My PM rights

Post Reply New Topic

Yes, because it is under the user control panel. The "infinity" colour scheme is quite pleasant with pale blues.

That's cool, and a potential benefit if the software was upgraded on this site, I guess. As I get older I have a harder time dealing with change, something everyone deals with to a degree I think, as they get older, but maybe worse for people with autism?

Ten years ago I would have never paid mind to anything like this. It bothers me when I see a building torn down that I used to see. Earlier in life, It would have been, cool we're moving into the future.

The word "programmed" is interesting. Back in 2005 there was a girl named Katie who actually admitted to me that her original rejection of me was "immature". Yet she still implicitly assumed she had to stick to the decision of rejecting me simply because she made it to begin with (even though she was admitting it was immature). It really felt like she was "programmed" in that way. Her "program" simply didn't allow for change of mind. This brings a more general question: why are people ran by their "programs"? Why can't they be less rigid and "bend" their ways here and there? The detailed post about the specific example of that girl can be found here: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt9507.html




In case of your kids, you are probably talking about things such as whether to buy their favorite candy at the store or whether to allow them to play a bit longer. If that is the case then I am in complete agreement with you. There is no major damage that can be done by "unfair decisions" and, therefore, it is a very good place to practice their skills of "getting to the point or losing their point".

In my case, however, I am talking about far more drastic things. If it wasn't for the retired professor who agreed to take me on out of pity, I would have been EXPELLED from school ... all because I CAME ACROSS as "not willing to cooperate" during my 10 minute long interviews with various professors. So, if you are talking about something as drastic as that, don't you think in this particular case allowing me to explain myself and attempting to adjust to my way of thinking is "lesser evil"?

But for some reason it seems like people are trying to avoid my way of thinking AT ALL COSTS. Lets go back to the scammer example. The professor who invited me to India knew about scammer. But she avoided talking to me about it. Why? Well, because on examples of other topics she found that talking to me is unproductive. Now, its not like she didn't care about my being scammed. She most certainly did. In fact, she was making phone calls from India to USA and was talking to my former thesis advisor in order to get HIM to talk to me. He didn't follow up on that -- he is known to procrastinate. But this still didn't make HER talk to me. She simply got more and more frustrated that HE won't "take care of situation". But the idea of HER talking to me just wasn't an option. Even if I am losing $8000 to the scammer. Still, the patience required to talk to me is somehow more important.



This is a miscommunication. Yes, if you read my posts it might SOUND like I dissect details. But I do it for the sake of a bigger point. If you read the way lau described the situation, you will see that he it is a lot more than just "getting details wrong". Just ONE GLANCE at what he wrote make it look like I am one of the scammers who send mass emails (I get hundrids of those on my hotmail daily). In reality it wasn't anything AT ALL like that. Now simply saying "no you are wrong" is pointless since the other person would respond "yes I am right". Thats why I demonstrated that he was wrong by quoting him sentence by sentence and showing where each sentence is wrong. This might LOOK LIKE picking details, but like I said, it is done for a bigger purpose.

Now, in case of sinsboldly the situation is similar. The FACT that she didn't look at any details reveals a "bigger picture" that she simply decided I was a scammer and lumped me together with the rest of those. THAT is why I feel details are important. Even though yes I was scammed, the specific brand of the scam I fell into is NOT a typical one. It was NOT one of those "business apportunities". And that is important, since THAT is one of the biggest reasons I fell for it. If it was just any old "business apportunity" I would have passed it right by. Even more importantly, sinsboldly didn't bother to figure out which country I was from. She said "here in America we call it Nigerian fraud". But I am FROM America! Again, this is not a detail at all. The fact that I am from America implies that I am a victim rather than fellow scammer.



