ERE1 vs ERE2, forum culture

[Tyler9000]

I guess I fall into the category of long-time forumites who have fallen off on the post frequency. Most of that is just other interests that capture my attention throughout the day. But I do admit that stopping by and seeing arguments over stuff like ERE1 vs ERE2 makes me feel like the scene from Community where Troy walks into the party carrying pizza and a big smile only to find everyone else fighting and the room on fire.

I'm sure this is captured elsewhere from others, but here are a few of my own observations from someone who doesn't really have a dog in the fight.

- My perception (right or wrong) is that ERE2 mostly involves very smart people burrowing deeper and deeper into the same intellectual hole using mental frameworks as the shovel. There's nothing inherently wrong with that and I find many of those frameworks useful, but to the extent that ERE2 is supposed to be "emergent" I personally see it as the opposite. Perhaps those deep into ERE2 feel that if you keep digging you'll eventually break through to something, but from my perspective you should try leaving the hole occasionally. I'm not sure anything truly emergent will happen until people start embracing new modes of thinking that can't be easily diagrammed.

- I don't necessarily have a problem with all of the jargon and labels, as I don't really see that as an ERE2 issue but a quirk of the engineering types naturally predisposed to any form of FIRE/ERE. There have been countless Myers-Briggs conversations here and on places like MMM long before WL, colors, and other stuff got mixed in, and I've noted before that the INTJs who dominate these conversations just can't help themselves from trying to categorize everything. That said, I do agree that the increasing levels of jargon places a steep barrier to entry to the vast majority of outsiders who are critical for the "ecology" part of ERE2 to take hold. So maybe finding language that actually supports the stated goal should be part of the plan.

- The thing I like most about ERE is the systems-level "renaissance" perspective to life. I'd also LOVE to find a way to branch that out in emergent new ways to a wider, interconnected ecology of people. I personally try to contribute to that cause not by master-planning the entire system, but by building a helpful node (through my website) that others can plug into their own web of goals as needed. Yes that's just one small piece, but I also see distributed systems as more aligned with the general ERE philosophy than top-down one-size-fits-all designs. And to the extent that conversations focus on tools for my toolchest rather than framework theory or utopian societies, I'll personally be a lot more inclined to participate.

In any case, I say this not to be critical of anyone. Just wanted to do my part by contributing to the conversation.

[jacob]

- My perception (right or wrong) is that ERE2 mostly involves very smart people burrowing deeper and deeper into the same intellectual hole using mental frameworks as the shovel. There's nothing inherently wrong with that and I find many of those frameworks useful, but to the extent that ERE2 is supposed to be "emergent" I personally see it as the opposite. Perhaps those deep into ERE2 feel that if you keep digging you'll eventually break through to something, but from my perspective you should try leaving the hole occasionally. I'm not sure anything truly emergent will happen until people start embracing new modes of thinking that can't be easily diagrammed.

I'd say it's at least somewhat wrong. ERE2 mostly involves admittedly very smart people who have been practicing alternatives to consumer/financial systems for a while (5+ years) but mostly done so in a semi-random fashion. Basically Copying, Comparing, and Compiling different examples(*) elsewhere without really understanding what they had in common or what the differences were or why some communities and strategies worked better than others.

(*) Visiting intentional communities, building Fort Resilience, volunteering, changing career, fund raising, going sailing, community development, teaching, meditating, ...

Much of the initial focus of ERE2 has been on abstracting the lessons learned and finding the underlying rules for what works and what doesn't. To help doing that we've drawn on practical theory mainly from sociology and psychology. No reason to reinvent the wheel. ERE2 is basically doing for psychology and culture what you're doing for portfolio allocation. Mapping out the territory. You may be dealing with your equivalent share of people who complain that you're overthinking your portfolio designs and just data mining a very deep hole when "everybody knows that time in the market is better than timing the market" and that simply owning the entire market creates its own emergence It's just that your theorizing concerns a different domain.

I know full well that creating a theory of everything alone is not going to cause any emergence. This is also why I'm here and not spending my time publishing in journals or writing more ERE1 books. A theory is neither a required but not a sufficient condition for movement. However, having a theory makes it far easier to "Compute", "Coordinate", and "Create" than the random copying of examples that theory-free approaches beget. Without theory, one is stuck with "Here's how I did it and so can you"-approaches. These actually used to dominate the FIRE movement. People would try to copy someone else's personal experience and hope the best. If it didn't work they'd try to copy someone else and so on. Theory allows for a more systematic and deliberate approach.

