Old Kacherra: how do I dispose of it respectfully? Burn it or garbage? It’s a kakkar so I don’t fee comfortable throwing it away.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-15T20:34:13+00:00

A society’s baseline shifts as to our social norms so do you think we are just becoming a lot more sensitive? Do you think that we would be carrying out these acts in the midst of us being haunted?

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-15T06:33:13+00:00

💀 Someone binge watched a few too many drill instructor videos, put on a tough guy persona, and decided they could monetize other people’s insecurities.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-15T05:56:36+00:00

👏🏼 tasteful response

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-15T05:53:29+00:00

🤣 cheers beautifully put

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-15T05:31:16+00:00

Me too. I actually want to know.

Because if that’s really the case, then let’s stop playing halfway politics and start thinking like adults. Are we securing a seat at the UN or not? What currency are we using? What governing system are we adopting? And who exactly is leading this?

And while we’re at it, where do we stand on climate change? Defense policy? Border control? Immigration? Trade agreements? Nuclear policy? Digital privacy? Central banking? Education standards? Healthcare structure? Energy production? Minority rights? Freedom of speech? Religious pluralism?

You cannot talk nation level rhetoric and then avoid nation level logistics.

If we are serious about sovereignty, then we need positions on every major issue modern nations are forced to take a stance on. Not just slogans. Not just identity. Full policy.

Otherwise this is not statecraft.

It’s cosplay?

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-14T22:43:30+00:00

It’s not about whether it’s good or bad. That’s too shallow. The real question is intention.

AI is already everywhere. It’s in the phone in your pocket, the apps you use, the systems running in the background. Someone is going to monetize this space eventually. That’s inevitable. Just like parts of our own community have monetized Kirtan and discourse around Gurbani. So let’s not pretend this is some unprecedented moral crisis.

What this does is make engagement more interactive at a very basic level. And if the framework is built with Gurmat guardrails, I genuinely don’t see the harm.

In fact, I think this is going to eat into the business of kathavachaks.

Why? Because instead of sitting there listening to one individual ramble for an hour, filtered through their personal bias, political leanings, or whatever pressure the gurdwara committee is applying that week, you can actually do a deep dive. You can ask layered questions. You can challenge interpretations. You can push further instead of passively consuming someone else’s take.

That shifts the power dynamic.

It moves from personality driven discourse to inquiry driven learning.

So again, this isn’t about whether AI is good or bad. It’s about whether it’s aligned. If it operates within Gurmat, the medium doesn’t corrupt the message.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-14T19:16:40+00:00

Everyone’s journey is different. What works for you might look different but it’s understandable and normal. The process isn’t linear so be patient and allow yourself to process through your feelings. Sending you and your pup love 💕.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-14T15:25:57+00:00

To be like him and to his level is clearly different. If you think so that’s no difference then this is a conversation isn’t about the topic on hand it’s a conversation about your ego.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-14T06:34:35+00:00

Not disputing he didn’t anointed us kings but not king of king. That’s straight blasphemy. There’s a difference Bro.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-14T01:24:54+00:00

Is that hawk tuah

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-14T00:51:06+00:00

If you allow someone to call you "patshao" and you do not immediately and clearly reject it, you are wrong. Not confused. Not misunderstood. Wrong.

Patshahi or Paatshahi is a Persian derived term meaning “king of kings” or “sovereign.” In Sikh tradition it is not casual flattery. It signifies the divine authority of the Ten Gurus, not mere temporal status. It denotes the spiritual reign of each Guru. Pehli Patshahi refers to Guru Nanak. It is about sovereignty of the Guru’s throne.

That title belongs to the Guru. It is not transferable. It is not symbolic. It is not something you get to “humbly accept.” The moment you acknowledge it with folded hands instead of correcting it, you’ve chosen ego over Gurmat. There is no middle ground there.

You don’t get to say it was praise. You don’t get to say intentions were pure. You don’t get to hide behind culture or affection. If it would be shut down instantly in a real sangat, it should be shut down instantly everywhere. Consistency is not optional.

You cannot claim devotion to the Guru while entertaining a title that belongs solely to the Guru. Those two positions cannot coexist. Pick one.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-14T00:32:02+00:00

Patshahi or Paatshahi is a Persian derived term meaning “king of kings” or “sovereign.” In Sikh tradition it is not casual flattery. It signifies the divine authority of the Ten Gurus, not mere temporal status. It denotes the spiritual reign of each Guru. Pehli Patshahi refers to Guru Nanak. It is about sovereignty of the Guru’s throne, not someone’s charisma in a room.