If that is the case, she should have responded this way to my justification and then, in my SECOND response I would have told her that I won't break the rule any more. I mean what happened is that I misunderstood her "question". While technically she didn't "ask" any "questions" (she simply "stated" that "it is against the law") she was IMPLICITLY asking me "are you going to continue to break this law or not?". I didn't understand that she was implicitly asking that question, so, naturally, I didn't answer the question that I didn't know was asked to begin with. Instead I told her justification. So if on her second reply she were to say "I am not interested in justification, I want to know whether you will do it again", then I would have said "no I won't do it again; I might not understand all the reasons, but since you told me it is not allowed, I won't do it". But she didn't even ask that; she simply assumed I was not going to listen.



Regarding your parenthetical remark, I was not a "newer member". I joined this forum in 2005, and I broke that rule in 2009. That is another reason why I am pissed at her: she should have realized that if I didn't attempt to scam anyone within 4 years, I am not a scammer. I mean, sure, a scammer would spend SOME time pretending to be a genuine person. But that would be at most few months, not 4 years.



You have just stated that they "get to core of the conflict and move on". But in my situation, the "core of the conflict" IS about details. After all, Asperger affects non-verbal communication. Now, what does that mean, non verbal communication? It means the way my eyes look, the way I move, and so forth. All these things are "details". But if I get these "details" wrong, people will get the wrong "big picture". So in other people's minds the "core of the conflict" is that I was "angry at them". But on my end, I was NOT angry, I simply did all these details wrong that made it look like I was. So, then, the details BECOME the "core of the conflict". So if others are trying to get to the core of the conflict, shouldn't I "help them out" by POINTING OUT what that "core" REALLY is?

Lets take my relationship with Anita (a DIFFERENT girl from the one I quoted above). So I came from a trip. I was sleepy. So when she called me on the phone, my voice was quiet. She decided I was "pouting" and then she broke up. So then I started trying to call her and explain that I was not "pouting", I was simply tired. Then she said that this is exactly why she is breaking up -- I can't just move past things, I have to sit there and analyze. Well, on my end, what am I supposed to do? If someone thinks I was "pauting" because I was "not getting my way" when in reality I was plain sleepy, shouldn't I correct a BASIC misunderstanding about FACTS?



Okay, if I were to write these three sentences BACK THEN, when I didn't know the guy was a scammer, I would have written something along the following lines:

"I would like to appologize for sending requests for money. Even though I don't think this guy is a scammer, I realize that the rules of this forum don't allow that. I will not send any more such requests."

But still, the above three sentence email wouldn't have satisfied me. The reason being is that simply stating "even though I don't think this guy is a scammer" is not going to make her believe that I am sincere about that part. I was hoping that with details I will get her to see that I am not just "one of these business aportunity people". Plus also she got her facts wrong. She probably assumed I was third worlder since she said "HERE IN AMERICA we call it Nigerian scam". So I wanted to straighten up misunderstanding.

I haven't the time or inclination to read your wall of words. Have you tried contacting Alex directly as I suggested several pages ago? You need to show some initiative and responsibility in sorting this issue yourself.

Roman,

Whether or not you mean to, when you continue to return to these long explanations and tangents, you demonstrate that you will never, basically, feel the issue is resolved until the other person says they completely understand you and you are right. This will not happen. The best you will get in most situations is an agreement to disagree, or, when personal feelings are involved, an "I'm sorry you feel hurt; I did not mean to hurt you." Learning to accept that before the other person goes insane is the only way to keep them willing to ever return to the figurative table.

Would you really patiently listen to someone trying to offer to you that level of explanation? I rather doubt it. Parents of AS kids will tell you that with our kids, at least, we've noticed it's a one way street. In the heat of the moment they want to explain TO us, but long sessions of back and forth can agitate them and make things worse. We save attempts at resolution for times they are calm and then we keep it focused to the point.

I will respond to all of your last post because that is what you seem to want. But you won't always like my answers. None of my answers are perfect; I don't have time for that. Still, I hope you can find the key points and listen.

This is the last post I'll make on this topic because there are dozens of demands on my time at any given moment, and my kids job husband etc have to take priority over anyone here at Wrong Planet.

