Re: [libreoffice-users] non-mainstream
ever
used an avatar on the Internet, unless I was doing an investigation
of some ill-behaved person and needed to move unseen. You can go to
my professional website and get my phone number (or nabble, and look
at my signature block). This is who I am, and it's never been a
problem. I strongly dislike avatars. If you cannot stand out where I
can see you, you'd better have a darned good reason.
If it were me, no one on this list would be here without an email
address to which a name and phone number was attached. Just grow up,
people!
One off-topic final note: I'm not finished with the bullying issue.
It relates in several ways to much of what I've already said. I'm
working on a blog post that will make this clear. I'll bring the link
to the list, when it's ready. I've been slow getting to it, as there
are many alligators in my swamp just now.
t.
On 05/21/2014 01:41 PM, anne-ology wrote:
On the other hand, this anonymity is the reason these
criminal types
(hackers, spammers/scammers, ...)
are able to roam 'round - with no fears of being caught ;-(
For that reason, many of us are wary - maybe even overly
cautious
;-)
From: Virgil Arrington
Date: Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:25 AM
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] non-mainstream
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
On 05/19/2014 07:42 AM, Tom Davies wrote:
Hi :)
Last week we had an interesting thread, at least i thought so,
about how
most of us are probably on the aspergers/autism spectrum. About how
that
might actually be a benefit despite being possibly mislabelled as a
'dis'ability. Sure, for some people it is too extreme and may be
crippling
or maybe it's still a benefit for a lucky few who maybe worked hard to
"make the most of it". Many of us have tiny amounts of it and even
that is
sometimes just enough to set us outside of mainstream society.
At the end of the week i unwisely went to a pub with a friend who
started
pointing out some of my "eccentricities" and physically held onto
me to
prevent me from leaving. Errr she's quite a hot chick so it wasn't
all bad
and when we go out i try to realise that almost all the glances and
stares
we get are because of her. Just before disappearing inside myself
i looked
around to reassure myself that everyone around me was different in
their
ways but found just a sea of white faces and all dressed in a very
similar
way to each other = nothing like me nor like almost any friend.
I'm guessing there are a lot of people here who feel 'outside' of
mainstream society for at least 1 reason or other. Here on the
list i feel
safe because no-one can judge any one else on such randomness as skin
colour.
Do other people here feel like they are outside of a mainstream
society in
a way that might show up in a photo or face-to-face? I think in a
photo i
might look too mainstream. A static 2 dimensional image often
misses a lot
of the character of a person. Would it be good to collect a bunch of
photos that show us using LibreOffice? Maybe focussing mostly on the
screen but enough of a hint of you or a friend that the photo gives an
impression of someone interesting. On the other hand maybe it is
best that
we stick with the images we have of each other in our minds-eye?
I like the idea of a montage of different users so that almost anyone
looking at the montage might recognise something of themselves in
one or
more of the people in the montage. If you email photos to me
privately i
might be able to get a local artist to put it together. I would avoid
naming names unless you specifically tell me to include it.
The term 'mainstream' is quite flexible and might be very different
in some
countries or amongst some cultures. If we look at the photos used
in our
marketing then simply wearing a suit would make you stand out and
it might
be good to see that sort of thing mixed in too.
Regards from
Tom :)
Tom,
I think there is a faceless anonymity that makes e-communication
work. One
reason we are free to share is the safety that comes from being able to
close the lid with nobody knowing who we really are.