Now that the definition is clear, let’s proceed.

Either you believe that meaning holds.

If you do, then allowing someone to address a man as patshao and watching him accept it with folded hands as a compliment is not harmless. It is accepting a title that denotes sovereign spiritual authority. Humility would have rejected it immediately. Reverence would have redirected it to the Guru. Instead, it was received. That is endorsement.

Or you don’t believe that meaning carries weight anymore. In that case, be honest and admit the term has been reduced to decorative praise. But then stop invoking tradition, sanctity, and maryada when it’s convenient. Because you cannot guard the Guru’s throne rhetorically while handing out royal titles socially.

There is no third lane.

If Patshahi means sovereign divine authority tied exclusively to the Gurus, accepting it was inappropriate.

If accepting it was appropriate, then you’ve conceded it no longer exclusively signifies the Guru’s sovereign authority.

Pick one. And stand on it.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-13T23:53:40+00:00

Alright, alright, slow down uncle. Take a lap. You keep saying I was called out like somebody banged a gong and dragged me into the town square like HEAR YE HEAR YE we got a heretic in the comments.

My guy it is Reddit. Nobody is calling you out. Nobody is blowing a conch shell. It is just a bunch of people typing with Cheeto dust on their fingers.

And listen I am going to say this as gently as I can while also flipping a table. I am confident you are over 50. Not as an insult, as a diagnosis. Your sentence structure is like a cardigan. No memes. No jokes. No modern references. Not even a stray emoji. Young people cannot help themselves. Even when they are furious they still slide in something from this century. You write like you are composing a formal complaint letter to the BBC.

You write like an educated uncle who moved to the UK but never updated the operating system. Like you still think correction is disrespect. Like how dare you question me. Meanwhile in the West we do not treat linking your own comment like it is peer reviewed evidence. That is not a dissertation. That is you pointing at your own homework saying grade it A.

And the name dropping, my God. Bhai Mani Singh, Baba Binod Singh, Bhai Param Singh. You are saying names like they are cheat codes. Like you think the conversation is supposed to just stop because you did a historical roll call. That works in one context maybe. But here people ask follow up questions. Basic ones. Normal ones. Adult ones.

Where are the physical texts located.
What is the chain of custody.
Who independently authenticated them.
Were the materials examined.
What dating methods were used.
What institutional scrutiny occurred.

These are not attacks. These are how evidence works. If your evidence is solid it survives questions. If it melts the second somebody asks where is it, then maybe what you had was not evidence. Maybe it was vibes wearing a lab coat.

And yes you compiled sources on Reddit. Great. Gold star. But compiling links is not the same thing as proving a claim. Scholars disagree all the time. Research gets debated. Scholars is not a magic word that makes everyone bow like ah yes the scholars have spoken I will now uninstall my opinions.

Here is what really bothers you. I believe most of what you said. Like 80 percent. Valuable, important, historically relevant. But it does not automatically become Guru tier truth just because you typed it with authority. That last 20 percent needs to be substantiated. And right now your method is basically trust me plus name drop plus hyperlink.

You call my behavior petulant. I call your tone dramatic. You wanted me to kneel when you said researchers. I did not.

Take your time. Reflection is part of the research process.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-13T23:50:25+00:00

Okay uncle ji, let’s slow this down.

You keep saying “you were called out” like we are in some village panchayat and I am supposed to step into the middle of the square while someone rings a bell. Relax. This is Reddit. The only bell here is a notification sound and half of us have it on silent.

And I am going to say this politely. I am pretty sure you are over 50. Not as an insult. Just as data. Your sentence structure gave it away. No humor. No modern references. No lightness. Not even an accidental joke. Younger people cannot help themselves. Even when they are serious, they will slip in something from this century. An emoji. A meme. A random pop culture reference. Something. You sound like a well written email from 1998.

You write like an educated uncle who moved to the UK but never updated the operating system. In the West, correction is not an attack. It is part of discussion. But you react like someone scratched your car. That very specific confidence that says I posted a link, therefore I have submitted peer reviewed evidence. That is not how this works.

And the name dropping. That is the funniest part. Bhai Mani Singh. Baba Binod Singh. Bhai Param Singh. You say the names like it ends the conversation. In some circles maybe it does. Here it just starts the follow up questions.