It sounds to me like she was trying to tell you she found you incompatible. As for why don't people bend ... Think about this: how much do you really bend compared to those around you? I'll suggest it's probably not much; that is how AS is. But it is harder for you to see it in yourself.




When you insist on having to explain yourself, this IS not willing to cooperate. This thread, for example. You were told multiple times what the situation was, but you need to write long missives explaining yourself anyway. The explanations are irrelevant!! ! If you did that sort of thing in a 10 minute interview, you prevented the interviewer from covering the ground he needed to cover.

Why would the professor avoid talking to you? Because her past experience with you had shown her that she could not be successful at it. It would wasted her time and leave you frustrated and puzzled. My bet is she tried, a small gentle start, and instead of you hearing her, you tried to explain yourself.

This isn't negotiable. You MUST learn the skill to get anywhere communicating with pretty much anyone. Get rid of the need to explain and learn to LISTEN, and to say something, anything, that shows you have HEARD.



Not the least bit interested in your bigger point. If anyone had seriously thought you were a scammer you would have been BANNED, and we wouldn't even be having this discussion, don't you get that?



Would you really have listened? You have a very hard time with it.

By and large moderator's experience shows them it is better not to engage. It varies a bit by moderator and member, but you have to accept that your moderator has needs, too.

This issue is closed.



Besides the point. This issue is closed.



The core is never "the" details, just a "few" details. And you need to know which details matter to the other person. The key to communicating is not to share what you see as the core, but to find out and address what the other person sees as the core. The best approach is to ASK, not explain.

One sentence answered the sleepy issue. If it took more, it means you missunderstood the problem. Stop and ASK.

Later I'll give you a script.



Excellent. From now on make it your goal to answer in three sentences. Let go of the desire to feel satisfied because, quite honestly, that goal is out of reach in most situations. Accept that so you can move on.

Here is a script for answering when conversations are showing conflict:

"I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. Could you help me out?"

Or

"I am sorry you are upset, but I am confused as to why."

Or

"I would like to understand your point of view better."

Yes, each of these involves showing, FIRST, that you are more interested in understanding them than you are in defending yourself. That is an ESSENTIAL step in communication. Eventually they will ask you similar questions back, in which case you do your best to answer in three sentences. If it isn't enough, guess what? They will ask more questions, and then you get three more sentences. It is the questions that help everyone get to and resolve the conflicting core issues.

ASK QUESTIONS first, explain in LIMITED amounts later, when THEY ask.

That is the script.

See if you can find someone willing to help you practice. This is hard to learn for many with AS, but you will find life goes much better if you do. I wish you well.

Last edited by DW_a_mom on 28 May 2011, 7:39 pm, edited 3 times in total.

One more suggestion: if you are not already working with a speech therapist, you should make arrangements to do so. The communication issues noted in this thread fall under a category called pragmatic speech, and many parents will tell you that pragmatic speech therapy has been the single most effective therapy they have used with their kids. The issue sounds like it has had a profound effect on your personal and professional life. It is in your best interest to engage with a qualified professional in resolving it. Help is out there. Take it.

Funny, I have actually been understanding what Roman is saying. I know what he is saying and am not misunderstanding it. I know what his intentions are after he has explained himself. I know he has learned his lesson, I know he fell for a scam and didn't know the person was a scammer, he didn't know asking for money was not allowed here. I know he won't do it again.

Is it really hard for people to not understand? To me it's all simple.

You've missed the point.

I think most everyone understood him six pages ago. You need to understand that to understand the issue. The problem is that understanding his reasons is irrelevent to resolving his problem. This isn't the Haven; it's a problem resolution sub-forum. Regardless of that fact, clearly stated, he wouldn't stop trying to make sure 100% of the readers stored each possible detail accurately in their heads. All that is completely besides the point as far as restoring his pm rights go and won't make it happen any faster, so why were we even having that conversation? This isn't about anyone not understanding him; it's about him not understanding anyone else.