Virgil
--
~~~
Tom Cloyd, MS MA (LMHC, WA State)
Cedar City / St. George, UT, U.S.A: (435) 272-3332
* << t...@tomcloyd.com >> (email) << TomCloyd.com >> (website)
* Sleight of Mind blog: Sleightmind.com (mental health issues)
* Founder: Google+ Trauma and Dissociation Education and Advocacy community
~~~
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] non-mainstream
Hi Tom :) Thanks for the support! Many people ARE neurotypicals but many aren't too. http://musingsofanaspie.com/2013/01/10/what-is-neurotypical/ I'm fairly sure i am NT but much of what you say people 'all' like would be a nightmare for me, and for many others too. It took me a lot of effort to learn to shake hands with people = more for the why and when than the how. It's an ordeal for me but i'm good at it, allegedly, so that balances with the awkwardness a bit. The only dog i like is one who likes playing "stick" or just running away without needing an excuse just for the pure joy of running and running. Many other people are similar or more extreme and maybe even freak out about discussing any of this. I think the girl in this video doesn't get it right for everyone because there seems to be much more variety in all this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=At4Vmo13vJE Regards from Tom :) On 22 May 2014 02:18, anne-ology wrote: >Virgil - exactly; >and my thinking as well. > > > > From: Virgil Arrington > Date: Wed, May 21, 2014 at 8:08 PM > Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] non-mainstream > To: users@global.libreoffice.org > > > Tom C. > > I generally don't disagree with you concerning human relations. However, I > don't want *all* of my human interactions to be as emotionally connected as > you seem to imply. > > I have my family and close intimate friends, with whom I communicate > directly, and rarely through e-communication. > > I then I have my church family, with whom I am open emotionally, but not as > much as with my genetic family. > > Then there are e-mail lists of a more personal subject matter on which I > will share more openly. > > But, this is a techno-geek lists. It exists *primarily* to help users learn > how to get the most out of LO. While I appreciate the interaction on this > list, I won't deceive myself into thinking that this is an emotionally > intimate support system. By it's nature, it can't be, nor do I think it is > intended to be. > > Virgil > > > > On 5/21/2014 5:49 PM, Tom Cloyd wrote: > > Anne, Virgil, Tom, > > > > I only just saw this thread, thanks to Anne's restarting it. I wish I > > could follow this list more closely, but I just can't. This thread > matters > > to me, however, so I feel compelled to jump in. > > > > Tom, and all - Your initial post is probably the most courageous, human, > > and gripping thing I've ever read on this list. I've always had a strong > > sense that you are much in touch with your valuing other people, and your > > awareness of them, and of yourseflf. In these things, you are in my > > estimation exceptional. Does this confer a kind of vulnerability? Surely. > > But the show is worth the cost of the ticket. You lead by example, > without > > question, and I love that example! > > > > It is an undeniable fact that we are social animals. Remove that from us > > and we become mute, because we no longer have a common language. We also > > likely become naked (ready for that?) and tool-less (ouch - no > > computers!!!). Going the other direction, a society of robots sounds > > unrewarding in the very areas that typically end up mattering most to > most > > of us, especially at critical times - like the death of a child, or when > > confronting an apparently unsolvable problem, or when encountering our > own > > finiteness. > > > > I don't want impersonal relations. I want people in my life. I can easily > > predict that virtually everyone else does too. People are more than data > > and intelligence and decisions. We have bodies and feelings, smiles and > > laughter and tears. I want all of that. Don't you? I'll bet you do. > > > > Being "different" is an interesting fate, and also as much illusion as > > fact. Two issues arise rather quickly, and they aren't often enough > > distinguished: self-acceptance and acceptance by others. I can (for those > > who are interested) give some exceptionally persuasive references in > > support of the proposition that these two issues are VERY intimately > > related - most particularly in our early years. > > > > When adult, it may be hoped (but hardly always achieved) that we are > > self-supporting enough to be only modestly reliant on acceptance from > > others. But must of us still need at least SOME of this, and fairly > > routinely. I know I do. However, there is this qualification: my computer > > accepts me all the time (well, most of the time). But I never get a hug. > My > > f
Re: [libreoffice-users] non-mainstream
Virgil - exactly; and my thinking as well. From: Virgil Arrington Date: Wed, May 21, 2014 at 8:08 PM Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] non-mainstream To: users@global.libreoffice.org Tom C. I generally don't disagree with you concerning human relations. However, I don't want *all* of my human interactions to be as emotionally connected as you seem to imply. I have my family and close intimate friends, with whom I communicate directly, and rarely through e-communication. I then I have my church family, with whom I am open emotionally, but not as much as with my genetic family. Then there are e-mail lists of a more personal subject matter on which I will share more openly. But, this is a techno-geek lists. It exists *primarily* to help users learn how to get the most out of LO. While I appreciate the interaction on this list, I won't deceive myself into thinking that this is an emotionally intimate support system. By it's nature, it can't be, nor do I think it is intended to be. Virgil On 5/21/2014 5:49 PM, Tom Cloyd wrote: Anne, Virgil, Tom, > > I only just saw this thread, thanks to Anne's restarting it. I wish I > could follow this list more closely, but I