[Tyler9000]

You may be dealing with your equivalent share of people who complain that you're overthinking your portfolio designs and just data mining a very deep hole when "everybody knows that time in the market is better than timing the market" and that simply owning the entire market creates its own emergence It's just that your theorizing concerns a different domain.

I feel seen.

I hear ya. It's normal for people to be dismissive of new ideas that they just don't connect with. I also spend way more time than you might think working hard to connect with those people in new ways, and am most proud when I hear from someone who says that something I made or wrote helped it finally "click".

I'm confident you've had plenty of similar experiences over the years, and I'm just hoping that you (and others) continue to put in the outreach effort in order to maximize your impact. I personally think the small successes in that process is where the real emergence happens.

[AxelHeyst]

Interesting thoughts, who are those people? are they up to ERE 1 WL7? are you up to ERE 1 WL7? if so please describe it. Interdependence is stronger than independence, but only as strong as the weakest link. I would consider one ERE WL7 individual better off than ten ERE 1 WL4 or 5 folks claiming to be something more as a group.
...
Again when did you reach ERE WL7? how are you doing it? Why should anyone listen to you about ERE 2 when you haven't accomplished ERE 1?

Uh, to answer the question directly I think I'm WL6 and have at bare minimum one more solid year of skill node development before I have the experience and breadth required to mantle myself up into WL7... also I went from "ERE? What's that?" to today in a short amount of time, so I have weird gaps from going so fast / using the crowbar approach.

But I don't think anyone should listen to me about ERE2. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything about ERE2. I am not qualified to explain/tell anyone else anything about ERE2. That's not what I'm trying to do! I'm trying to participate in the conversations about ERE2 because I find them interesting, and because for me they're hinting at a potential Vision that is compelling to me and also perhaps can help me begin to assemble a Plan for how to approach that Vision. I don't think I or anyone else needs to be EREWL7+ to participate in those kinds of discussions. Probably need to be WL5+ just to be able to basically understand wtf is being talked about, sure.

Maybe that's some of the source of animosity here? The people who think they are participating in ERE2 conversations are being perceived as self-proclaimed thought-leaders or evangelists?

If not enough ERE 1 folks are willing to listen to ERE 2 ideas, like previously stated, you have cut off the hand that feeds you.

Clearly. Again, to me, the upset about this was a surprise. I'll speak for myself, but I'm pretty confident that I'm not the only one: I am paying a lot of attention to the people who are upset. I am trying to understand as fully as I can. Hence why I started this thread. Because if the way we've been approaching having discussions around ERE2 is gutting ERE1, then that is a big problem that needs to be addressed.

This is what I've worked out so far:
1) The use of jargon and frameworks that would overtake practical and ERE1 threads sucked. It came off as elitist and exclusionary. That's totally legit. I think we all get that now and have already improved that, keeping heavy jargon and framework stuff to dedicated ERE2 threads.
2) The perception that people who are not 'full ERE1' aka WL7 were trying to tell people who were/are WL7+ what they ought to do rubbed people the wrong way. Well, yes, that makes a lot of sense as well, I can see how anyone would get upset about that. I think the clarification there is that that's not what the people having ERE2 discussions were trying to do, or at least that's not what they thought they were doing. They thought they were trying to figure out a Vision and a Plan composed of the things they did already know, and use that as a roadmap to get where they wanted to be. Something like that.

Am I off with those? Is there something else?

[theanimal]

Maybe that's some of the source of animosity here? The people who think they are participating in ERE2 conversations are being perceived as self-proclaimed thought-leaders or evangelists?

I think that, along with ERE2 being presented as "The Way ™," is part of it. Partly because the theorizing does not make it appear emergent at all. The MMGs were emergent, the meetups were emergent. Scheming how to change paradigms and unite everyone under a more community oriented ERE does not seem emergent. Then further fuel seems to be added when the critiques don't appear to be taken seriously because they've been heard before.

I also think a lot of stems from the name, it's a marketing issue. IMO, a new name (ERE2) distincting this newer goal is not necessary. Integrating systems with others will be/has been the goal of some but not for others. Both still operate under the same framework. From my understanding, the ERE city idea is related as a concept but never had any of the same pushback/criticisms.

