Are you a Flat World Society Member?

Huck

Moderator, please read

gregory said:
I can't find what I want in the history threads either. That was how I ended up here.... :D Solandia said a while back that she hopes to be able to improve the search function.... I look forward to that !

(Huck - I am also an absolute WHIZZ with google ! :D)

Well ... a lot of things, that we talked here are simply at google.

Type: "tarotforum woodcut printing", you will get mostly the aeclectic tarotforum link at first place. Then go to the second entry, and below is a link "more results of tarotforum.net." You press it and you get about 31 positive results of tarotforum pages which include "woodcut printing".

Well ... occasionally it's a simple way to ask. Perhaps the forum looks a little adversary to some users, cause it is not clear, that questions often find a friendly answer. In these ideas of this somewhat hectical days variously it was expressed, that there is an unknown fear somewhere to run in open knives of the "socalled historians", who only wait to eat some small children ... likely having read too much of the brother Grimm stuff.

.... :) ... that's no joke, but a suggestion and I asked the moderator to read it: Perhaps we should install somewhere a thread with the content "What I ever wanted to ask about Tarot history" ... or similar. "Even stupid looking questions are allowed", well, it's a general experience, that stupid questions often take a strong development just meeting a point, which is not really and generally considered.

As far you're really a whizz with search engines, we often search people with this talent.
 

gregory

Huck said:
Well ... a lot of things, that we talked here are simply at google.

Type: "tarotforum woodcut printing", you will get mostly the aeclectic tarotforum link at first place. Then go to the second entry, and below is a link "more results of tarotforum.net." You press it and you get about 31 positive results of tarotforum pages which include "woodcut printing".
If you search here, you don't.... We could really use a boolean facility, and solandia was looking into it. I feel sure it would make for an end to LOADS of duplicate threads ! Google is fine - but for a seriously precise search here, it can't cut it !
 

Huck

playing cards burning, books burning, post removing ...

Playing cards burnings, books burning, post removing ...

This was always bad style.

History is history.

... and even when it is only our own small history.
 

Tarotphelia

Some histories are approved of, some are not. Some live on in memory and perhaps even in oral legend ..:party:

Card burning - I am still murky about all that . Maybe someone has interesting information on the tarot card burnings of the past .And other mysterious questions like why the tarot came to have a Devil card when it was perilous to own a picture of him . }) Tarot burning must have been quite a sight !!
 

jmd

moderating note

OK - I have decided to provisionally lock this thread, pending a probably permanent decision after further reflection and discussions with le pendu (with whom I have not discussed this decision).

The thread as a whole (with the exception of a few posts), though serving a useful purpose of allowing some venting of various frustrations, belongs neither to this area of the Forums, nor to any others on Aeclectic per se.

Also, many parts of this thread simply veer beyond the acceptable in terms of what Aeclectic seeks to promote: broad discussions, with also precise details, in tones that display rather a high tolerance and respect for other posters.

As such, genuine questions are never viewed as stupid, and rather lead to either greater clarity, or a refinement in one's own expression as to information that may have previously been expressed.

Whether previous discussions on any items has beforehand been made may of course be referenced and linked - this does not prevent further discussion from taking place.

The thread has also seen a number of posts that clearly break the general guidelines in being ad hominem (ie, either directly or by insinuation attacking the person), rather than discussing the points raised. This of course is inevitable in this thread given that much of it was meta-discussion about how many feel about posting in this area.

I sincerely ask that all members consider two things:

On the one hand to not hesitate to contribute and provide their own small contributions to Tarot historical insights: without that, the forum does not exist;

On the other hand, I ask that contributors dis-regard posts that offend, rather focussing on that to which they can add to. At its most unfortunate possibility, please even consider using the 'ignore' option for any member you find offensive.​

This has another consequence, one that Solandia also wrote quite early on in the guidelines, and assists in both the reading of the thread, but also in not having entire posts shown of someone another member has chosen to place on their 'ignore' list: please do not quote whole posts!

By all means relevant sections of another post that are directly addressed may be appropriate, but request that you err on the side of caution: what each of us often want to say does not need to have the speech of another repeated. The reader of the thread will, in most cases (there are of course exceptions) be able to see the connection.

Finally, I have sent a few PMs to a number of members - PLEASE, consider the health of this Forum.

Aeclectic has never (to my knowledge - I trust Solandia will correct me here is I am in error) actively sought to increase or keep membership for the sake of membership. Rather, Aeclectic seeks to be a place where positive contributions can be made in a rather broad community with various interests, background knowledge, and personal styles.

The only way to accommodate this is when each of its members read contributions as at least possibly having worth. By all means this does not mean that posts making claims for a 9th century origin of the Crowley-Harris deck cannot be both questioned and alternate evidence presented. Readers will make their own minds up as to whether such a view has merit in further pursuing.

This is a long post, and am simply trying to articulate that this thread was so far left open as it was deemed to serve a useful function given what I also realise is being felt beyond the posts.

In my personal opinion, the point has been made, and will not remove the thread, but simply lock it from further posts.

Please take up your disagreements on this, in the first instance, by PM. Further replies under the guise of a new thread will be removed without comment.

If you have further disagreements about the decision, please contact Solandia.