just can't. This thread matters > to me, however, so I feel compelled to jump in. > > Tom, and all - Your initial post is probably the most courageous, human, > and gripping thing I've ever read on this list. I've always had a strong > sense that you are much in touch with your valuing other people, and your > awareness of them, and of yourseflf. In these things, you are in my > estimation exceptional. Does this confer a kind of vulnerability? Surely. > But the show is worth the cost of the ticket. You lead by example, without > question, and I love that example! > > It is an undeniable fact that we are social animals. Remove that from us > and we become mute, because we no longer have a common language. We also > likely become naked (ready for that?) and tool-less (ouch - no > computers!!!). Going the other direction, a society of robots sounds > unrewarding in the very areas that typically end up mattering most to most > of us, especially at critical times - like the death of a child, or when > confronting an apparently unsolvable problem, or when encountering our own > finiteness. > > I don't want impersonal relations. I want people in my life. I can easily > predict that virtually everyone else does too. People are more than data > and intelligence and decisions. We have bodies and feelings, smiles and > laughter and tears. I want all of that. Don't you? I'll bet you do. > > Being "different" is an interesting fate, and also as much illusion as > fact. Two issues arise rather quickly, and they aren't often enough > distinguished: self-acceptance and acceptance by others. I can (for those > who are interested) give some exceptionally persuasive references in > support of the proposition that these two issues are VERY intimately > related - most particularly in our early years. > > When adult, it may be hoped (but hardly always achieved) that we are > self-supporting enough to be only modestly reliant on acceptance from > others. But must of us still need at least SOME of this, and fairly > routinely. I know I do. However, there is this qualification: my computer > accepts me all the time (well, most of the time). But I never get a hug. My > friends, acquaintances, and clients accept me most of the time, too, but > offer so much more, including hugs. I may spend more hours with my > computer, but I prefer my friends, acquaintances, and clients. > > ...and now to Virgil - I think there is some truth to what you say, and it > has to do with this: When dealing with problems, which is what we do most > of the time here, keeping the level of affect (feelings) produced in our > brain moderated allows our perceptions and cerebral cortex to function > unimpaired by the disruptions that are caused by affective excess. But who > wants primarily to dialog with a computer? Or a robot? And who wants to be > up in their cerebral cortex all the time? Is that what your wife wants from > you? Your kids? Your dog? You? You know the answer. > > Well, I'm like your dog. I want more. I think that if the truth be known > we all do. > > Yeah, I suspect that more than a few here are exceptionally developed > relative to problem solving skills, and possibly less developed in > supportive, rewarding social relations skills. So...with that awareness in > mind, let's just work a bit at keep all of ourselves involved here. Tom D. > did, when he told his story. Practice make better. > > Anne - yeah, you're right. That's one reason why I have never ever used an > av
Re: [libreoffice-users] non-mainstream
ere without an email address to which a name and phone number was attached. Just grow up, people! One off-topic final note: I'm not finished with the bullying issue. It relates in several ways to much of what I've already said. I'm working on a blog post that will make this clear. I'll bring the link to the list, when it's ready. I've been slow getting to it, as there are many alligators in my swamp just now. t. On 05/21/2014 01:41 PM, anne-ology wrote: On the other hand, this anonymity is the reason these criminal types (hackers, spammers/scammers, ...) are able to roam 'round - with no fears of being caught ;-( For that reason, many of us are wary - maybe even overly cautious ;-) From: Virgil Arrington Date: Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:25 AM Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] non-mainstream To: users@global.libreoffice.org On 05/19/2014 07:42 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Last week we had an interesting thread, at least i thought so, about how most of us are probably on the aspergers/autism spectrum. About how that might actually be a benefit despite being possibly mislabelled as a 'dis'ability. Sure, for some people it is too extreme and may be crippling or maybe it's still a benefit for a lucky few who maybe worked hard to "make the most of it". Many of us have tiny amounts of it and even that is sometimes just enough to set us outside of mainstream society. At the end of the week i unwisely went to a pub with a friend who started pointing out some of my "eccentricities" and physically held onto me to prevent me from leaving. Errr she's quite a hot chick so it wasn't all bad and when we go out i try to realise that almost all the glances and stares we get are because of her. Just before disappearing inside myself i looked around to reassure myself that everyone around me was different in their ways but found just a sea of white faces and all dressed in a very similar way to each other = nothing like me nor like almost any friend. I'm guessing there are a lot of people here who feel 'outside' of mainstream society for at least 1 reason or other. Here on the list i feel safe because no-one can judge any one else on such randomness as skin colour. Do other people here feel like they are outside of a mainstream society in a way that might show up in a photo or face-to-face? I think in a photo i might look too mainstream. A static 2 dimensional image often misses a lot of the character of a person. Would it be good to collect a bunch of photos that show us using LibreOffice? Maybe