The last few posts are just practice, btw. Roman and I are rehashing on purpose to help him understand better the social rules for communicating more efficiently. That comes from some questions he asked a page or so ago. I offered to talk about it, just now I've spent as much time as it makes sense for me to spend.

Well I can give you concrete examples of the "opposite direction" in my case. Throughout my teenage years, the number one thing that drove people nuts is that I was asking too many questions. I kept saying why did you say this, what exactly did you think that made you produce this statement, and so forth. Back then I was NOT insisting on giving long explanations about my own behavior; my questions were exclusively about other people's.

Things changed at 21 when I was hurt and THEN I became obsessed with explaining myself. At the same time, wanting to know about other people's thoughts continued, with a new outlet. In fact, I spent a lot of time contemplating just what could have gone through the mind of the specific people who hurt me? I have came up with long winded theories of what these people were SUPPOSEDLY thinking; but I am pretty sure these theories are wrong. So I WISH I could ask them for a long explanation of what they thought and this would resolve a lot of my obsessions.



Again, this is different in my case. At the beginning of my relationship with Jennifer, she was willing to write me long emails about what went through her mind and what all the reasons are why I should do things differently. This didn't agitate me at all. On the contrary, this was one of the biggest things I LIKED about her. But then, few months later, she lost patience and stopped giving any explanations. THEN I became more and more agitated.



Suppose someone went to jail, and two years later they are getting him out of jail. The fact that they are getting him out doesn't mean that they consider him "innocent". It simply means he served his term. It seems like the same is happening with my PM rights. Approximately a year ago (which is also a year AFTER I lost the PM rights) I made a post asking to get them restored. But, because I was irrate in that post, they refused to restore them. Yet, they mentioned that after a significant portion of time passes, I am welcome to make that request again. Why did they mention it? They deemed that I need to "spend more time", but once that time is "spent" they can get me rights back. Well, now "more time" was in fact "spent". That is why getting rights back doesn't make me feel completely happy. I wish I could get them back right after I lost them.



Yes and no. On the one hand, I would have NOT listened to the part "I am not interested in long explanation" and I would have produced one anyway. ON THE OTHER HAND, I would have answered the question that she asks regarding whether I will do it again. In other words, I WOULD have wrote information contained in my "three sentences" in the previous post, BUT this information would have been together with a see of other information.

I can prove to you that this is in fact I would do. As you saw from our correspondence, I tend to quote EVERYTHING and respond to every bit of the message (the only exception is right now when you said you don't have time, so I am trying to force myself to only respond to key points). So, this complulsion to respond to everything would have made sure that I DO respond to what mod REALLY wants to know AMONG other things.

This brings me to one of the examples where *I* am the one who wants OTHERS to explain things to me. One thing I don't understand is this: if other people have question A, and I have instead answered everything A through Z, why can't people simply "take" the answer to question A and postpone reading the rest? Why do they react like I didn't answer A even though I DID?

Well I partly konw the answer: perhaps it would take lots of time to dig it out from pages and pages of irrelevent stuff. But I bet it is more than just that. I mean what if I were to color the answer to her question in red or something, and that way she could find it? I bet she would still feel I "don't cooperate", because of all of the other stuff that is not in red.



This is another example of when I want other people to explain things TO me. I want to understand, from their perspective, what are they "losing" by "engaging"? And what are their "needs" that are being "compromised"?

I realized that if I speak to someone on the phone, then I might compromise their need of going to work, going to buy food, or numerous other things they need to do. But if I do it in writing, then they can always pick a time that is convenient to them. Now if it is something really really long then, sure, they won't be able to do it within a day or so. But still, I am sure they can find a time within a week or two weeks? So if the consequences of my losing PM rights extended for TWO YEARS, why couldn't the mod find time within these two years to engage in long discussion?