[classical_Liberal]

FYI my posts are not meant to be "mean" (I know @jacob personally doesn't really care about this aspect), but they are, as always, designed to provoke some emotion in those who have a developed emotional side. I am of the opinion emotions are actually a strength, and expressing them openly is healthier than not. Airing them, or being a mouth piece for others to air them, is what ends conflict and brings about understanding for those of us who are more emotional beings.

Some people are more into practice (applied theory) and some people are more into theory (abstracted practice). For my part, I don't really care all that much about what someone has been doing lately. I never ask [how are you doing? what are you up to?] and I rarely tell myself.

I think this is basically a core issue that has so many of my old forum friends a bit up in arms. I liken it to a bunch of people flying into Davos every year on private jets to discuss policies that should apply to everyone else for climate change prevention. While theories and organization are important, leaders are often judged by their actions. Those who lead by applying their theories are often the creators of strong movements and changes. This is why I respect you as a person and ERE creator so much. You applied a working theory before you preached it to others.

For people who are practice oriented (which also includes theory, it's just the emphasis is on experimentation with practical applications ASAP), it seems a bit pointless to theorize what could happen if 10% of my town were WL7 ERE 1 adherents. Because that's a pipe dream unless something is done to promote that message. I think it's a very fair criticism to tell someone like me "then get it done yourself". OTOH, I can also see how it's frustrating to someone who maybe trying to get it done, personally or through helping others, when all the "new talent" starts to get scooped up into another pool before they even reach the initial goal of ERE WL7. Something along the lines of the Mt Stupid theory. Many people speaking loudly from the top of the mountain to those in the valley in front of them.

I believe these two preferences can co-exist simply by mostly ignoring stuff that they don't care about.

This is true in theory, and probably in practice for you. However, most humans, including those you would like to influence with ERE (1 or 2) theory, are more emotionally and person oriented than you seem to really understand. This is why people plant flags, why it is so difficult to get new ideas across, and why conflicts exist when paradigms and priories of things and groups they care about suddenly change. This happens more acutely when it appears to happen outside of their view. I think these thread and explanations are a good thing to help alleviate some of that tension, but it also just shows how far this paradigm shift has moved already behind closed doors.

As far as I'm concerned, the collaboration is already underway. There was enough critical mass to get it started. I'm kinda happy with that so my interest is in the collaboration.

This is great that it's working out to start. However, I will once again reiterate the argument that if ERE 1 is the sole driver for growth of ERE 2, then it will stall out very quickly if ERE 1 stops being successful. This should be an important consideration. Maybe even important enough for the thinkers of ERE 2 to consider, and advise others, that it may be best for those who have not been able to accomplish significant growth on ERE1, to focus most effort on the application of the proven theory first. IOW, Make sure they are in the valley before shouting from the mountain top.

I do.

Fair enough and thanks for the detailed responses.

[classical_Liberal]

Am I off with those? Is there something else?

No I think that's smarter marketing.

As far as the anything else, I would point to my post above wrt ERE 2 thought leaders seriously considering pointing folks toward the application of ERE 1 to at least a WL6 understanding. Encouraging anyone who has not reached this level to focus on this new theoretical model is doing them a personal disservice, is doing ERE 2 a disservice as the base knowledge is not there, hence has the impacted of hurting ERE2 by getting people in over their head.

It's not like there isn't plenty of theory involved with personal WOG development. Those who love theory should have plenty to do in ERE 1 progression along with the application. Many often like to use interdependence models to reach WL 6 and 7 anyway. So, I'm not sure how that's so different than this new stuff anyway.

I will also argue this is different than the 5 year old discussions about WL's and ERE vs FIRE. Because the ERE model existed at that point and had for a long time. Those were just discussions designed to help people understand ERE. Interdependence based WOG's ERE is also not knew. If there were lots of on forum discussions about it (this ERE 2 idea), and how it could potentially evolve, naturally arriving at some of these new (to the forum) models and ideas, this whole thing would probably make a lot more sense to a lot more Forumites. It's just some progression on an idea that already has existed and has been used vocally by forum members like @ego for a decade.

How it actually comes across is a brand new idea that was created in a monastery somewhere and given a new name so it's not ERE, with a new vocabulary, new working models, and has the blessing of our respected leader. Still using credit card points as your primary ERE tool? Doesn't matter, get on the new train!

[AxelHeyst]

I think that, along with ERE2 being presented as "The Way ™," is part of it. Partly because the theorizing does not make it appear emergent at all. The MMGs were emergent, the meetups were emergent. Scheming how to change paradigms and unite everyone under a more community oriented ERE does not seem emergent. Then further fuel seems to be added when the critiques don't appear to be taken seriously because they've been heard before.