focussing mostly on the screen but enough of a hint of you or a friend that the photo gives an impression of someone interesting. On the other hand maybe it is best that we stick with the images we have of each other in our minds-eye? I like the idea of a montage of different users so that almost anyone looking at the montage might recognise something of themselves in one or more of the people in the montage. If you email photos to me privately i might be able to get a local artist to put it together. I would avoid naming names unless you specifically tell me to include it. The term 'mainstream' is quite flexible and might be very different in some countries or amongst some cultures. If we look at the photos used in our marketing then simply wearing a suit would make you stand out and it might be good to see that sort of thing mixed in too. Regards from Tom :) Tom, I think there is a faceless anonymity that makes e-communication work. One reason we are free to share is the safety that comes from being able to close the lid with nobody knowing who we really are. Virgil -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] non-mainstream
Anne, Virgil, Tom, I only just saw this thread, thanks to Anne's restarting it. I wish I could follow this list more closely, but I just can't. This thread matters to me, however, so I feel compelled to jump in. Tom, and all - Your initial post is probably the most courageous, human, and gripping thing I've ever read on this list. I've always had a strong sense that you are much in touch with your valuing other people, and your awareness of them, and of yourseflf. In these things, you are in my estimation exceptional. Does this confer a kind of vulnerability? Surely. But the show is worth the cost of the ticket. You lead by example, without question, and I love that example! It is an undeniable fact that we are social animals. Remove that from us and we become mute, because we no longer have a common language. We also likely become naked (ready for that?) and tool-less (ouch - no computers!!!). Going the other direction, a society of robots sounds unrewarding in the very areas that typically end up mattering most to most of us, especially at critical times - like the death of a child, or when confronting an apparently unsolvable problem, or when encountering our own finiteness. I don't want impersonal relations. I want people in my life. I can easily predict that virtually everyone else does too. People are more than data and intelligence and decisions. We have bodies and feelings, smiles and laughter and tears. I want all of that. Don't you? I'll bet you do. Being "different" is an interesting fate, and also as much illusion as fact. Two issues arise rather quickly, and they aren't often enough distinguished: self-acceptance and acceptance by others. I can (for those who are interested) give some exceptionally persuasive references in support of the proposition that these two issues are VERY intimately related - most particularly in our early years. When adult, it may be hoped (but hardly always achieved) that we are self-supporting enough to be only modestly reliant on acceptance from others. But must of us still need at least SOME of this, and fairly routinely. I know I do. However, there is this qualification: my computer accepts me all the time (well, most of the time). But I never get a hug. My friends, acquaintances, and clients accept me most of the time, too, but offer so much more, including hugs. I may spend more hours with my computer, but I prefer my friends, acquaintances, and clients. ...and now to Virgil - I think there is some truth to what you say, and it has to do with this: When dealing with problems, which is what we do most of the time here, keeping the level of affect (feelings) produced in our brain moderated allows our perceptions and cerebral cortex to function unimpaired by the disruptions that are caused by affective excess. But who wants primarily to dialog with a computer? Or a robot? And who wants to be up in their cerebral cortex all the time? Is that what your wife wants from you? Your kids? Your dog? You? You know the answer. Well, I'm like your dog. I want more. I think that if the truth be known we all do. Yeah, I suspect that more than a few here are exceptionally developed relative to problem solving skills, and possibly less developed in supportive, rewarding social relations skills. So...with that awareness in mind, let's just work a bit at keep all of ourselves involved here. Tom D. did, when he told his story. Practice make better. Anne - yeah, you're right. That's one reason why I have never ever used an avatar on the Internet, unless I was doing an investigation of some ill-behaved person and needed to move unseen. You can go to my professional website and get my phone number (or nabble, and look at my signature block). This is who I am, and it's never been a problem. I strongly dislike avatars. If you cannot stand out where I can see you, you'd better have a darned good reason. If it were me, no one on this list would be here without an email address to which a name and phone number was attached. Just grow up, people! One off-topic final note: I'm not finished with the bullying issue. It relates in several ways to much of what I've already said. I'm working on a blog post that will make this clear. I'll bring the link to the list, when it's ready. I've been slow getting to it, as there are many alligators in my swamp just now. t. On 05/21/2014 01:41 PM, anne-ology wrote: On the other hand, this anonymity is the reason these criminal types (hackers, spammers/scammers, ...) are able to roam 'round - with no fears of being caught ;-( For that reason, many of us are wary - maybe even overly cautious ;-) From: Virgil Arrington Date: Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:25 AM Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] non-mainstream To: users@glob
Re: [libreoffice-users] non-mainstream