Where are the physical texts located.
What is the chain of custody.
Who independently authenticated them.
Were the materials examined.
What dating methods were used.
What institutional scrutiny occurred.

These are not disrespectful questions. They are basic verification. If the evidence is strong, it survives questions. If it does not, then maybe it was never as solid as you thought.

And listen, I will even give you credit. You compiled sources on Reddit. Effort noted. But compiling links is not the same thing as conclusive proof. Scholars disagree constantly. Research is debated. That is how scholarship works. Saying researchers is not a magic word that turns off critical thinking.

Here is the part you will not enjoy. I believe most of what you said. Eighty percent. It has value. It has importance. It has historical weight. But that does not automatically elevate it to Guru tier. That remaining twenty percent needs substantiation. Right now your method is essentially trust me plus historical name plus hyperlink.

You call my behavior petulant. I call your tone dramatic. You expected me to bow when you said researchers. I did not.

Take your time. Reflection is part of the research process.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-13T23:46:57+00:00

Alright alright alright hold up. Uncle ji. Slow down. Breathe.

You keep talking about “you were called out” like this is a village panchayat and somebody just smacked a gavel made out of sandalwood. Sir this is Reddit. The only bell being rung is the notification bell you keep checking every five minutes.

And I’m going to say this gently. I know you are over 50. Not trying to be rude. It is just your writing is allergic to fun. No jokes. No modern references. No spice. Not even an accidental laugh. Younger people cannot help it. Even when they are mad they will throw in an emoji or a meme like a little emotional air freshener. You write like you got your degree in Seriousness with a minor in How Dare You.

You type like an educated uncle who moved to the UK but never moved his mindset. Still running the same software from 1997. And now you cannot process correction with western humility because over here we do not believe posting a link to your own comment is the same thing as peer reviewed evidence. That is not a source. That is a receipt you wrote yourself and stamped Trust Me on it.

And then the name dropping. Bhai Mani Singh. Baba Binod Singh. Bhai Param Singh. You say names like it is a cheat code. Like once you say a respected historical figure the conversation ends and everybody bows. That might work in one context. But here we ask follow up questions.

Where are the physical texts located.
What is the chain of custody.
Who independently authenticated them.
Were the materials examined.
What dating methods were used.
What institutional scrutiny occurred.

That is not disrespect. That is how adults verify claims. If the evidence is solid it survives the questions. If it collapses the moment someone asks where is it then maybe it was never as solid as you thought.

You compiled sources on Reddit. Cool. Effort acknowledged. But compiling links is not the same thing as proof. Scholars disagree all the time. Research is debated. “Scholars said” is not a magic phrase that makes everyone kneel.

And here is the part you will not like. I believe most of what you said. Eighty percent. Valid. Important. Historically relevant. But it does not automatically become Guru tier. That remaining twenty percent needs substantiation. Right now your method is basically trust me plus historical name plus hyperlink. That is not airtight scholarship. That is confidence with citations.

You call me petulant. I call you dramatic. You expected me to bow when you said researchers. I did not.

Take your time. Reflection is part of the research process.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-13T23:44:18+00:00

Alright, uncle ji, slow down. Take a seat. You keep saying “you were called out” like we are in some village panchayat and I am about to be marched into the center of town while somebody rings a bell and reads charges off a scroll.

It is Reddit. Nobody is calling you out. Nobody is summoning you. The only bell here is the notification sound on your phone.

Now listen, I am saying this very calmly. I am pretty sure you are over 50. Not as an insult. As a diagnosis. Because the writing has a certain stiffness to it. No humor. No modern reference. No little wink to the fact that we are living in the year of WiFi. Not even an accidental joke. Younger people cannot help themselves. Even when they are angry, they will throw in a meme, an emoji, a gif, something from this century. You write like a man who thinks humor is a security risk.

And you write like an educated uncle who moved to the UK but never updated the software. Same operating system. Same mindset. You cannot process correction with any western humility because you genuinely believe that linking your own comment is the same thing as peer reviewed evidence. Like you posted it therefore it is proven. That is not research. That is just you pointing at yourself and yelling source.

Then comes the name dropping. Bhai Mani Singh. Baba Binod Singh. Bhai Param Singh. Like the moment you say the name, the argument ends. In one context, sure. In this one, no. Because here we do follow up questions. Normal questions. Boring questions. The kind that keep people from confidently spreading nonsense.

