1. Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by K_D_R Sep 03, 2016
- 2266 views
decompensation:
"In psychology, the term refers to the inability to maintain defense mechanisms in response to stress, resulting in personality disturbance or psychological imbalance. Some who suffer from narcissistic personality disorder or borderline personality disorder may decompensate into persecutory delusions to defend against a troubling reality."
I believe it is futile and probably counterproductive endeavor to attempt a rational dialog with a delusional antagonist, particularly in a public forum. Irrational inflammatory posts should be politely ignored.
Under no circumstance should my own wisdom be used against me.
Ken
2. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by ryanj Sep 03, 2016
- 2223 views
Why don't we talk about something productive?
Agreed. Let's move this back to the original topic - dropping Windoze support.
As it is, even irv seems to support the idea of continuing Windoze support in Euphoria. After all, we don't really have a widespread equivalent to Broadway that would let us have the best of both worlds, as EuGTK does.
Agreed? You were the one who started this whole fork, addressing "Kat", who had nothing to do with the original topic. If you think you know someone's supposed secret identity, it seems inappropriate to bring it up and stir up controversy.
3. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Sep 04, 2016
- 2206 views
You were the one who started this whole fork,
Agreed ( the one at http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/130224.wc ) - but it was to talk about the theme of dropping Windoze support in general, to stop turning the earlier EuGTK thread into a pro-vs-con thread of Windoze. It was not meant to devolve into a thread about Kat. I've done by best to present my arguments about Windoze in every post that I've made to that thread.
addressing "Kat", who had nothing to do with the original topic.
I want to point out your bias here. If I am correct (and I'll be the first to admit that I'm certainly not Mr. Always-Right), then this is wrong. If Kat posted on the EuGTK thread then she certainly had something to do with the original topic.
If you think you know someone's supposed secret identity, it seems inappropriate to bring it up and stir up controversy.
Hmm. I've done it in the past without stiring up much controversy before: http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/125012.wc
I would agree that in general this sort of thing requires a good deal of discretion on a case-by-case basis.
As to why I felt it was necessary in this case, the answer is that I felt that if left unchecked the discussion could devolve along similar lines as to this one http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/126405.wc but thought that removing the cloak of anonymity might prevent that.
Why don't we talk about something productive?
Agreed. Let's move this back to the original topic - dropping Windoze support.
Agreed?
Yes, I agree that continuing to discuss that beyond a certain point (which I believe we've already reached) is not productive.
If you really agree with this, then I suggest that you also should stop being unproductive by trying to bring the discussion back to this topic.
4. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by unsteady Sep 04, 2016
- 2206 views
If you are addressing this to "Kat", you will probably get a replay from him.
Yes, I think I just got the reply, above.
It wasn't from this Kat. And i don't know nick "unsteady". And i don't use nix.
I was posting as "Steady". Jim Brown for reasons of disagreeing with him, decided to suspend me. So I deliberately chose the name "unsteady" and same email address provider to sign in to get further ahead in my Euphoria queries. Jim Brown tired to scuttle me in that effort and I had to appeal to Matt in direct emails to resolve the issue, and Matt actually did help. I have noticed that Matt is rarely posting these days. From reading about you, "katsmeow", I realise that you have had a long standing duel with Jim Brown. I just want Jim Brown and others to know that I have been on the Euphoria forum for about 2-3 years, I have no interest in Linux, I am a Windows user, by habit and commercial sense.
Having said that, I am tempted to switch to Xamarin packaged for free with the free Visual Studio 15. personally I find Visual Studio 15 too cumbersome to use. Xamarain has a long tradition via "mono" for Windows and Linux and has far more users than Euphoria. For me it is not a question of which language is slightly better than the other or which is slightly faster; I just want to get cheaper programmers so that I can outbid others on small applications that bring me an overall profit of $200-$300 per usable application after paying my programmers.
If you all decide to stop windows support, I am not at all worried. Then there is Freebasic compiler too. And I am sure there are many more Euphoria level Languages which I can use, but have not investigated. I am over 50 and I do not want to be switching programming Languages unnecessarily
I hope Jim Brown can see his Paranoia soon, and get appropriate help or medication.
5. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Sep 06, 2016
- 2168 views
I was posting as "Steady".
So, I asked you over a year ago (29 June 2015 to be exact) if you were the same user, and you seem to have ignored it.
Jim Brown for reasons of disagreeing with him, decided to suspend me.
This is untrue.
There was a CodeOfConduction violation incident on your part (at http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/126405.wc ) which a different moderator, ChrisB, dealt with ( here, http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/126407.wc ).
About a week after this, I checked your email address and discovered that the email address provided - steady@programmer.net - was fake. So your account was banned solely for that reason - the idea was that once you discovered the ban you'd contact the admins from your real email address and we'd fix everything up.
That account remains banned until someone puts in a valid email address for it.
So I deliberately chose the name "unsteady" and same email address provider to sign in to get further ahead in my Euphoria queries.
mail.com and programmer.net would technically be two different providers, I think.
