In almost ANY communications scenario in which a message is being received but misinterpreted, it must be the job of the sender to clarify the message. Very easy to think of counter-example: Espionage. And in a roundabout way you make an excellent point. As has been mooted before on this page - as with the case of espionage, women don't WANT to reliably communicate their interest, or lack thereof, to potential mates. This stems all the way from monkeys in trees, exhibiting sexual dimorphism with the females not only burdened with infants, but also physically smaller and weaker than the males upon which they depend.
The males need to spread their genes, and as such they will treat favourably any female who shows signs of interest, in the hopes that they'll get to reproduce. The females in turn will show or feign interest in as many males as possible to increase their chances of said males providing for them. And therein lies the rub - If the males see a female showing interest in mating with other males, then at the very least they're less likely to provide for that female. So, we have the males competing for the affection of any female who will give it, and we have females pretending to all comers that they are exclusively interested - it's a pretty bleak picture, isn't it.
Fortunately, we've evolved a bit since then. I think.
Oh c'mon, don't tell me that doesn't work for men, too. I mean, tell me you don't wanna be Paris' next husband. Oh god no! I mean, quite aside from her being a room-temperature-IQ'd ugly skank, I don't think we'd have anything in common.
...wait, that could be read two ways. I meant the other one.
Well, to quote a great line by Reacher (when confronted by an ugly-mug barkeeper with the scars of a lot of fights) - "You know what your face tells me? That you lose a lot of fights."
And of course you have to time it perfectly so you aren't "some random stranger" but you haven't left it the extra 5 minutes that will tip you over to "oh but I think of you as a friend" / "but I don't want to risk our friendship".
It's true, ever wondered why so many less-physically-attractive women have "great personalities"? It's because that's their stock in trade, whereas the hot ones don't need to be nice in order to have guys dripping off (or on) them.
Well, the first two corners contain essential vitamins and antidepressants, I'm sure that one of the other two would contain some form of delousing agent...
Speaking from experience, this is probably a result of either (a) him being distracted and not in the mood (yes, it's possible:P although us guys are usually willing to 'get into' the mood if asked, unlike women who in my experience either can't or won't do so), or (b) him having misinterpreted your signals, and consequently been knocked back, often enough in the past that he's simply playing it safe. I know I feel terrible if I've just spent an hour trying to get my lady excited and (as far as I, poor male that I am, could ascertain) she's been very much enjoying it, then she turns around and says "look, I'm really not interested, please leave me alone".
Regardless, it sounds like you've improved the communication process and ended up in a fairly good place as a result, which is commendable. Keep up the good work!:)
Speaking personally, I "did finally get some pussy" and was devastated by how empty and shallow I felt afterwards. I swore off sex until I found someone I could love, and (for me) it was the best call ever. My problem wasn't getting laid - I knew I *could* get laid by doing the hot-cold thing, being nice one minute and a dick the next, because emotionally, many women are stupid and mistake asshole for alpha. I wanted a life partner, not a fuck buddy, and I'd guess a lot of us geeky kind of people are similar.
Korben Dallas said it best, "I don't want a million women, I just want one. One perfect one."
So, being the geeks that we are, we should hack around this. Does anyone have experience with being "the jerk" for once? I'm considering a balanced approach, enough jerk to challenge her but enough real you to keep her. See the Don Juan forum.
Personally, I'm mildly outraged that (some) women do this - my wife included. If women want men to read the signals properly, we need to know the rules and they need to be consistent. It's manipulative, sneaky, underhanded, and just plain unfair. I feel like I'm playing by a constantly-changing set of rules (Calvinball, anyone?). If that's going to be the case, I refuse the play the game. Because that's all it is - a game. I don't like playing games with people's emotions and I REALLY don't like people playing with mine./Soapbox I can't help but agree with you here. It seems to me that (while they would obviously never admit this) many women deliberately give insincere come-on signals in order to get attention and/or get non-sex-related things that they want. It's the classic case of the hot cheerleader giving the nerdy guy a big smile then asking him to do her homework - she's obviously never going to be interested in him but she'll pretend so for personal gain.
It's a smidgen different if it's someone you're in a long term relationship with. But still, women like being admired, and they like being wanted. What sometimes makes this awkward is that they like these things independently of liking sex, and it can get frustrating when one's partner wants to feel desirable (and so deliberately works up some sexual tension) but isn't actually interested in sex.
Imagine you like long distance running. So are a lot of your friends. You have a long distance running club, and you all train so you can attend marathons.
Then some guy rocks up to your marathon, wins it by a mile, and brags endlessly about how much better he is than you. The organizers give him the shiny medal. But really, he caught a taxi.
Point is, even if bots are better at one aspect (grinding gold) than humans, that doesn't make the rest of the game worthless.
...annoying additions to the game that occurs randomly while logged in and harms, kill, or causes monetary loss to the inattentive player. I believe they're called Sons of Arugal. Or, later, Fel Reavers.;)
Actually, if you follow the Uberman's Sleep Schedule and had *nothing* else to do with your time, you could legitimately be logged on continuously. I think the timeout for disconnecting idle players is around 20 minutes.
And I almost forgot, he had his latest feature pulled from the last release because he couldn't figure out minimum ship and has put the latest release in danger. Yes, it'll be less problematic code than most but releasing something is better than releasing nothing. He's wiser than you. Releasing nothing will lead to customers being frustrated. Releasing something that's not ready for release will lead to your company building a well-earned reputation for shoddy work.
How far are you hoping to travel? O.o It takes a lot more energy to haul yourself 10kms vertically (where the air's thin enough for it to be really worth it) than it does to just push through the extra air at ground level unless you're going a long way, I don't have numbers but I'd guess at least 500kms. For short trips (what's the average daily commute? 20km or something?) you're far better served by some mass transit system, hopefully a variant of those Personal Rapid Transit thingies.