I also think a lot of stems from the name, it's a marketing issue. IMO, a new name (ERE2) distincting this newer goal is not necessary. Integrating systems with others will be/has been the goal of some but not for others. Both still operate under the same framework. From my understanding, the ERE city idea is related as a concept but never had any of the same pushback/criticisms.

Ah, this is helpful. I appreciate the clear answer.

I did not understand that anyone thought ERE2 was being presented as The Way. I also did not understand that people thought the ERE2 people were trying to unite everyone under a more community oriented ERE. I have genuinely, up until reading this post of yours, not understood why the people who don't like ERE2 haven't just ignored the ERE2 stuff going on. I always thought of ERE2 stuff as a direction people could go in, or not, as they saw fit.

[AxelHeyst]

Interdependence based WOG's ERE is also not knew. If there were lots of on forum discussions about it (this ERE 2 idea), and how it could potentially evolve, naturally arriving at some of these new (to the forum) models and ideas, this whole thing would probably make a lot more sense to a lot more Forumites. It's just some progression on an idea that already has existed and has been used vocally by forum members like @ego for a decade.

How it actually comes across is a brand new idea that was created in a monastery somewhere and given a new name so it's not ERE, with a new vocabulary, new working models, and has the blessing of our respected leader. Still using credit card points as your primary ERE tool? Doesn't matter, get on the new train!

I guess I just don't see where the idea that ERE2 people are pushing ERE2 is coming from, particularly to people who don't yet grasp the fundamentals of ERE1? Is it just the fact that the ERE2 discussions are public? Is it the fact that there isn't an ERE1 ID Card Check requirement, aka that sub WL7's are tolerated in the conversations?

I see and agree that there is a lot to ERE2 discussions that has existed and been promoted by eg @ego. I hear you about there being a marketing issue... like it feels like all of a sudden a bunch of kids with Ken Wilber books tucked under their arms show up and say "Hey old farts, listen up, we've invented this new thing that's never existed before that you should try!!" and ego et al are going... uh huh, fascinating. Do you even know how to balance a checkbook?

I'll sit with that for a bit. I've learned a lot this morning. Thanks.

[jacob]

I'm confident you've had plenty of similar experiences over the years, and I'm just hoping that you (and others) continue to put in the outreach effort in order to maximize your impact. I personally think the small successes in that process is where the real emergence happens.

Yeah. Although real emergence happens throughout the system at multiple levels. It's an ongoing process. Been happening for years for ERE1 via the forum and the rest of the FIRE movement.

So ... my personal perspective follows. This might help to explain my position better.

There came a time with my blog where most of my life-energy was connecting with people making blog comments, people who emailed me, people who talked about ERE on reddit et al. However, if I spend my life-energy connecting with one person at a time via email, zoom, or responding to specific comments, I can not spend that life-energy doing ditto with another. I can respond to maybe 7-10 different ideas each day but if it's done in a rivalrous fashion, I can reach at most 7-10 people. See http://earlyretirementextreme.com/email ... rimer.html ... and eventually https://earlyretirementextreme.com/so-l ... -fish.html because, for a large part, this https://earlyretirementextreme.com/angr ... -poor.html .

Using a forum makes my life-energy non-rivalrous. With the previous strategy, I'd often be telling different people the same things one-by-one. Compare it to a doctor or a psychologist having the same conversation they just had with the previous patient with the next patient. In a forum, I can be responding to several people at once. This way my ability to reflect on 7-10 ideas per day makes it possible to connect with 50-150 people. It also takes a load off that a forum allows other people to respond and so if someone else has already made the effort, I don't have to. This further increases the effective reach---I can focus my responses on filling in the blanks.

As such an internet forum is a vastly improved system for transmitting ideas compared to a soapbox or individual telephone conversation.

However, that too has its limits. Just like there came a point where there were too many demands for personal conversations for every single question/issue, there comes a point where there are too many "blanks" being generated for me to fill in each one personally. Compare this to a city trying to solve crime with more policing but only having one officer to police. Given those limits, another strategy is needed. Insofar I want to retain some life-energy for myself, the next step becomes about figuring out a way to fill in blanks without having to personally engage every single time there's a snag somewhere. For example, the "too much of that kind of conversation or too little of this kind of conversation". Why is that still a thing? I want to know.