Jim Brown tired to scuttle me in that effort
On 24 June 2015, you informed me that you had forgotten your password, so I reset it for you. That's hardly 'scuttling'.
and I had to appeal to Matt in direct emails to resolve the issue,
At the time (5 March 2015) you said you sent a single email directly to me and Matt, Tom, and ChrisB about it, and that my address bounced.
Later, I tenatively concluded that you went directly to Matt without asking me first. I determined that Matt should have had a record of the original email with my address on it if it had bounced, but he didn't, and also that mail sent from mail.com would not bounce when sent to my address.
and Matt actually did help.
You may not remember this, but I overrode his decision to unban the Steady account. I agreed with his decision at the time to allow unsteady to be activated. The admins work as a team. This transparent attempt to divide us won't work.
I have noticed that Matt is rarely posting these days.
He is, however, reading on a daily basis, and would have spoken up immediately if he had wanted to do so.
From reading about you, "katsmeow", I realise that you have had a long standing duel with Jim Brown.
Well, katsmeow, I'm sorry that you see it this way. From my POV I'm merely performing my duties.
I hope Jim Brown can see his Paranoia soon, and get appropriate help or medication.
That's the kicker. Your entire post, filled with untruths, is clearly a milder form of personal attack that is forbidden by the CodeOfConduct. And you've done it to an admin, no less. Obviously, there are consequences.
Welcome back to extended moderation.
6. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by jmduro Sep 06, 2016
- 2153 views
I am over 50 and I do not want to be switching programming Languages unnecessarily
I hope Jim Brown can see his Paranoia soon, and get appropriate help or medication.
I'm also in the 50's (56 to be exact) and I know about 30% of us (I'm in these) face andropause: "Common disturbances associated with andropause include low sex drive, impotence, depression, irritability, fatigue, muscle loss, and fat accumulation."
During this period which can last more than 15 years, our emotional reactions can be disproportionate. Please take this into account before discussions turn sour.
Jean-Marc
7. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by ne1uno Sep 06, 2016
- 2122 views
let's all throw some pop psychology terms out there. see if anything sticks Confirmation Bias Megalomania
8. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Sep 06, 2016
- 2136 views
let's all throw some pop psychology terms out there. see if anything sticks Confirmation Bias Megalomania
Touche! I've got one of my own: gullible personality disorder
9. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by evanmars Sep 07, 2016
- 2092 views
Affleunza
10. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by evanmars Sep 07, 2016
- 2076 views
Affluenza
11. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by unsteady Sep 07, 2016
- 2021 views
About a week after this, I checked your email address and discovered that the email address provided - steady@programmer.net - was fake. So your account was banned solely for that reason - the idea was that once you discovered the ban you'd contact the admins from your real email address and we'd fix everything up.
That account remains banned until someone puts in a valid email address for it.
So I deliberately chose the name "unsteady" and same email address provider to sign in to get further ahead in my Euphoria queries.
mail.com and programmer.net would technically be two different providers, I think.
steady@programmer.net was, is and will be my email address for programming related work. You never tried to reach me at that address. If you have been using Internet and free email addresses, you would know that mail.com provides some 80 different email addresses to choose from, and programmer.net is one and mail.com is another of those. You might like to learn that one can choose 10 different email addresses from their list to be sent to one account. So I will maintain that you did not, have not and refuse to check that address, and anyone of the readers can check that I have that address, and also unsteady@mail.com. I have asserted that I am not your enemy Kat but you insist on remaining paranoid, and I do urge you to seek psychiatric help before it becomes too severe. This last is a recommendation from a doctor friend who has read much of this correspondence.
12. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Sep 08, 2016
- 2001 views
steady@programmer.net was, is and will be my email address for programming related work. You never tried to reach me at that address.
I did. I got back 421 Downstream server error back then. I just tried it and got the same thing now.
If it's real, please send an email to openeuphoria AT gmail DOT com from that email address. The account will be re-enabled once this email is received.
If you have been using Internet and free email addresses, you would know that mail.com provides some 80 different email addresses to choose from, and programmer.net is one and mail.com is another of those.
Something odd is going on here. I tried mail.com last year, to verify if there was an issue sending and receiving emails from that provider. (It worked, btw). Ido not remember seeing programmer.net as an option. However, I just tried to sign up again and I can't get it to work. Once I fill out all the fields and hit the button, the password fields clear. That's all that happens.
The layout of the website is also different from what I remember.
I do see programmer.net as an option to choose from now. This is strange, as I checked out the whois registrations and they do not match.
