Did this fivearts.org website exist after fivearts.info was closed?  Or did it exist before fivearts.info?  Because as long as I remember, when fivearts.info still existed, I also saw the fivearts.org website

It existed a few years after .info came about. Many are/were originals from .net that turned up to .info to congregate. Then there was a disagreement between users and staff over how things were conducted over at .info and thus a split came up. It was then that .org was formed and they have been running concurrently, until .info went dark.

I do not recognise the pages. And I also do not recognise the translated into English poems to be remotely related to Bazi in of itself. Primarily because it included "deer" which under no normal Bazi interpretation you would include.

So it sounds like it's more a bespoke edition of something that is exclusively used by some and is not typical in use with Bazi and thus may not actually be related to Bazi beyond the superficial state of employing the Bazi system at all. As of such you may find that not many know of origin of this material at all.

It would be nice if some translations could be recovered from cache.

You might be better off asking for fellow forum users to help provide useful explanations instead. For if you think about it; if the translated material that was shared was good, there would be plenty of copies around. Yet if it was not, then it begs the question of how much value there was in the translated material in the first place.

On the other hand, if anyone knows a way to contact the owner, I'm pretty much sure that even a single 5 years sponsor subscription could cover some hosting for the time being.

I am certain given the traffic that .info was experiencing, $50US would only cover a month at best and likely not even that. And that is assuming the issues that .info is experiencing is hosting costs.

There is also the small possibility, that it might be legal as well. As there was a shady practice that the management there turned a blind eye to that could land them into hot water legally; sharing of copyrighted material. And not just any sharing; quite often it was entire works that was being shared around. Initially, early on the .info site, such practice was frowned on and proactively stopped. However, as management took the forum to a particular direction, this was even promoted. If the issue was legal, then $50US wouldn't even begin to make a dent into the costs involved that way.

And finally, near the end of the user visible side of .info, it was starting to be plagued by spam posts. And those posts did not have anything done about them. This is often one of the bigger signs that management has basically given up on the site. So it may not be something you can convince them to return to unless if there are many hundreds or thousands of users willing to sign up for the 5 year subscription at $50US.

Noticed it too. If it stays down, then thats a fairly large public repository of information about the 5 arts lost.

It's not really lost - not directly at least. Most of the older .net posts was from the web.archive and it was paywalled on the .info forum; so it wasn't exactly publicly available anyway. A suggestion that Puppylove made to help the community keep the hope alive that all is not lost.

Any of the newer information posts that made up the early .info forum until recently however, may be lost if the posts were hidden, but if I were to be honest, how much of that would be a real loss to the community at large?

Even then, any remaining posts that were left open, should be recoverable through the web.archive again.

Seems like it is not the first time ...

.net was taken down because meek felt in their journey that .net was holding them back. And so they took the course of action that would free them from it.

.info I am unsure, it has had outages like this before, but it was remedied previously in a couple of days; it has not had rolling on weeks now worth of down time, so it's currently down status over such a lengthy period of time is a first. The domain name was renewed before the outage, so it didn't seem like any lapse in getting it back up was originally intended. But most certainly, there appears to be no sign of effort to bring it back online that we as users can see.

If I were to guess, a variety of reasons began the slow decline of .info over the years where it may not be economical or productive to keep it running (in no particular order):

1. Loss of professional service.
2. Loss of well informed users willing to share.
3. Mismanagement of forum goal
4. Mismanagement of forum expansion (economical/costs).
5. Mismanagement of forum user experience (transparency/lack of rules/favortisim from greed).

Of those, I would say the biggest problem, was the mismanagement of the forum goal that ultimately lead to decisions being made on the various other factors, that slowly bled the .info site down.

There was plenty of cheer when .info was revealed to have taken on the mantle of the then lost .net forum. It was touted to be a continuation, but better, with less restrictions and rules but with the same function as before, so users were expecting more of the same but on a better scale. Initially, this was the case, but it soon became apparent that the lax rules and the decisions made were letting the rot slowly creep in and nothing was being done about it; there was a good reason such strict rules were in place in the original .net site. It wasn't perfect, but it helped weed out undesirable users from infesting the other users on the site.

Anything on the internet that is hosted has bandwidth requirements and costs. Use more than what is available, and the site goes down, either from lack of available bandwidth remaining or the server has fallen over somehow.

However, as was revealed late in the life of .info during one of their off the cuff blog style posts pleading with the community to stick with them, the management ultimately had very different goals in mind for .info compared to .net.

For their time and money put in for the community, the management did not just want to recoup costs that are needed to run .info, they wanted more from it; not just much sought after information (that they paywalled in some instances but they themselves were able to read freely), but also influence (the owner of the new hub of fivearts, that professionals and experts were wanting to advertise their services on, etc) and also money (paywalling, central hub offering services and advertising).

This lead to a decline in typical forum experience standards in the drive to increase brand awareness of .info, and on came the pitting of users against each other to drive content creation (for advertising, and unique user counts) and hoping to get users into providing more onto the forums to drive ever more users and professionals into signing up to this hub.

In order to keep the increased amount of users accessing the forum (and thus keeping up advertising revenue), the management would have needed to invest into hardware, servers and services to allow the greater amount of users continued access with as little downtime as possible. But this is a spiraling pool that has no end to it, as the .info site itself is only a hub and forum exchange; it did not create anything of value on its own (not that you could not have copied elsewhere online) outside of help from forum users (that management had alienated). So whilst all the management goals remained the same, all it could do was keep the expanding (to maintain revue to offsert costs) until it popped.

First the knowledgeable users left. Then even the frequent fivearts users reduced their visits to the .info site. Then of the last few years, the paid service (professional) users left as well. (For various reasons)

This ultimately left the .info site with extremely high running costs from the now increased exposure of the .info brand over the years, but there is little new revenue generating content and potential advertising revenue. So there's high outgoing costs, but a lot less coming into the purse.

Without changes at the highest levels over there, it would only have been a matter of time before economics takes over and it reaches the closed state at .info.

A sad reality unfortunately, but good reason on why due diligence on at every level during business planning is so important.

Dear Dharma,

May I know how do we identify Mao as the mother.  Is it looking at the year pillar rather than looking at the stars that produce the Gui DM which is Geng?

Hope to get some pointers here.

There are other representations besides the common ones. But the jist of what was used is:

The Year and Month can represent parents (These are the pillar and palace representations)
Besides Resource that produces the Day Master, the Output Star is also a representation of a female.
In some other cases, the same element as the Day Master can also be used to represent the mother, but this is usually reserved for female chart owners.

Given the information above, when you look at the chart, we can see that the chart owner is not a female. This eliminates the same element being used to represent the mother.

We now look at what else is in the Year and Month and can see that there is an Output star as well (Wood) that is located in the Year pillar. With two representations matching a representation of the mother (Year or Month Pillar/Palaces + the Star representation), this indicates that this is likely to be the mother.

If we look further, we can also see that sitting in the Stem of the Year is Ding fire, that is also a Wealth star; a common representation of the father. Since the representation of the Father and the Mother are in the same pillar, we can safely assume that the Mao wood can be used to represent the mother.

From there you then apply the usual interpretation methods to obtain ifurther nformation on how things progress or why they end up as they do.

Is appointed star, J and U related to setting, subject and object? And the author suggesting that these need to be fixed before asking question?

Pretty much, yes.

And is The-Monk suggesting that this is subjective opinion by the author, such that it is not necessary?

Yes. And no.

Yes, because the original author did not put that piece together in one go. Some of it was created a long time ago, and then subsequently when "inspiring" and "insightful" parts were posted by others, the author appended those particular parts (sometimes even editing it in part or entirely) in to what they viewed as the "propoer process" for "How to ask...". Which is why I said that the context is likely lost as it was not originally part of that "How to ask..." piece and the accompanying piece where the original context was is now no longer connected to this anymore and thus loses context and meaning.

No, because despite the entirety of Five Arts being agnostic towards peoples views, thoughts and beliefs, invariably, there is a subset of people where Five Arts will not perform in their hands entirely, or as well in the hands of others. By extension, there will be those who need "structure" and "process" to go through, such as praying, or meditating before performing readings, before they are able to perform well with their line of Five Arts skills. So, for some, it is most certainly helpful to have a regime to run through to help with their approach. However, there comes a point also where too strict a regime or doctrine becomes "dead weight" and becomes nothing more than an activity that is pointless in the hands of another that may not require such methods to gain the same results.

Looking over it all...

I would say you would have a hard time in trying to look for a school that will help. Usually, this means either you have reached the peak of what can be achieved already, or you have no sources of learning easily available to you that can push you further.

However, given that you are not at a point where you can help others on a whim and seeking to further continue your progressing along the road, this would suggest that you are more likely to be at the mercy of the second possibility; lack of sources for learning that can actually push you further. In this instance, spending any money on such a goal would not grant you any special previlege, or beneficial status that would help you in reaching your goal.

With this line of thought, since it would be fruitless in looking for a school to aid you in progressing along the road, it would be more logical to see what you can obtain on your own in the mean time. For any time you do invest is entirely your own and when the fancy takes you over the content.

However, even then, you will find it hard to truly obtain gains in progressing. So rather than waste time, relationships, money on something that can not be obtained, or has little impact on what your goal is. It would be best to see what can be done on your own spare time and effort and a community that you fit in with.

Quote

Today he is serious ill, wanting to explain the reason this day clash Yin wood causing secretly to move,  this happen to hurt Chen earth

 
i have question why yin wood can be secretly to move. yin wood is no power.  coz can not get generate from month branch or moving line branch

I'm afraid you're many months too late to join in on this one, as the OP is no longer with us.

As for why Yin Wood can be Secretly able to Move (Hidden Movement), in certain school thoughts, the end to the Season still carries some of the Five Elements strength within it, and thus, as the month of Chen, still part of the point of Spring, could be considered to be in a healthy state. And thus a Clash/Strike would cause it to become Hidden Movement.

Then there is also the possibility that Yin and Mao are Void/Empty, meaning a Clash would provide such a line with the Void/Empty state to become "prominent" (after becoming Solid from the Clash/Strike), akin to meaning something is about to take place after something that was not there/not interested has had its interest piqued after a stimulus of some kind (from the Clash/Strike).

However, as even OP is not the original author, it would be difficult to determine whether there was any transcribing errors, or whether there was more meanings behind it (such as combining the above two points, or even more). If OP had any thoughts or revelations about this topic, I'm afraid it is impossible to obtain them now.

If you have any questions, it'll probably be better to ask anew in your own thread. As this thread was already old before OP departed.