And so, life-energy is better spent talking about snags. The cause of the problems rather than the answers to the problems. Why they occur? How to fix them? How to avoid them? What keeps people from learning or looking things up insofar they don't perceive an immediate personal benefit? Is it because they can't or won't or something else? Why do people keep asking others to explain things they can just as easily look up on google themselves? Are they looking for a personal connection? An emotional one? A tribal one? Are they looking for a medal or someone wearing a uniform before they'll listen? Do they just hate googling? Figuring out the "if only someone had told me"/"they did, why didn't you pay attention"-divide. Is it possible to change the environment so snags are less likely? This [recurring snag stuff] is basically where I am now and why I'm interested in ERE2 stuff.

What can I do to reach others who in turn may reach others still? That, to me, is the interesting question these days.

PS: I do realize that humans usually look for an emotional or a familial or a credentialed or ... any other vector for proper connections according to their preferences (I'm now talking to the room), but I think my life-energy is better spent figuring out what matrix of those works best within the system than dealing with every single point individually.

[unemployable]

I forget who has said what in this thread, but regarding people leaving the forum, that's been happening all along. There's a core group here of about a couple dozen that seems to have been here forever, but if you go back a few years this core looked a little different. Some people who participated religiously left, and not because of ERE2 because it didn't exist back then. They were interesting people who led interesting lives and had interesting things to say, so I wonder about them and why they up and left. Did they get enough fulfillment here that they go could back to doing ERE anonymously? Did they get tired of the gatekeeping and jargon which certainly existed back then, just in a different form, or think they "weren't on a high enough Wheaton level" or whatever? Did they get a better job or have some sort of life change whereby the best choice was to de-ERE? Was it all too hard? We'll never know. Some of this is the turnover that all bulletin boards experience, but I've seen enough people go from multiple posts a week to straight radio silence that I wonder what happened, and wonder whether a common cause has been present.

And I get wanting to move on mentally. Over the years I've gotten bored with a lot of things or have moved on to the next level. I like exploring places... used to drive there, then I flew there, now I hike there. Jacob seems to have mined out ERE1. On some lower level, so have I.

When people announce their displeasure with the regime or changes thereto, as opposed to just walking back into the woods, that's a success. You've gotten people to care. This capital doesn't come easily, so you do not want to light it on fire.

I say all this because if you want ERE2 to succeed it needs to be something that brings people in, not keeps people out. At its best it should be a concept that keeps people here and engaged. Some of the people in the past who left might've stayed around if an amenable form of ERE2 existed. Everything so far points to ERE2 being the opposite. This is a BAD thing. Very bad.

I'm not sure what the hell ERE2 really is beyond more people doing ERE and the whole network of ERErs expanding, gussied up in fancy language. That's literally what Jacob wrote: what happens when 25% of your neighbors are ERE. Well also what he wrote is that ERE2 doesn't even have a strict definition yet. So instead of leading us all to the Grand Canyon blindfolded and telling us to jump, why not move in baby steps? Let's get to ERE1.1 where there's more sharing, greater resiliency, a stronger and broader web. One Wheaton level ahead of plain old ERE1.0, rather than five. Instead of five people on the board discussing it (and not just in a meta/"this scares me" sense) it becomes most of us. I don't care whether you're orange or INTJ or WL6 and wouldn't know what to do with the information if I knew. But it would help to know who has an extra TV to replace mine that just broke, and in exchange I can housesit your cat. Then ERE1.2 might be not lecturing me because I want a needless extravagance such as a TV. Simple, and not necessarily new, but maybe executed more deliberately.

Still reminds me of crypto. People talk about creating a bitcoin city or a bitcoin island or a bitcoin country... well 15 things need to happen first, one of which is convincing people it's not all a big scam and is worth leaving the old system for, and everyone has a different idea of what this utopia will look like, if they have any concrete idea at all. The more clearly you identify and achieve the things between 1.0 and 2.0 the easier and more viable a sell it will be.

[Ego]

I see and agree that there is a lot to ERE2 discussions that has existed and been promoted by eg @ego. I hear you about there being a marketing issue... like it feels like all of a sudden a bunch of kids with Ken Wilber books tucked under their arms show up and say "Hey old farts, listen up, we've invented this new thing that's never existed before that you should try!!" and ego et al are going... uh huh, fascinating. Do you even know how to balance a checkbook?

Not at all what I intended to convey. I said this....