For mail.com
Registrar: PSI-USA, Inc. dba Domain Robot Registrar IANA ID: 151 Registrar Abuse Contact Email: domain-abuse@psi-usa.info Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +49.94159559482 Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited Registry Registrant ID: Registrant Name: Jan Oetjen Registrant Organization: 1&1 Mail & Media Inc. Registrant Street: 701 Lee Rd. Registrant Street: Suite 300 Registrant City: Chesterbrook Registrant State/Province: PA Registrant Postal Code: 19087 Registrant Country: US Registrant Phone: +1.8774612631 Registrant Phone Ext: Registrant Fax: +1.6105601501 Registrant Fax Ext: Registrant Email: hostmaster@schlund.de
And for programmer.net
Updated Date: 2010-07-01T18:14:47Z Creation Date: 1996-11-19T05:00:00Z Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2017-11-18T05:00:00Z Registrar: Register.com, Inc. Registrar IANA ID: 9 Registrar Abuse Contact Email: abuse@web.com Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.8773812449 Reseller: Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited http://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited Registry Registrant ID: Registrant Name: ATTN Domain Inquiries Registrant Organization: World Media Group, LLC Registrant Street: 90 Washington Valley Rd., #1128 Registrant City: Bedminster Registrant State/Province: NJ Registrant Postal Code: 07921 Registrant Country: US Registrant Phone: +1.9089030200 Registrant Phone Ext.: Registrant Fax: +1.9082759105 Registrant Fax Ext.: Registrant Email: domains@world.com
Furthermore, the web page for programmer.net suggests that it's held by a domain parker.
It's hard to say for sure what is going on, but what I suspect happened is that the group behind mail.com once held programmer.net as a domain for use in emails, but that at some point they lost it and it was taken over by the domain parker. But they never updated their website to reflect the loss of this domain. (Perhaps due to lack of funds? They seem to be running a free service, after all.)
So I will maintain that you did not, have not and refuse to check that address,
I have done so multiple times at this point.
and anyone of the readers can check that I have that address,
Agreed. I'll put it out there - does it work for anyone else?
and also unsteady@mail.com.
Perhaps. There's certainly no record of that email address on the forums. That's not the one assigned to the unsteady account.
I have asserted that I am not your enemy Kat but you insist on remaining paranoid,
I am simply following the evidence.
... your enemy Kat ...
Also, at this point in time I do not view Kat as an enemy.
and I do urge you to seek psychiatric help before it becomes too severe. This last is a recommendation from a doctor friend who has read much of this correspondence.
If that is true, then the solution is simple. Offer me a referral to that doctor in that person's professional capacity. I would certainly look forward to discussing this matter with someone who does not hide behind the pseudonomity of the internet. (If that doctor friend is in a different profession, say a General Practitioner, that person should at least be able to refer me to another professional.)
I should certainly think this person would welcome additional business. What's the name of the doctor, and the name of the practice?
13. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by katsmeow Sep 10, 2016
- 1934 views
Jim is still playing games with what shows on the forum and what doesn't. One of my nicks has been banned from this forum for YEARS. This post of mine 5 minutes ago was stopped from showing:
From reading about you, "katsmeow", I realise that you have had a long standing duel with Jim Brown.
Well, katsmeow, I'm sorry that you see it this way. From my POV I'm merely performing my duties.
I hope Jim Brown can see his Paranoia soon, and get appropriate help or medication.
That's the kicker. Your entire post, filled with untruths, is clearly a milder form of personal attack that is forbidden by the CodeOfConduct. And you've done it to an admin, no less. Obviously, there are consequences.
Unsteady, you are correct. Iamlost, applying my nick to anyone you don't like is an attack againt me. I demand you ban yourself.
14. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by fizzpopsoft Sep 11, 2016
- 1915 views
What I see as a pity, is that someone who does contribute some good code, is also the same person who gets into waste-of-time, negative threads very, very often. For YEARS now. Threads that you can spot by the inevitable "I said, you said" quotes. Logically speaking either many different people, at different times are picking on one person, or that one person has a serious chip on their shoulder that just won't come off. The stated goal of this forum is to promote Euphoria - please can we concentrate on that? After all, membership and activity here is waning and these arguments are unlikely to help with that.
15. Re: Off Topic: Regarding Dialog with Forum Members Who are "Decompensating"
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Sep 11, 2016
- 1919 views
Jim is still playing games with what shows on the forum and what doesn't. One of my nicks has been banned from this forum for YEARS. This post of mine 5 minutes ago was stopped from showing:
Yes, you seem to have neatly ignored my pubic reply to you on this 4 months ago (to the day): http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/129656.wc
Yes, it is. This is because, even though it otherwise fits in fine with the CodeOfConduct, it still is a violation of the peace treaty that ryanj came up with. Specifically, you're not allowed to use the useless_ username anymore.
From the peace treaty itself: http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/126304.wc
you stop using "useless" as a name on this forum,
So, you'll be sactions for this violation again.
Unsteady, you are correct.
As I said before, I'm just following the evidence.
If I was wrong, surely someone have attempted to demonstrate it with actual proof by now?
applying my nick to anyone you don't like is an attack against me.
I think, where a general dispute and/or question of fact exists, then it is not a personal attack. This applies even if the accusing party is later shown to be wrong (as long as the accusing party admits it).
I demand you ban yourself.
As a compromise measure, I shall agree to this.