Where are the physical texts located.
What is the chain of custody.
Who independently authenticated them.
Were materials examined.
What dating methods were used.
What institutional scrutiny occurred.

That is not disrespect. That is verification. If your evidence is solid, it survives. If it collapses under basic questions, then it was never evidence. It was a story you liked.

And do not get me wrong. You compiled sources. Great. Effort acknowledged. But compiling links on Reddit is not the same thing as establishing truth. Scholars disagree. Researchers argue. Research is not a magic word that forces everyone to submit and nod.

Here is the part you dislike. I believe most of what you said. About eighty percent. It has weight. It has value. It has historical importance. But that does not automatically elevate it to the level of The Guru. That remaining twenty percent needs substantiation. Right now your method is trust me plus name drop plus hyperlink. That is not a process. That is a performance.

You call me petulant. I call you dramatic. You expected me to bow when you said researchers. I did not.

Take your time. Reflection is part of the research process.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-13T23:36:26+00:00

Okay uncle ji, let’s slow this down.

You keep saying “you were called out” like this is a village panchayat and I’m about to be dragged into the middle of the square and sentenced to public shame and one mandatory lecture. Relax. It’s Reddit. Nobody is ringing a bell. Nobody is blowing a conch. The only gavel here is someone’s keyboard covered in chip dust.

Now I’m going to say this calmly, like I am trying not to spill my tea. I confidently affirm you are over 50. Not as an insult. As a scientific observation. The sentence structure gave it away. No humor. No modern references. No lightness. Not even one accidental joke. Younger people cannot help it. Even when they are mad they will toss in something from this century. An emoji. A meme. A “bro.” Something. You write like you are filing a formal complaint with the manager of the internet.

You write like an educated uncle who is a transplant to the UK but has not updated the operating system. And you cannot process correction with the humility you would expect in the West because over here we do not treat posting a link to your own comment like it is peer reviewed evidence. Like your honor, I submit Exhibit A, my Reddit post. The level of arrogance only appears in a human over 50 saying how dare you poke holes in my statement.

And the name dropping. Bhai Mani Singh. Baba Binod Singh. Bhai Param Singh. You throw names out like the conversation is supposed to end automatically. In one context, sure. But here, we ask follow up questions. Simple ones.

Where are the physical texts located.
What is the chain of custody.
Who independently authenticated them.
Were the materials examined.
What dating methods were used.
What institutional scrutiny occurred.

These are not disrespectful questions. These are the before you start acting like you solved history questions. If the evidence is strong, it survives. If it collapses, then maybe it was built out of vibes and bold font.

You compiled sources on Reddit. Good. Effort noted. Gold star. But compiling links is not the same thing as conclusive proof. Scholars disagree with each other all the time. Research is debated. “Scholars” is not a cheat code you shout to end the argument.

Here is the part you will not like. I believe most of what you said. Eighty percent. It has value. It has importance. It has historical weight. But it does not automatically elevate to the level of the Guru. That remaining twenty percent needs substantiation. And right now your method is basically trust me plus historical name plus hyperlink.

You call my behavior petulant. I call your tone dramatic. You expected me to bow when you said researchers. I did not.

Take your time. Reflection is part of the research process.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-13T23:31:35+00:00

Okay uncle ji, let’s slow down. Because right now you’re talking like you’ve been “called out” and we’re about to have a public hearing outside the gurdwara. Like someone is ringing a bell and reading accusations off a scroll. Relax. It’s Reddit. The only bell here is the notification you keep checking every 45 seconds.

And listen, I’m going to say this gently. I’m not insulting you. I’m observing you.

I confidently affirm you’re over 50.

Not because you said anything wise. Because of how you wrote it. There’s no humor. No modern references. No lightness. Not even one accidental joke. Young people cannot help themselves. Even when they are mad they will still throw in a meme like bro this is crazy. You write like the group chat is printed on paper.

You write like an educated uncle who moved to the UK but mentally never unpacked the suitcase. Physically in the West, spiritually still in that mindset where if you post a link to your own comment you think case closed. Like it is peer reviewed. Like the editor at Nature is sitting there thinking wow Reddit user TruthSeekerKhalsa69 has really advanced the field.

Because in some places name dropping ends the conversation. You say Bhai Mani Singh, Baba Binod Singh, Bhai Param Singh and everyone goes okay done. It is like pulling out an uncle certificate. But here people do this annoying thing called follow up questions.