For others, talking about theories is the perfect distraction from doing ERE1 shit. That fact makes it hard for some of us to read and engage with the ERE2 walls of words.

I wanted to respond to @sky's thread about motivation with via negativa. The first step to accomplishing something is to avoid getting distracted by something else.

Discussing this distraction is next level distraction so I will end it there and finish photographing the painting I've been staring at for two days.

[AxelHeyst]

Not at all what I intended to convey. I said this....

I know. I think it's what c_L was trying to convey though. I appreciate your perspective on theory distracting from doing separately.

[daylen]

Well, part of it of course, is that forums are ancient. Mostly absorbed by reddit. The younger generations are going to do their own stuff and this forum will die a slow death. That is just fine / natural / or "demergent". Of course, the eventual death will not be in vain as it has already sent influential waves throughout society.

[unemployable]

Mostly absorbed by reddit.

Not this place though, not yet. It's not the same as r/LeanFIRE, where most of the talk is on financial aspects. Reddit isn't a panacea; everything being open to everyone is a blessing and a curse.

[daylen]

Right, I am just saying that the young people mostly aren't going to go looking for old forums with grumpy souls. They are just going to build "new" stuff and rediscover all the "old" stuff. That's just part of the cycle of young and old humans distracting themselves from rivalrous games.

[unemployable]

This isn't anyone's gateway forum to FIRE-land and never has been. You have to come here on your own. And I sense the new members now are mostly pretty young (20s-early 30s) and in the earlier phases of working. Make the shiny new thing just beyond ERE1 rather than way beyond it, and preferably adjacent to some congruent concepts such as homesteading and vandwelling and you can broaden the net while still aiming conceptually higher. But it's not my forum.

[AxelHeyst]

@unemployable I dig what you're saying. I think it's sort of what I was trying to unearth with my "examples of ERE2" thread but didn't quite know how to articulate.

I'd just reiterate that to date, ERE2 hasn't been anywhere close to the marketing stage, nowhere close to the stage where anyone is comfortable saying "right we've got this thing sort of figured, hey noobs try this thing on". Maybe we should have put some warnings on it? Like hey, this is a paradigm construction zone, enter at your own risk, don't try this at home, sort of thing?

I'm really starting to think that a lot of the conflict is around a misunderstanding and lack of communication around what the ERE2 discussions themselves were. Like some of the critiques I'm starting to see are people saying "Whoa! Don't tell people/me what to do!!" And the Ere2 people are going "uh, we haven't told anyone to do anything? We're just kind of brainstorming here?"

[macg]

I believe these two preferences can co-exist simply by mostly ignoring stuff that they don't care about.

I agree with this. Honestly I don't understand what the friction is about at all, even after reading people explain it. If a post or slew of comments in a post don't interest you, just ignore it and move on. For example, I've stated elsewhere that the whole colour thing is out of my current comprehension level right now, so I just skip those conversations. At least for now, until if/when I decide I want to understand it...

[IlliniDave]

I missed the genesis of this discussion, but from my perspective it seemed like somewhere in some thread a question was posed: where have all the OG-types gone, they don't seem to be around very much? Or something in that vein. And a few of us replied. I may have it wrong, maybe some of the OGers came out in attack mode, but I don't sense there is friction or people being upset at the root of it. Having some interest in oldschool ere doesn't even mean a desire to take it all the way to level 7 or 10 or whatever the top is now, much less an automatic passion for ere2.

I'd guess many of the OG folks here operate at highish "Wheaton Levels" in some domains (i.e., on balance the group is intelligent and accomplished). Some of those domains have a strong component along the ere->ere2 axis, others are more orthogonal.

Many of the OGers did just what is now being suggested, we began to ignore it and moved on--retreated to journals and pursued other interests. Then this thread got started seeking perspectives, which several OGers supplied, in good faith as far as I can tell.

Many of us are those that have hit the point of "so now what?" To me that's a very personal and individualized question that I'm exploring and experimenting with on an incremental basis. I certainly don't begrudge people trying to hammer out a collective version of ere. Perhaps I am wrong to have approached old ere with my individualist mindset--seeing any path to ER as a path to liberation, with liberation being the point rather than the process being the point. I recognized some time back that it puts me in the position of not having much to offer except, "what I'm up to lately," which as mentioned above, isn't of much interest.

I have noticed some of the Faded Away making an effort to have more of a presence since the conversation sprang up in a few places, which is nice to see.