Posted by Phillip Marx on January 4, 2000, at 2:55:31
In reply to Re: Speaking of Courtesy, dj and pm, posted by JT on January 3, 2000, at 22:54:14
Darn, registration, even telephone class registration is on hold for a “Y2K contingency week.” Their website should have said so. I missed last month since I went in their last day, which was my first convenient day off, only to discover that it was an un-announced half-day for them. Crowding the deadlines (AKA procrastination) strikes again. Such matriculation difficulties may help me get in even this late due to displaced competition for classes though, seed for hope. My sympathies go out to all those secretaries who have to live with so many appointment “dis”-appointments. I’m not depressed, never been so diagnosed, that turn of phrase “is” funny to me.
Now what? Even demonstrating that the transcription process discards formatting is angering? Why? Is gleaning a lost art? It would have been more fun to stay at work late tonight than to come home to this. I’m not married, I don’t have to think that such sweet talk is what it isn’t. I have heard people very affectionately use the worst language possible on each other. But these displays of real anger are about nothing except frustration with care I’m not trained or trying to provide. Please, you know who, show your therapist what you wrote (shouldn’t take long) and report back.
Thanks Noa, thanks juniper. I don’t like any turn of this towards debate or confrontation. I’ve heard it said that he who throws the most mud loses the most ground. Though I am trying to regain ground, mud isn’t the type I am after, I am only trying to recover my own lost ground. My search for sense doesn’t make enough sense to them, dealing with depression isn’t my skill, I hear I’m not alone, it’s a difficult skill to achieve. Patience please(!!!!!) while I apply some diligence to correcting that academically. A lot of patience, it will take several semesters, and even then I will still be far short of what anyone with a Masters would know. I wish I had taken time out to get a Masters long ago, que sera. My success rate has always been higher for the more easily achievable goals. “For debate’s sake” is only for the sake of useless friction to me. I so classify it. Debate is NOT my goal. Discovery is. I apologize for my slurred writing with apologetic facts, facts of substance, facts of personal deficit. Apologies without substance are….? Substanceless? My apology isn’t an empty one. I would like bygones to be byes gone bye-bye. If reading my writing doesn’t make them think “Hey, that’s me” then let’s part ways. They should go their ways, and I’ll go mine. Que sera.
I exercise the envelopes of concepts I am discussing with as little periphery omission as practical. Not paper envelopes, but boundary envelopes like flight envelopes. Not flighty thinking, but aerobatic thinking. Not dwelling in the depths of the valleys of life, but flying peak-to-peak. That means the ups, the downs, the positives and the negatives, the lefts and rights, the complements and the opposites, using temporal and spatial coordinates and selected tie-in references where convenient. Tied in, not separated and isolated with/by multiple paragraphs. Sometimes I settle for a very complex summary sentence instead of several pages. Sometimes I settle for a very complex paragraph instead of tons of pages. Point, point, counterpoint, concessions, punch-line (or anecdote). This apparently unsuccessful but nevertheless attempted verbal agility is meant to be more all-encompassing than confusing. For examples used in other writings: I use ground references when flying to deter vertigo (down, up, well, sick). Peak-to-peak flying causes less eye-strain than sticking close to the ground does (up, well, sick, down). I have a seaplane rating, so I can appreciate even the lowest landmark “land” reference above an expansive and featureless sea when the compass is dud (down, up, spin, sick). Concept compass points don’t require full exercise of all scrambled combinations and permutations of sub-concepts. I’ve left a lot out. A lot of glue-talk omitted results in a lot of choppiness. I’ve probably got less than ten minutes left before this sleep medicine finishes me off for tonight. Oh woe, time to whoa, gotta close.
Not tonight, but later, I’m going to try to figure out if there is a way to understand or develop a conscious metric for the mixed trusts and trust boundaries I see for technical references. Trust boundaries and cross-tabulations. Too complex for me this moment.
My apologies to this board for my being an involuntary clumsy oaf part of whatever deeper this disruption has been about.
Good night.
pm> > I am sorry if u both feel discomfited by my purposefully cutting comments, which I stand by. No I do not have to read everyone of PM's remarks and I certainly don't. However my initial interest in his comments soon waived and turned to personal outrage because of his holier than thou attitude which was quite explicit in a number of his rambling diatribes.
> >
> > Point taken and noted that he seems to be living in a maniac delusion which my comments do not penetrate and that I might be better off focusing on other issues from a more positive perspective.
> > However, I do not think that a little pointed commentary is out of place on occassion, though I don't intend to make it a habit here.
> >
> > > May i begin the "wave" for noa?
> > ... please cut each other a bit of slack
> > >
> > > juniper
> > >
> > DJ, from what I can tell, you started the mud slinging. Why?... If you are annoyed by his rambling, just don't read it. There is no reason to start name calling and such. Why get so personally insulting? One of the things I like about this place is that is generally very civil. That is why it hurts me to see you two throwing insults at each other.
> _____________________________________________
> I don't care for this at all.
> There is enough of this kind of stuff going on in the world - wouldn't it be agreed?
> Why bring any more of it to ourselves in a forum where we are given the rare opportunity to enlighten one other in thoughtful, caring terms?
> This type of flaming seems more appropriate in a setting OTHER than a psychological board that seems, so far at least, to be dedicated to intelligent, helpful discussions - not argument.
> Save it for the courtroom, work, wherever.
> Let all of us try to serve the board's integrity if for no other reason than out of due respect for what Dr. Bob is providing us...
> JT
> ________________________________________________
poster:Phillip Marx
thread:17556
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20000101/msgs/17957.html