On the other hand, this anonymity is the reason these criminal types (hackers, spammers/scammers, ...) are able to roam 'round - with no fears of being caught ;-( For that reason, many of us are wary - maybe even overly cautious ;-) From: Virgil Arrington Date: Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:25 AM Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] non-mainstream To: users@global.libreoffice.org On 05/19/2014 07:42 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) > Last week we had an interesting thread, at least i thought so, about how > most of us are probably on the aspergers/autism spectrum. About how that > might actually be a benefit despite being possibly mislabelled as a > 'dis'ability. Sure, for some people it is too extreme and may be crippling > or maybe it's still a benefit for a lucky few who maybe worked hard to > "make the most of it". Many of us have tiny amounts of it and even that is > sometimes just enough to set us outside of mainstream society. > > > At the end of the week i unwisely went to a pub with a friend who started > pointing out some of my "eccentricities" and physically held onto me to > prevent me from leaving. Errr she's quite a hot chick so it wasn't all bad > and when we go out i try to realise that almost all the glances and stares > we get are because of her. Just before disappearing inside myself i looked > around to reassure myself that everyone around me was different in their > ways but found just a sea of white faces and all dressed in a very similar > way to each other = nothing like me nor like almost any friend. > > I'm guessing there are a lot of people here who feel 'outside' of > mainstream society for at least 1 reason or other. Here on the list i feel > safe because no-one can judge any one else on such randomness as skin > colour. > > Do other people here feel like they are outside of a mainstream society in > a way that might show up in a photo or face-to-face? I think in a photo i > might look too mainstream. A static 2 dimensional image often misses a lot > of the character of a person. Would it be good to collect a bunch of > photos that show us using LibreOffice? Maybe focussing mostly on the > screen but enough of a hint of you or a friend that the photo gives an > impression of someone interesting. On the other hand maybe it is best that > we stick with the images we have of each other in our minds-eye? > > I like the idea of a montage of different users so that almost anyone > looking at the montage might recognise something of themselves in one or > more of the people in the montage. If you email photos to me privately i > might be able to get a local artist to put it together. I would avoid > naming names unless you specifically tell me to include it. > > The term 'mainstream' is quite flexible and might be very different in some > countries or amongst some cultures. If we look at the photos used in our > marketing then simply wearing a suit would make you stand out and it might > be good to see that sort of thing mixed in too. > > Regards from > Tom :) > > Tom, I think there is a faceless anonymity that makes e-communication work. One reason we are free to share is the safety that comes from being able to close the lid with nobody knowing who we really are. Virgil -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] non-mainstream
On 05/19/2014 07:42 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Last week we had an interesting thread, at least i thought so, about how most of us are probably on the aspergers/autism spectrum. About how that might actually be a benefit despite being possibly mislabelled as a 'dis'ability. Sure, for some people it is too extreme and may be crippling or maybe it's still a benefit for a lucky few who maybe worked hard to "make the most of it". Many of us have tiny amounts of it and even that is sometimes just enough to set us outside of mainstream society. At the end of the week i unwisely went to a pub with a friend who started pointing out some of my "eccentricities" and physically held onto me to prevent me from leaving. Errr she's quite a hot chick so it wasn't all bad and when we go out i try to realise that almost all the glances and stares we get are because of her. Just before disappearing inside myself i looked around to reassure myself that everyone around me was different in their ways but found just a sea of white faces and all dressed in a very similar way to each other = nothing like me nor like almost any friend. I'm guessing there are a lot of people here who feel 'outside' of mainstream society for at least 1 reason or other. Here on the list i feel safe because no-one can judge any one else on such randomness as skin colour. Do other people here feel like they are outside of a mainstream society in a way that might show up in a photo or face-to-face? I think in a photo i might look too mainstream. A static 2 dimensional image often misses a lot of the character of a person. Would it be good to collect a bunch of photos that show us using LibreOffice? Maybe focussing mostly on the screen but enough of a hint of you or a friend that the photo gives an impression of someone interesting. On the other hand maybe it is best that we stick with the images we have of each other in our minds-eye? I like the idea of a montage of different users so that almost anyone looking at the montage might recognise something of themselves in one or more of the people in the montage. If you email photos to me privately i might be able to get a local artist to put it together. I would avoid naming names unless you specifically tell me to include it. The term 'mainstream' is quite flexible and might be very different in some countries or amongst some cultures. If we look at the photos used in our marketing then simply wearing a suit would make you stand out and it might be good to see that sort of thing mixed in too. Regards from Tom :) Tom, I think there is a faceless anonymity that makes e-communication work. One reason we are free to share is the safety that comes from being able to close the lid with nobody knowing who we really are. Virgil -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
