Forum?

by Mike Sententia on May 12, 2014

You found my old blog. Thanks for visiting! For my new writing, visit mikesententia.com.

I’m back to writing my book. Well, re-writing — I’m going over the introduction, and greatly shortening Part 1. So that’s where my writing time goes this week.

But several of you requested a forum on this blog. So, let me ask you: What are you looking for? How would this forums be different than other magick forums online?

My requirement is, this forum must be about direct magick. We can talk about connections between direct magick and other systems, how to explain what we do to chaos magicians, and so on. But this blog is about direct magick, and the forum will be, too.

So, thoughts? Do you want a forum? What categories would you like?

Thanks!

If you liked this post, consider visiting my current blog at mikesententia.com.

{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }

George May 13, 2014 at 12:55 AM

I think it would be a good idea.

The comments section below posts is increasingly of the ‘conversational’ sort, as posts raise issues and people come up with different ideas, be they philosophical (’emergent properties’) or practical (‘energy connections’).

The problem with it being in the comments is that the different threads end up spread over various posts and are pretty untraceable – the insights and ideas get lost quickly. A subject-organised forum would help us here.

I think quite a lot of value might be derived from it, for Direct Magick as a specific topic and just understanding and using the offshoot ideas that come from it.

Reply

Simon May 13, 2014 at 4:51 AM

I think its a good idea in principle – and definitely going forward something that would be needed. I wonder if right now it isn’t slightly premature before the 1st book has been written. After all this is the document that will allow people to actually practice direct magick and compare results etc.

That should probably be the real utility of the forum – an actual virtual testing space rather than another talking shop. I see what George means to some extent about catergorizing the discussions better. But not sure its that crucial.

Reply

George May 13, 2014 at 12:43 PM

Simon has a good point, but I think it could be both. I think this would loop back into the book as dynamic feedback. Just looking at recent posts, where Mike has revisited how he does certain things, shows Direct Magick is very much an evolving thing. In a sense the book may never be quite ‘finished’. Having a forum means that this evolution can be kept organised rather than spread over disparate posts.

Additionally, some of this stuff is ‘research work’. For instance, “creating sensations in non-mages” is the sort of thing that has wide implications and is a project others could contribute to via a forum topic in a way not possible in the blog comment format. Similarly, ‘debugging’ people’s connections to ethereal software by reporting their experiences.

I guess I’m seeing it as a way more people can get involved and contribute to the practical aspect. (Any semi-philosophical discussions that come out of it I see as being a lead-in to new ideas for action, rather than just chat. For instance, one’s conclusions about ’emergent behaviour’ might affect how you see interacting with software really works, leading to new approaches, etc.)

Reply

Synchronicity May 13, 2014 at 10:15 PM

A pragmagickal lab would be awesome.

A place where people can…
– try experiments
– share techniques/experiences
– discuss models and test hypothesis
– report their progress or their struggle in learning
– ask for help/clarification
– devise real world applications to health/love/business projects
– translate/decompile other magickal system rituals in the underlying assembly code of direct magick

BUT… to really make it work, there must be a certain number of users sufficiently skilled in direct magick.

So I agree with Simon: the right time to open this forum should be after the release of the first book.

Reply

Mike Sententia May 14, 2014 at 1:20 PM

Thanks, everyone. I think I’ll stick with blog comments for now, and add forums once the book is up and more people can practice direct magick. Thanks!

Reply

Takeo Otori May 16, 2014 at 3:55 AM

A Forum is a cool Idea because you can discuss better and more topics without waiting for comment unlock and open own topics that doesn’t fit in any article (that also doesn’t mix the comments in the different articles) that would be a nice “home” for everyone who is working with direct magick. Please add :)

Reply

Mike Sententia May 16, 2014 at 10:28 AM

That’s actually why I’m holding off on forums. An unmoderated forum where anyone can post a topic probably won’t preserve the aspects of Direct Magick that I’m working to build and communicate. Once the book is done and more people are actively working with the system of Direct Magick that I’m developing, I’ll add a forum for that. Thanks!

Reply

wallum May 20, 2014 at 5:46 PM

I think a forum is an excellent idea, that will foster the growth of emerging mages, like an online laboratory of magick (the study of which is called magology, or magicology?). I love Synchronicity’s explanation, that of;

“A place where people can…
– try experiments
– share techniques/experiences
– discuss models and test hypothesis
– report their progress or their struggle in learning
– ask for help/clarification
– devise real world applications to health/love/business projects
– translate/decompile other magickal system rituals in the underlying assembly code of direct magick”

Whilst I respect your decision, Mike, to postpone a forum until such time as enough experienced moderators are available, I wish it were available now :) !

Can anyone direct me to a forum where such things are already being discussed? Perhaps less from a lab perspective, instead more of a discourse. I can’t seem to find any other group of mages that I resonate well with, as the majority seem to focus more on rituals/tradition/implements etc or appear to be 12 year olds debating the definitions of terminology of magick that they have never actually achieved (psi groups etc).

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: