It becomes a cracker-jack excuse. The issue would be choosing partners to trust. He seems to have some difficulty with that. The idea that the responsible person must personally do everything is a naive concept of responsibility. He is responsible for choices he makes, and choices he doesn't make. We are responsible for what we create in life, and, as well, what we don't create. Responsible does not mean "to blame." It means that we have power, and Guido had and has power. The issue is how he uses or does not use it.Abd wrote:"Terrorized" is very unlikely to be correct. Perhaps Graaf has given evidence somewhere, but surely it would be possible to link to it, so we could assess if it indicates "terrorized" or something else.Graaf Statler wrote:En nu nog even het juridische verhaaltje voor jullie allemaal op een rijtje. Wij hebben een rechtssysteem gebaseerd op op het Napoleontische recht met als basisprincipe redelijk en billik.Abd wrote:Den Broeder's claim that the government of the Netherlands "terrorized him" leads me to suspect everything he's written.
I have given the evidences and a explanation this claim of Guido is correct.Yet I have never questioned that he is 'seriously ill." People can die from disorders of the mind, one might call them "programming errors." Such conditions can also create physical conditions and symptoms, some of which can be objectively measured. This idea that there are two kinds of illness, "mental" and "physical," and that "mental illness" is perhaps some kind of moral defect, is pernicious. Further there can be a physical condition that can be improved by training, i.e., programming the mind. I encountered the skepticism with my daughter. When I mentioned that she needed to be carried into the bathroom to use it (she was able to use it privately, slowly and carefully), one nurse said, "If someone would carry me around, I'd get sick too!" She was the nurse of the most horrible orthopedist we saw. A battle-axe of a woman that I kept referring to as "he" because of, well, habits. And the attitude was like too many male doctors. Utterly unsympathetic, total focus on form and "physical ailment," as if the mind and body can be cleanly separated, which will lead anyone astray with a neurological disorder like CRPS.[/color]Abd wrote:ME/CFS is a CNS disorder. Is it a "mental illness"? The fringe claim, for a long time, was that it was a physical illness, den Broeder, I think it has been, calls it an "inflammation." Which it might well be. But there is no clean boundary between physical illness and mental illness. The brain, after all, is physical. But the brain also carries images, patterns, and these patterns interact with the physical.
FUCK YOURSELF
I have given plenty of evidences Guido is serious ill. For sure Guido can give much more evidences.
Get lost!
So I saw this close up. She recommended physical therapy, prescribing it, and I took the opportunity to find the best in the region, Shriner's Hospital for Children. It was about 40 minutes drive away, but well worth it, it would have been worth driving hours. And they were mystified at first (that still puzzles me a bit, because the symptoms were really obvious!)
But when physical therapy was accomplishing nothing, I told them and they immediately arranged for a consult with the person I call the Grand Old Man of Pediatric Orthopedics in Western Massachusetts. Later, when I talked with other physicians, they agreed. He was the best. And he spent a lot of time with her, talking with her, observing her carefully, while touching her knee and obviously hurting her. But she tolerated it, because he generated trust by his manner. And then he said, "I know what is happening with you." Nobody had said that before.
He said the magic words, and I looked it up. Yes. Unmistakable. And he said, "You are going to be fine. Here, meet Maureen, she's worked with this." And Maureen knew exactly what she was doing and did it, and daughter let her, even though it hurt like hell, obviously so. I understand how and why it worked. Was there a physical cause? Yes, they thought there was an original trauma, very painful, but gone fairly quickly. Whereas the girl's mother thought she was faking, dramatic, etc. That attitude and everything else that went with it explains why the girl came to live with me. And why I was successful with her. My attitude was that she never lied, though sometimes her interpretations were a bit weird. I trusted her and gave her full control over her life. At 12. Most involved claimed she was too young, but she was actually demanding it, and I had raised five teenagers before her, I knew what was happening.
As it relates to ME/CFS, there are probably "physical" and "mental" components, if we are going to divide life up like that. And all this will vary with the person. The issues with support for those disabled, and the definition of disability, are political issues, unfortunately. From my point of view, someone who does not find joy in work is disabled, somehow! That is not normal! We attempt to make all this a moral issue, which distracts us from reality.quote wrote:PARADISE! What a concept! What a place to live! Except the sovereign territory of Paraduin is the residence of Prince Ogidius, sole monarch of the micronation of Paraduin. Plus a river island between Croatia and Serbia?:Micronations.wiki article
I have made clear Paraduin with the ruling Prince Ogidius is a kind of paintball game, fun, the product of a speelse geest. And, that is really funny part, his claim is correct and legitimate.
Sure, a practical joke, but then you mix that with "correct and legitimate," which is, from what we have seen, preposterous. The claims of Liberland appear to have more basis, but that's not saying much. Liberland has raised money and has real people active in or near the scene. Guide calls it fraud, but the real possibility for establishing sovereignty for Liberland would probably involve money (or equivalent power). If it's true that Croatia doesn't want the land, then they ought to rather easily settle for compensation for surrendering all claims. It is not an issue of "selling" land that they don't own. It is abandoning a claim to allow another. What would Croatia want? What would be their conditions? Trying to force a claim on them is very likely to fail. They have an army and they have police. Graaf's claim appears to be that he made a claim, without any physical basis. Like someone claiming part of the Moon, with no power to exercise any kind of sovereignty there.
And, yes, a practical joke but Guido did not admit that on Wikipedia and made spurious arguments, about articles. They don't like that. I had a friend who wrote a joke article. He had a tendency to do things like that. The article was preposterous on the face. And he lied, to avoid admitting the truth (though he did admit it fairly quickly). It is simply no wonder that he was banned, even if the article was actually harmless. The Wikipedians, hoax articles are not harmless, they waste resources, not that the project itself isn't practically designed, as it were, to profligately waste resources dealing with unnecessary disputes that any sane organization would handle in minutes, or hours at the most.Abd wrote:Guido is entirely responsible for Wikisage and if it was "screwed up" by Wikipedians
In no way! Everyone is responsible for his own actions and it's plausible/very likely Guido is unable to control his wiki by himself because of his illness.
And:
]Graaf Statler"Een beheerder dient een goed rentmeester te zijn, dus de vlieger als de kat van huis is dansen de trollen gaat niet op bij een rechtbank, en zeker dus niet in dit geval[/size].A manager "must be" a good steward. What does "must" mean? There are consequences from our choices. Taking a stand that we are responsible for them is not "truth,"b because it is an interpretation or judgment, not fact. However, it is an empowering stand, that is known to generate, with high success, results worth living for. Blaming others or "circumstances" does what? It defines us as being victims, by definition without power, doomed to endless complaint to get others to fix our problems. Where and when did we learn to do that? That is a question that can be answered, if one asks it and looks for answers.
Yes. A translation:And last but absolute not at least:J. W. Ausma wrote:Rechters geloven niet in sprookjes maar luisteren wel naar een verhaal met een boodschap
And special this advice is something to keep in mind, dear wikipedians.
Judges do not believe in fairy tales but do listen to a story with a message.
Yes. So the skill of a lawyer is presenting that story, engaging the jury, in the U.S. Judges play a different role here. Can I pull that off? I don't know, but I do know that I have skill and training in personal presence and presentation. So maybe. Can I do it in writing? With a sympathetic audience, yes. Not with a bunch of trolls looking to figure out what is wrong. Or, I'll put it this way: that is a more complex problem.[/quote]
DON'T DO THIS EVER, EVER, AGAIN HERE, ABD!
Your always helpful fake side admin.
