Deepthought

1.) Well with the co-morbid lobotomy, necrophilia and the rotting corpse theme being somewhat premature at this stage of things, what with the proverbial necrosis currently being by far more analogous to gangrene, an amputation of sorts is though as such required, and reconstructive surgery is certainly not impossible. The N.A.S. is also learning this (for however long that may take) but denial and transference of responsibility was of course not in anyway unexpected, as is more usually the case with habitually embedded NT behaviour patterns as involve at least psychological humiliation and annihilation anyway, or of course more simply put ~ 'normalised abuse' or 'antisocial behaviour'. This I went about explaining in the "switzerland posts" as you describe them, with the present summation there in the other place being as now more relevant apparently here as follows: 2.) "N.T. society currently shares in and enforces psychological humiliation; according to the habitual and thus pervasive repercussions of generalised ageism, sexism and tribalism. The importance of being younger or older, more or less masculine or feminine, and more or less numerous and deserving of means and resources ~ depends upon the physiological humiliation and annihilation of one or more other people, or peoples. 3.) Thus as such a state of mass-psychosis exists, as being a traumatised habituation of psychological inferiority ~ involving to various extents and degrees a variable add-mixture of inferiorities, mediocrities and superiorities, which have been developing >societally< since about 1500 B.C., as is therefore in general considered normal, and acceptable for the most part in terms of being traditional. 4.) Hence for the most part there is a pervasiveness of normalised and therefore concurrent abuse going in N.T. society, as you may or not recall happening as you grew up, and those conforming to it in the sense of having Inferior Inferiority Complex; they very much need affirmation or validation until the depravation of affirmation is ameliorated ~ just as for instance someone dying of dehydration needs progressive rehydration with fluids and minerals so as to live; for as long as that may be required. 5.) For those who have Mediocre Inferiority Complex, they do not seem to be so dehydrated, and those with Superior Inferiority Complex - seemingly even less dehydrated. But the thing is of course that drinking the proverbial seawater and effluence of normalised abuse is both a dehydration and an intoxication of sorts; all in itself, and hence we have the addictive and unwitting nature of social abuse ~ so as to gain compassion and understanding. 6.) Being consumed by individualised elitism (as in the psyche-analytical sense of being possessed of an inferiority complex) is one way of learning what is not to be done, and as such smarting or wising up to this or growing out of it eventually is to be done by way of affirming life. 7.) Everyone then has their personal path to tread and journey to make, and every step taken is increasingly more meaningful as a comprehensive understanding of our particular types of consciousness; our particular characteristics of experience, and the specialisations of our awareness ~ as directly and indirectly corresponds with everyone and everything else in >at least< the material environment." 8.) So as returning to your question: 9.) It is certainly not the responsibility of community members to do the moderators work for them, being that each community member is responsible for their personal interactions, and regardless of whether it is wittingly or unwittingly done in jest or not ~ antisocial behaviour (i.e. inverted insults etcetera) remains as normalised abuse however much it is characteristically dressed up or not as being otherwise. I merely address or ask then for clarifications regarding architectural ambiguities in linguistic structures that appear not to be concretely grounded, or as may be excessively abstracted, as they are rather nonsensical and counter-productive as far as I am concerned ~ which we have already discussed previously. 10.) Now as far as pressurising myself goes, your concerns are thankfully acknowledged, but are no longer relevant, as conversing with you has helped make lighter work of things regarding the nonsense of the other place, and I have also been progressively regaining my composure and maintaining my progressive gait once again anyway. So as your questioning appears to follow a "Why bother?" theme, the answer quite simply is that it is no bother for me, whereas attempting to do otherwise is.

There is a 'Poll: should the Community keep the Leader Board? Please Vote.' post by NAS Moderator, with last voting day being 31/08/17. If you feel so inclined to do so of course?

Explain meaning and purpose of this statement please.

Well, Sherlock, as far as logical solutions go, a very tidy fit in the old infinitely pieced jigsaw of logic, yet you know not perhaps that the tree population rustled in justified relief when computer technology came along with spellcheck and edit functions, as I cannot write anything generally without having to abridge it a multitude of times from complex long~form aspertechian to short-form simplis-tico-speak when explaining stuff. Twenty-two commentaries abridged down to seven, seven abridged down to one, and one up to three to produce one piece of writing, and the job is done. Fortunately I have a stand-alone self-contained PC with no outside inclinations whatsoever, as it was taken to my local trusted computer vet and given a coding snip, and I only use the word-processor on it anyway with all its multitude of so far completely irrelevant functions. Well irrelevant to me at least. The thing about my process of writing, is that by the time I get to a finished article, I am completely and utterly in no way inclined to write anything ever again, in the short-term. Strangely enough, at the N.A.S., recall all the damage a leader board could achieve stuff that we were discussing, well it happened, hence I have been a bit busy of late getting peaceful vibes back on line, and I will be busy for a little while longer perhaps with the initial peace treaties among the community members. Fortunately, there has also been as a result of which several calls to do away with the leader board in a functional sense ~ which is remarkably appealing!!!