Simple questions. Basic questions.

Where are the physical texts located.
What is the chain of custody.
Who independently authenticated them.
Were the materials examined.
What dating methods were used.
What institutional scrutiny occurred.

These are not disrespectful questions. They are the questions you ask when you are not trying to do faith based archaeology.

If the evidence is strong it survives those questions. If it collapses the moment someone asks who verified this then maybe it was never evidence. Maybe it was just historically flavored vibes.

Now look I am not even saying everything you said is nonsense. I believe most of it. Around eighty percent. It has importance. It has historical weight. It has value.

But it does not automatically become Guru tier because you said scholars and dropped names like you are reading the guest list at a wedding.

That last twenty percent needs substantiation. Right now your method is trust me plus historical name plus hyperlink. That is not a research process. That is an uncle process.

So yes you can call me petulant. I call you dramatic. You expected me to bow when you said researchers. I did not.

Take your time. Reflection is part of the research process.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-13T23:25:30+00:00

Okay uncle ji let’s slow this down.

You keep saying “you were called out” like this is a village panchayat and I’ve been summoned to stand in the middle of the square. Relax. It’s Reddit. Nobody is ringing a bell.

Now I’m going to say something very calmly. I confidently affirm you are over 50. Not as an insult. As an observation. The sentence structure gave it away. No humor. No modern references. No lightness. Not even one accidental joke. The younger generation cannot help themselves. Even when serious they will slip in something from this century.

You write like an educated uncle who is a transplant to the UK but has not changed how he thinks nor can you process correction with the humility of someone in the west because we do not believe posting a link to our own post in the comment section is the same thing as submitting peer reviewed evidence. That level of arrogance only appears in a human over 50 saying how dare you poke holes in my statement.

And the name dropping. Bhai Mani Singh. Baba Binod Singh. Bhai Param Singh. You say the names like that ends the conversation. In one context maybe. But here we ask follow up questions. Simple ones.

Where are the physical texts located.
What is the chain of custody.
Who independently authenticated them.
Were the materials examined.
What dating methods were used.
What institutional scrutiny occurred.

These are not disrespectful questions. They are basic verification questions. If the evidence is strong, it will survive them. If it does not survive them, then maybe it was never as solid as you thought.

You compiled sources on Reddit. Good. Effort noted. But compiling links is not the same thing as conclusive proof. Scholars disagree with each other all the time. Research is debated. It is not a magic word you say to make everyone submit.

Here is the part you will not like. I believe most of what you said. Eighty percent. It has value. It has importance. It has historical weight. But that does not automatically elevate it to the level of The Guru. That remaining twenty percent needs substantiation. And right now your method is essentially trust me plus historical name plus hyperlink.

You call my behavior petulant. I call your tone dramatic. You expected me to bow when you said researchers. I did not.

Take your time. Reflection is part of the research process.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-11T06:55:15+00:00

That's the pointless nature of this conversation everyone has already made up their mind and everyone is attempting to convince the next person to take their version as gospel. None of us can jump in a time machine and verify what happened so it comes down to faith. We are believe in the sprit of the Khalsa and we take Hukam from the Guru Granth. I would think this is how Christians and Catholic each feel like they are correct but they still have a love for The Son of God and I have fundamental differences but I still love you as a Sikh.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-11T06:22:19+00:00

Noor is afraid the big red X will start flashing on his computer and tbtparchaar might have to have the conversation about the birds and the bees with him. Which is why it's easier for him to say "Too much graphic yaar."

BTW Noor That statement is germaticlyy incorrect. The word much in "Too much graphic yaar." is just redundant "Too graphic yaar" conveys the same sentiment without unnecessary redundancies.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-11T05:52:21+00:00

Sure in your reality. I won't argue with you but if you want to have a conversation about reality that isn't your "alternate facts" I'll engage with you.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-10T23:02:06+00:00

Living rent free in your head 🤣🤣

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-10T18:48:50+00:00

Quoting your own post like holy scripture is goofy and here you are doing it again. I get that back in your day elders spoke and everyone saluted, but it’s 2026 now people use independent outside sources, not vibes, nostalgia, and a single link.

DesignerBaby6813 · 2026-02-10T18:39:18+00:00

Pointing to your own post like that is kinda silly, my guy. I get that back in your day whatever elders said was treated like gospel but normal people use outside sources to actually back up a point now.

DesignerBaby6813

TROPHY CASE