filePro Programmer shortage

[Fairlight]

A couple things will be rearranged order-wise, so I keep it shorter and
condense multiple citations for one thought.

In the relative spacial/temporal region of
Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 02:09:20AM -0500, Brian K. White achieved the spontaneous
generation of the following:
> 
> > and pop psychology drivel.  "Alpha-male-geek," indeed.  Whatever.
> 
> It was intentional catchphrasing duh.

I'm sure it was.  I just have no idea -why-.

> Maybe if I were thinking the way you are thinking it would be purile. But
> I'm not.  It's like this, I too, often don't dignify an affront with even
> the slightest response. When I do that, it's because I don't credit the
> person with even the tiniest teensiest bit of respect. When someone I
> have the slightest bit of respect for says something, I feel they deserve
> at least to be told to "screw off I have my reasons". More often they
[snip]
> polite words for.  As far as I'm concerned, He's insulted me 1000 times
> more than I did him.  Maybe that's his own form of tit-for-tat and that's
> fine, but it's a pretty sucky game to play if all that happens is we
> never talk to each other as friends again.

Oh for the love of all that's good and holy...  If -that's- what it's
about, then you haven't learned a lesson that's come to me via the school
of hard knocks.  Let me pour you a stiff shot of distilled knowledge:

     You can't expect (or force) other people to behave by your own set of
     values or ethics.  Doing so will simply alienate them, not elicit any
     change in their behaviour.  

As for your tit-for-tat BS (which is what I honestly think is is--juvenile
BS), first, don't play those games--act your age.  Second, don't attribute
that to John--especially if it's simply for lack of any other explanation
other than, "That's what I'd do..."  

> And frankly I'm sticking to my guns about the first post. There was
> absolutely no excuse for talking to anyone here that way.  I don't care

Frankly, I think someone (or several someones) getting hot-headed is a lot
less of a problem than the juvenile mind-games you're getting into here.  

> list members, but he was ...let's say unsavory, _here_ and I want those
> people who fear sharing their thoughts here to see that there are other
> attitudes present here and not everyone is willing to put up with it.

I've said it before, I'll say it again.  Anyone without the guts to stand
by their convictions and speak their mind--that's their own problem.  If
someone is -that- cowed, their views don't count for much anyway.  Their
loss.  They have a voice, choose not to use it for one reason or another,
that's nobody's problem but their own.  You, Jay, several others, and I
have no problems in this regard.  I fail to see why you think anyone else
need fear speaking their mind.  I've been told to sod off more than a few
times before.  I haven't keeled over dead from the slights yet.  (Touch
wood.)

So basically you're what...taking it upon yourself to rally everyone behind
your way of thinking?  You know, I've -made- that mistake before, and I can
tell you that you're on a dead-end, one-way street, Brian.  You won't win.
You can only lose if you reach the end of that road before stopping while
you're ahead.

> > You'll save yourself the embarrassment.
>
> Not even slightly embarassed. Why should I be? Saying "I don't know where
> to start" is not good enough. Re-read my post, sloooowly, And debate
> actual points. I didn't say anything I don't still stand behind. I wasn't

I did read it.  Several times.  I don't know whether to recommend you
pursue a career in comedy, or take the MMPI-II exam.  You're either really
amusing in a warped sort of way (as in, "Boy, he's queer as a three pound
note...I just don't get him, but he's at least amusing--sometimes."), or
you have some issues to work out and some learning and growing up to do.

But if I were you (actually, when -I- was -me-, once I wised up, and in my
more "in tune with the world" moments, rare as they seem to be), I'd be
embarrassed.  You're doing something for entirely the wrong reasons.

> "mouthing off". I didn't stab anyone in the back, and what I did do,
> of course I didn't do lightly because of course I knew it would feel
> that way.  Therefore, I would request serious critiques or responses not
> offhand dismissals.

Okay--keep in mind that you wanted serious critiques and/or responses.
You really should be careful what you ask for, you know.  That said...

You spend hours in the chat room talking with the rest of us, -including-
John.  You have a better measure of the man from there than here, as I
personally think a lot of his inflection, tone, and attitude gets lost
in the 7bit text translation.  That you -know- him, get along not just
cordially, but in a friendly fashion and such, and then slam him like that
-is- basically a stab in the back, IMHO.  I don't think there's any 
way to skirt that issue.

And to compound the error, you say you didn't do it lightly because you
knew it would feel that way.  So you basically -knew- you would potentially
hurt someone, and intentionally went out of your way to hit Send, is that
it?  I think that qualifies as malicious in its own right, Brian.  You're
now into pot and kettle territory (assuming John even -did- anything wrong,
which is debatable), you have no higher moral ground, and you're using dud
ammo, to boot.

> Stab in the back... since when does being smeones friend mean you are
> obligated to sit and do nothing while they abuse someone? I generally

I stayed out of the thread, but I did read it.  One of those things I've
learned to do is sit back and read what John says and try to 'hear' him say
it vocally in my head as he would speak it, because the same thing from him
comes across sometimes at 180 degree angles as far as what I take away from
it, depending on which medium it's in.  Which is not to say he puts on an
act anywhere.  He's sincere everywhere.  I don't think he started off with
any ill intent at all, and Jose basically started in from a standpoint of
feeling hurt or slighted or something or other--and things just escalated,
as they're wont to do around here.  It's that simple.

The word "abuse" is bandied about so damned lightly by everyone these days,
it trivialises the real thing.  A couple people had a -mutually- heated
argument, Eventually they called it a day.  Nobody got bloody abused.  Next
you'll be calling the ACLU to file a class action suit on behalf of the
portion of the list you can get on "your side" while you're at it.  It's a
great load of liberal whining nonsense.  There was no abuse on either side.
I guess that's what some people call speaking your mind without
pussyfooting around, these days.  Pity, as it really does trivialise -real-
abuse.

If you think -that- was abuse (on either side), you have no real clue, and
may you never have to actually experience the real thing.  I have, and I
can tell you that the real thing and what you're describing as such are
quite disparate creatures.

> problem to resolve here. Either I grossly misjudged someones basic
> character, or my friend has a problem he needs help with and as a friend

-Somehow-, I don't think John needs help from you.  I can't speak as to
what you think his character is, was, or will be.  That's -your- problem,
not his.  He (nor I, nor anyone else, for that matter) shouldn't have to go
through life looking over their shoulder, toeing the line to make sure
they're within someone's boundaries of what is expected of them by one
individual or one thousand individuals.  He owes you nothing.  He owes -me-
nothing.  I was brought up with one (of many) truisms drilled into my
head--nobody -owes- you anything.  And that includes behaving the way you
want them to because it happens to be more convenient and fit your views
better.

If they're -really- a friend, let them fall on their ass if they made a
real mistake, and be there to help them up afterwards and support them.
Protecting someone from themselves is a surefire way to ensure they never
learn anything from their mistakes.  Been there, done that.  

This -assumes- he made a mistake in the first place.  Personally, I chalk
it up to a mutually heated argument that escalated.  Putting yourself in
the middle and then dragging it up a week later after it was dead and
buried is -not- helpful to anyone except you.  That you're doing it because
you're hurt, and feel a need to do it publicly at that?  Well, I'm leaning
towards that MMPI-II recommendation again...

> i am at least concerned even if not in any position to do much about
> it, or I am ignorant of some prior facts that would explain things and
> maybe Jose really is some kind of scumbag that deserved to be personally
> attacked like that and I don't have to feel like this person I thought
> was a good guy is really only a good guy as long as you say your John is
> God prayers just right and bow low enough.

You know, I actually used to think that about John.  I'm on record, if you
care to check the archives, as saying -very- similar things about him some
one and a half years ago, noting the ego I perceived him as having, etc.
Almost identical.  I don't deny it.  At the time, I thought I was right.

The tragic irony of the thing was--I got to know the man, and I found out
-just- how -completely- wrong I was.  And I'm now honoured to consider him
a close friend.  Sure--we -all- have egos, for the most part.  But since
I've gotten to actually know him, I've discovered that John does -not-
leverage his nearly as much as he could, much less how much people dream he
does.  It's a false perception on the part of some readers.

MAYBE prior facts aren't your business, Jose isn't a scumbag, John has no
problems, and the -real- problem is that you just can't stop projecting
your values and expectations onto others long enough to let peace reign.  I
don't recall anyone asking you to referee.  I don't see why you should be
hurt when your call is ignored.  Yes, I read the explanation.  Thoroughly.
It's a cognitive distortion.  You think you're owed something, based on the
faulty premise that others should follow your set of mores.  That's not
reality, that's somewhere between a child-like ignorance and delusion.  I
don't think you're outright delusional, but I certainly don't credit you
with acting rationally or maturely at the moment.

I'll tell you something though--you're almost certainly not going to get
the acknowledgement you want at figurative gunpoint.  For your own stated
reasons, you're resentful and trying to provoke a reaction--any reaction,
as an acknowledgement that, by your value system, you're not "scum of the
earth".  I believe most people outgrow that desperate kind of need for
attention somewhere around middle school in most cases.  You might stop
looking so hard at others' behaviour and look carefully at your own.

And you know, harsh as I've been about this with you tonight, it's not like
I haven't made similar mistakes.  It's also not like I haven't paid the
price.  You can choose to ignore me--feel free.  Of course, then you have
to pay tuition at the school of hard knocks, so don't complain about
having to attend.  I did just earnestly try to save you the trouble.

Now...-I- would rather this didn't blow up into another huge fireball.  The
list walls are still scorched from the last one and the repainting is only
half done.  If you have some personal issues with someone, my advice would
be to take them up privately.  Personally, my estimation is that you have
personal issues with yourself that need to be worked out before you can
honestly work out issues fully with anyone else.  Actually, I think if you
worked out your own issues, many of your issues with others would become
entirely moot points.  I could be wrong, but you sure read that way from
here.

But really, enough already with the public baiting.  It's one thing when
we're in the heat of the moment.  You're trying to re-kindle a fire that
already died out, just to satisfy your own needs and soothe your sense of
insecurity.  Last I checked, this was a filePro forum, not a peer support
group for therapy.  He doesn't owe you a response of any kind, no matter
how you feel or why you feel it.  If you can't handle that simple truth,
I suggest you find a good therapist that can help you see where your
reasoning is flawed and why you will be perpetually let down unless you do
something about your distorted views on how things should be.  Because I
can pretty much guarantee that reality isn't going to bend over backwards
to meet your expectations of it.

Reality...is.  You can either accept that on the universe's terms, or you
can be perpetually disappointed and bitter.  The latter is a horrible thing
to see anyone endure.

You got your serious consideration from me.  I'm out of this from here on
out, responses to baiting inclusive.  Explain away to your heart's content,
justify whatever you like--whatever.  I can't help you any more than I
just tried to.  I'm personally just hoping you'll let the whole thing drop
and save everyone the flurry of hellfire that I can just feel around the
corner.  Everyone -was- leaving well enough alone.  I think we'd all prefer
it stayed that way.  I think we'd all that it rather had never started,
actually, but it is what it is and here we are.

Peace,

mark->
-- 
Bring the web-enabling power of OneGate to -your- filePro applications today!

Try the live filePro-based, OneGate-enabled demo at the following URL:
               http://www2.onnik.com/~fairlite/flfssindex.html