Yes, only though for a limited duration, be it until the end of the day, or however long, thereafter nothing more can be done about written errors at my point of interface. This has already been addressed on the other thread, and this problem with editing remains as stated here also.

Wording errors, spelling mistakes, and so fourth. I found the thread, but as the edit function only remains viable for a short time after posting, alas, the question remains.

I have made three attempts to respond to you since you last posted Ferret, but I did away with the first one due to an error on my part, and the other two were done away with from the system memory before I was able to get them totally finished. Literary exhaustion after weeks of lost work has taken over now, but it has given me leave to write that you really do seem very much to be my twin brother from another mother, and of course - the game is most certainly on.

1.) In terms of being competitive with yourself, perhaps watch over that one very carefully (in the compassionate sense of caring), as winning needs losers as already mentioned concerning 'Competitive Hierarchical Ethos'. Keep safe and secure in mind that collaboration (or working together as musicians do) is the key to regarding the enlightening harmony or intuition of the inner-self - or deep seated knower. After all, the deep seated knower seriously does know a thing or two about comfy sofas with two really really comfy seats - and Ferret treats particularly in your case! 2.) I also literally 'see' in my case 'spiro-grahic' geometrically swirly and twirly patterns, and on first reading the characteristic patterns of your writing - I assumed that something similar was on the go or the case with you too. Do you recall the geometric system I listed a while back? With additional sensibility descriptives now added: 8.) Geomatrix >> White >> Intuitional >> White Noise 7.) Heptagon >> Violet >> Rational >> C* high 6.) Hexagon >> Indigo >> Sentimental >> B* 5.) Pentagon >> Blue >> Communicational >> A* 4.) Square (+) >> Green >> Emotional >> G** 3.} Triangle >> Yellow >> Imaginal >> F* 2.) Circle >> Orange >> Reproductional >> D* 1.) Line >> Red >> Sensational >> C* low 0.) Point >> Black >> Environmental >> Black Noise * Do not be surprised if I have got the notes in the wrong order ~ B may be D, F may be A and all that ~ as dyslexia so rules with me. ** The Masonic 'G' if that rings any of those grand-architectural-diatonic-concert-pitch-Fibonacci-shells-and-weighing-bells states of affairs for you? 3.) Polarities involve negative, positive and neutral states - you only seem to be using the negative (worth-less) and positive (worth-while) states and excluding the neutral values gradient between the two. Recall the Receptive, Protective and Projective capacities and functions of each state of the seven inter-phasic networks of the mind/body relationship? Of course, I may have misinterpreted things, but I always reserve the right to at least be entirely wrong! 4.) Rather than the energy being diverted and lost in competition, it is divided and its focus is diminished in the peripheral sense, and enhanced in the centralizing point of focus sense. Or in other words the bigger-picture is reduced in terms of intuitional triangulation and empathic relativity, as by proportion tunnel vision is increased in terms of imaginal specificity and reproductive co-ordination for sensational affect and or effect. The old problems of having affairs with fantasy whilst missing or becoming separated or even divorced from reality start creeping in. The N.A.S. community leader board as of 01:33 12/07/2017 featured photographs of two people's faces rather than avatar images - mildly sketchy to say the least perhaps? 5.) Posed 'look-at-me' photographs really are in my opinion weirdly strange. 6.) I think that some proportion of O.P.s will be pretty much constant regarding their decision making processes; as people tend to like what they like or know what best suits them and so fourth ~ recalling the Autistic tendency to being particular, fussy, exacting, specific or even pedantic. The old proverb that you can can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink comes to mind. None the less though, some O.P.s does not account for all O.P.s, and the Content/Value and the Quality/Worth of the Replies/Answers will be diminished ~ if the aspirational stability of the Self-centric 'I am as I am' characterisation; is converted to the compulsive instability of the Ego-centric 'I will be as I become' re-characterisation ~ i.e., top of the chart, most mentioned, most achievements, most followers, most friends and all that sort of pride before the fall thing. 7.) The Munchausen-By-Proxy, Stockholm-Syndrome, Guardian-Role-Transfer or just plain Normalised Abuse problem involving supporters, followers, leaders, abstainers, protestors, militants and deviants along with social stratification and segregation into inferior, mediocre and superior sub-classes of community members . . . well it might not be so bad given the Autistic tendency for some to be moral and ethical industrial diamonds, and some alot more egalitarian, but again this does not account for all and that is not good. 8.) 'Reportedly' all the comments about what could be better about the last site from Autistic people went into choosing the new site format. It was also 'reportedly' tested out by Autistic people on mobile phones for which the new format is designed. The sudden change of format with no how to use the site pages was though a complete discrimination against the regulars - who might also have been some of the testers so as to offer instruction to others regarding what was what and where; instead of all the benighted confusions and upsets that started on that fateful Wednesday. 9.) I only make demands (insistences or peremptory requests to sort things out) when people behave disrespectfully or malevolently, and that is all. Authoritarianism or elitism is a sociological misnomer based upon ungrounded and unreasoned abstract constructs - normally involving at least psychological humiliation (ageism, sexism and tribalism), or at most physiological annihilation (lynching, ethnic cleansing and war), and many people make demands on this basis - and are therefore deluded. 10.) So like yourself with the N.A.S. types hypocrisy and condescension, I am not into it either ~ in the sense that I attend the dance but I do not dance that dance. I support people who are neurologically divergent or not, I do not support organisations, and the vast majority of people, in excess of ninety percent, are victims of normalised abuse themselves anyway ~ whether they be unsanely or insanely neurotypical or not. 11.) My reasonable adjustment for this pervasive madness ~ is comprehensive compassion and understanding; "Forgive them for they know not what they do." sort of thing, as most people ignorantly abuse themselves by unwitting abusing others into collectively abusive stupidity or insanity too. There is as such a major affirmation shortage going on on this planet, and I do my bit to address that shortage - by preaching what I practice. I do not have my pass plate yet as I am still learning not to drive myself any madder than I already am. Most importantly though, it is neither your job, my job, nor anyone's job to fix the sociopathic mess going on around us, as it is everyone's responsibility to reduce their part in it by setting the example of what life affirming behaviour and discussion actually is. 13.) Little by little we are getting there, and the N.A.S. has played a huge part in increasing awareness not only about A.S.D., but in part neurological diversity also with many other groups and communities of people doing pretty much the same thing. Yay. But oh my absolute being and infinite becoming ~ that website needs help. Any huge non-profit computing companies out there that might feel intrigued about doing a total programming charity job to create a platform that serves the broadest extent of people on the A.S.D. spectrum ~ let the N.A.S. and ourselves know, perhaps? 14.) I have got to say, it is not tenacity that I have ~ that got extensively burnt out years back anyway. It is actually more patience in that I have temporal aphasia, or no sense of time passing, and a narrow or singular range of interests which I follow slowly but progressively heel to toe; heal to toe; heel to toe. I take each step as being gently and evenly placed and then firmly and evenly trod ~ as I have poor foresight but richly exacting hindsight. In this way I really have over the decades learnt from my mistakes; rather than punishing myself for them and thereby repeating them ~ sod all that malarkey I thought and did! Thus when my well being is compromised, as it has been for the last week, I have rather than walking written away these ills as if Milo with his brother Sherlock solving the 'Website' of the Baskervilles case!