And in many cases I DID ask. Then, according to the answer I get, I am obsessed about the "few" details that they mentioned. Yet, they still accuse me of "obsessing about details". The issue is that these "topics" were important "back then, not now". So, because I am talking about them too late, they become "details". This is continual pattern: I tend not to figure out what the other person is looking for right away; then later on when I have figured it out I want to come back and do what they wanted me to do. But they don't welcome that, because they have already "moved on".



With sleepy issue it was like this. During the night I was "sleepy" I thought everything was fine, so I did NOT make any long explanations. Then next morning, out of the blue, I find my phone blocked while trying to call her. I have NO IDEA what happened. I try to use other street phones to reach her. She doesn't reply, or just hangs up on me. Then I *ASK* her what went on. She then FINALLY tells me I was "pouting". So then I start to explain to her I was sleepy. She ignores me. I figured "alright, maybe she doesn't understand a connection between sleepy and pouting", so I start to explain in more detail. She still ignores me. Then I start to explain in A LOT more detail. And then she responds "this is exactly why I am leaving: you never move on past anything". But what was I supposed to do? I felt forced to do what I did.

Anyway, things to note is htis:

1. I did NOT assume what "the details" were, I ASKED

2. AFTER she answered that I was "pouting", it fell into a category of "few details" rather than "the details"

3. I DID try to FIRST tell her BRIEFLY that I was tired, she ignored me

4. ONLY THEN I was forced to go on long explanations
Later I'll give you a script.

Temporarily addressing the pm issue, if you are looking to be declared innocent, I hope you realize that will not happen. You did make a mistake, and you should affirmatively accept responsibility for it, regardless of how innocently it was made. If you accidentally drive over a cat, are you going to focus on the fact it was an accident, or apologize that you unintentionally killed the cat? The right thing to do is to care more about the cat, and people are more willing to accept the former if you start by focusing on the later. I hope you can understand that this forum has a responsibility to protect vulnerable people from harm, even when that harm comes with no malicious intent.

For the communication discussion, Roman, as much I appreciate that you really are trying, these questions aren't going to be resolved in this thread. One thing you seem to be missing about the issue of time constraints is that demands on people's time are constant: when this week's frenzy is complete, there is new one to deal with. When it comes to the people we love most, sure, we carve out time to meet their needs. It's an investment. But every investment carries a cost, and we are constantly weighing those costs against the benefits. I made a choice to spend some time writing with you, even though I don't really know you from Adam, because I care about everyone here, but it has been expensive in ways I don't feel it is appropriate to list. The number of people willing to do that is always going to be limited, and it is unfair to demand or expect it.

I repeat my recommendation to find and work with a speech therapist on what are known as pragmatic speech issues. These are paid professionals who know how to answer your questions and help you find compromises that will make your way in this world a little easier. You're a smart guy; I believe you can do it, but you really should learn it from someone trained with the right information, instead of reaching wrong conclusions on your own, or relying on people like me who aren't perfect social butterflies, either.

Still hurts my eyes, though they are rather sensitive today. Not sure I could go with the change in format from this to that. If this forum was to change, I suppose I'd bare with it, though.

After you become a member you can change the colors under user options to suit your preference. I looked for that option as guest, but Tallyman explained to me that it is only visible for members.

My main issue at this point is the site is still in it's infancy and there aren't too many people posting there, to get the immediate response that you can get here.

I don't know how he planned on getting my money off me. He was the one with the "wad" so it wasn't my risk to take. I'm fairly sure this guy wouldn't have gotten violent at all especially not in a busy bus station but a few times he tried to get me into a more secluded area with nobody around and I suspected that he might pull out a weapon and mug me so I made sure I didn't follow him into any quieter areas. Once he concluded that I wasn't gonna fall for the scam he just shook my hand and apologised for taking up my time. He was fairly professional but the scam itself wasn't very good.

Ah good idea, never go to a area with no people with a stranger.

I am still waiting to get my PM rights restored.

Did you contact Alex as I suggested several weeks ago?