neglect the content of the message but react on the writingstyle or haircolor of the writer.

I think more than 90% of what is written on TF are reactions of this second type. (many reactions are a mix of both). It does not have to be negative, it can just be social talk, at which I am not very good and also not very much interested.

Like I said: reacting only on the content can give the impression of neglecting people, but the only thing you neglect -in my view- is a ego-oriented direction of the discussion, which in the end goes about nothing.

I try to stand in life without prejudices and to react without preconceived ideas about people. Having said that I have to admit that after a while -after visiting TF for some time- you devellop some ideas about the people behind the words and a preference of who you find most of the time intersting and who rarely.

But people can and do sometimes change, grow, devellop. So I try to begin every new day like a new born baby with an open mind for everybody and everything.

Chok dee to all of you!

Now should I neglect the message or should I neglect you?

Now should I neglect the message or should I neglect you?

I am the message. There is no more. The Buddha knew already thousends of years ago that the self, the ego are nothing, just social, mental constructions.

Your Op makes sense, although I must say I find it a breath of fresh air and an old truth at the same time.

Hard to make meat or bones out of it, to quote the title, but it all sounds very human.