This is a good point. Social engineering is so powerful, especially given that most people in large corporations go around in a daze. I worked with a temp. sysadmin for a month or so a while back and I was amazed what information he was able to get (passwords especially, information on ordering, etc) simply by phoning up and asking for it. On the hardware side, cleaners are even more amazing - a company that requires security clearances and background checks will quite happily let some anonymous guy on minimum wage wander around their entire office, eyeballing trade secrets and potentially swiping millions of dollars of hardware if he knows what he's looking for.
Slashdot Mirror
The males need to spread their genes, and as such they will treat favourably any female who shows signs of interest, in the hopes that they'll get to reproduce. The females in turn will show or feign interest in as many males as possible to increase their chances of said males providing for them. And therein lies the rub - If the males see a female showing interest in mating with other males, then at the very least they're less likely to provide for that female. So, we have the males competing for the affection of any female who will give it, and we have females pretending to all comers that they are exclusively interested - it's a pretty bleak picture, isn't it.
Fortunately, we've evolved a bit since then. I think.
Someone hand this man a (+, insightful/informative)!
Kinky. Rule 34 kgo!
...wait, that could be read two ways. I meant the other one.
Well, to quote a great line by Reacher (when confronted by an ugly-mug barkeeper with the scars of a lot of fights) - "You know what your face tells me? That you lose a lot of fights."
And of course you have to time it perfectly so you aren't "some random stranger" but you haven't left it the extra 5 minutes that will tip you over to "oh but I think of you as a friend" / "but I don't want to risk our friendship".
It's true, ever wondered why so many less-physically-attractive women have "great personalities"? It's because that's their stock in trade, whereas the hot ones don't need to be nice in order to have guys dripping off (or on) them.
Well, the first two corners contain essential vitamins and antidepressants, I'm sure that one of the other two would contain some form of delousing agent...
Speaking from experience, this is probably a result of either (a) him being distracted and not in the mood (yes, it's possible :P although us guys are usually willing to 'get into' the mood if asked, unlike women who in my experience either can't or won't do so), or (b) him having misinterpreted your signals, and consequently been knocked back, often enough in the past that he's simply playing it safe. I know I feel terrible if I've just spent an hour trying to get my lady excited and (as far as I, poor male that I am, could ascertain) she's been very much enjoying it, then she turns around and says "look, I'm really not interested, please leave me alone".
:)
Regardless, it sounds like you've improved the communication process and ended up in a fairly good place as a result, which is commendable. Keep up the good work!
Speaking personally, I "did finally get some pussy" and was devastated by how empty and shallow I felt afterwards. I swore off sex until I found someone I could love, and (for me) it was the best call ever. My problem wasn't getting laid - I knew I *could* get laid by doing the hot-cold thing, being nice one minute and a dick the next, because emotionally, many women are stupid and mistake asshole for alpha. I wanted a life partner, not a fuck buddy, and I'd guess a lot of us geeky kind of people are similar.
Korben Dallas said it best, "I don't want a million women, I just want one. One perfect one."
Good god, I'd forgotten about that. Now I have to forget it all over again.
It's a smidgen different if it's someone you're in a long term relationship with. But still, women like being admired, and they like being wanted. What sometimes makes this awkward is that they like these things independently of liking sex, and it can get frustrating when one's partner wants to feel desirable (and so deliberately works up some sexual tension) but isn't actually interested in sex.
"Your rating is only 2450. You suck and your opinion is worth nothing."
.> )
Imagine you like long distance running. So are a lot of your friends. You have a long distance running club, and you all train so you can attend marathons.
Then some guy rocks up to your marathon, wins it by a mile, and brags endlessly about how much better he is than you. The organizers give him the shiny medal. But really, he caught a taxi.
Point is, even if bots are better at one aspect (grinding gold) than humans, that doesn't make the rest of the game worthless.
Passing viruses around due to unprotected port access doesn't count. :P
...annoying additions to the game that occurs randomly while logged in and harms, kill, or causes monetary loss to the inattentive player. I believe they're called Sons of Arugal. Or, later, Fel Reavers.Actually, if you follow the Uberman's Sleep Schedule and had *nothing* else to do with your time, you could legitimately be logged on continuously. I think the timeout for disconnecting idle players is around 20 minutes.
What, are you SOFT ON DRUGS? I'd never vote for you!
<dripping_sarcasm>
Yeah, us two are, but Jeff dropped out.
And I've been playing WoW since just after release. Ssssh!
Got them over it? Have you looked at the WoW forums recently? A more wretched hive of tards and nerdrage you will not find.
You must be careful!
How far are you hoping to travel? O.o It takes a lot more energy to haul yourself 10kms vertically (where the air's thin enough for it to be really worth it) than it does to just push through the extra air at ground level unless you're going a long way, I don't have numbers but I'd guess at least 500kms. For short trips (what's the average daily commute? 20km or something?) you're far better served by some mass transit system, hopefully a variant of those Personal Rapid Transit thingies.
Tell me more about these 'low monthly payments'?
This is a good point. Social engineering is so powerful, especially given that most people in large corporations go around in a daze. I worked with a temp. sysadmin for a month or so a while back and I was amazed what information he was able to get (passwords especially, information on ordering, etc) simply by phoning up and asking for it. On the hardware side, cleaners are even more amazing - a company that requires security clearances and background checks will quite happily let some anonymous guy on minimum wage wander around their entire office, eyeballing trade secrets and potentially swiping millions of dollars of hardware if he knows what he's looking for.