CompuServe Messages

<<>>But sometimes they are called for when an individual need to be "klunked on the head" because they are offering poor service. >> <<Very interesting choice of words.>> An interesting expression. <<How much were you willing to pay Dana for her consulting? She is a top consultant in this field, btw, in case that had escaped your notice.>> She did enlighten me as to her credentials. I don't think I really want to hire somebody with her attitude. Nor, would she probably want to hire me. If I needed to administer drivers licenses, I'd probably pay $8/hour or so. If I liked her and needed her help she would probably ask a substantial multiplier over that. I couldn't guess if it was $25/Hour or $200/Hour. It's like me: My standard rate that many pay is about $500 per hour (I have more work that I like.) But I do a lot of work for charity for free, and I work for friends for free. Small businesses can only afford about $25 per hour, and I accept those jobs with the condition that the fee be paid to charity (The Salvation Army, by the way) rather than to me since $25 doesn't mean a whole lot even if you get lot of hours. <<Somehow, I'm somewhat skeptical of your claim that you've learned something from this exchange.>> That is your right. I learn something from everybody. I study people, despite what you may think. I hold these conversations on such light topics as this to keep touch, to test people, to see how they react, to try new approaches. Mostly, to study what and how they choose to blind themselves. It may have escaped you, but along one path of this thread I have essentially solved my problems, thanks to the help of Jennifer, and along the other path I have played a game of chicken shit myself. Now, I wasn't the first to start the game, but I was curious as to whether the motivations were ego, insecurity, ignorance, or what. So, I followed a pointless and trite argument over the subject of "chicken shit". Nobody got it, which has fascinated me greatly. It has been a topic of conversation around here, actually. Why? Why? Was it intentional, or obstinance, or was it of being utterly unaware? All along I have been especially fascinated that none of the name-callers broke out of the argument and rose to a higher cause and said: "Look Dave, this is a silly argument, let's solve your problem. I know about this, how can I help?" Nope, that didn't happen even once. That's pretty unusual, most commonly an attribute of bureaucrats. But the people here shouldn't be people like that. So, what was going on? Hmmm. Yes, it has been interesting. I still haven't a clear answer, actually. But it has been a highly valuable experience. I think that I have learned a lot. People like Jennifer and Mike Wright have ignored the petty argument and offered true help. Others, well, have preferred to devolve to petty, emotional bickering at the expense of facts. So, I do feel that I have learned a lot. This has been a valuable experience. The tip off that I valued the conversation were several, by the way. Clearly, I have more than a small amount of responsibility wherever I work. I make a lot of money (a really lot of money) and therefore I place a high value on my time. And, I have pretty clearly never resorted to name calling, but have been discussing a number of strategies, arguments, and debate-like points. So I haven't been running from the emotional side of things at all. (Well, initially I was rather emotional because of the shoddy answer that somebody that I won't hire gave, but that passed right away.) I have valued the conversation with you, too. I don't understand you. But look at this lengthy message and its openness, and you'll see (if you step back) that I am not just picking a fight. You have baffeled me, it is true, but you have also given me things to think about. So, I am obligated to explain myself here at the end. And, to sincerely thank you. And to answer any other questions. I would rewrite this message if I had more time. I'm not manipulative, but investigative as an individual. I sound a little bit too much the former because I have been sloppy in this message. The difference is key, as we would both agree: Manipulative is to bend others against their will to achieve some end, whereas here there has been no end other than to understand why the silly, attacking debate raged on. (The problem, by the way, was very, very real.)