Hi Ferret, Yay, so good to read your words and grin humorously with Cheshire-Cat pleasure once again. There is unfortunately no new level of hell alas ~ as hell has itself been fully and completely replaced by the N.A.S forum! Nothing hell was could possibly compare to what the N.A.S site now is. Got though a 'Colour-That-Site' app to change the stark white glare and the lurid magenta-red to a colour scheme my retinas and sensory systems can deal with. Eye-strain, migraine and seizures no longer induced. Do not like like everyone else does not like the 'nested threading' (as allows a person to answer say the third post of perhaps ten; with their answer becoming the fourth post of then eleven in the thread ~ for those who know not as I knew not). It is a mucking fragmentation and sequential confusion reigns! I completely and utterly understand and comprehend that you might not be, and fair play, but are you perhaps open to returning to the NAS site; as the site needs to be changed for the better, and it would be even better yet still if you were also, along with the rest of us, involved in the concerted effort to do so? Whichever way though, your first or last post on the new N.A.S site is very much appreciated, seriously well put, nice one.

Panic!

Creative refinement does not seem to be a possibility here. The quote function is only temporary - I assume until you sign out for other destinations. Hey ho!

Eureka - now I see Edit by the Quote; I was blind and now I see . . . . . . . Thumph!

Hi Lufty. I was writing about deleting in the 'editing' sense of things and all that - not completely deleting them! These posts are the children of my mind, and writing viable stuff is a labour of love. Can you or does anyone else know how to access or better yet still 'recognize' the edit function . . . ? Deepthought

I have asked this question elsewhere but here would of have been more appropriate, so is there a way of deleting/correcting written errors or irregularities once posted?

Train

Hi Ferret, The legal and general situation was resolved with an edit job. Apologies for any inconvenience. Hi Trekster, or anyone else that knows, Is there an edit function on this website system at all, or is it only achievable by asking a moderator? Just as a question though.

Ferret, Are you available for Sherlock scene of the crime Ferretic investigation services, and logic-topic check. I went a bit Milo with the perpetration of going all legal and general on one of the other forums. The 'new-look' is a major visual hypersensitivity issue for me, and I was focused on being all big and polite and diplomatic - but as the eyestrain and headache were getting worse, I was getting all the more annoyed with the situation, and the diplomat was done away with. One member had tended their resignation, and my fellow Autling defense mode abetted me in making a case of things.

Being charitable as a person and being a charity are separate issues as individuals are able to choose whichever way and to whichever extent they wish to be charitable, whereas a charity can only provide for that which they are specifically set up to do. The concept of government funded charities as being government service providers is common knowledge for those who work in the organizational structures of charities - whilst unsurprisingly many people have little or even no comprehension of how charities work beyond collecting or giving donations. As for the charity or quango business - a charity does not stop being a charity on account of having become a quango, and there are thousands of charities operating specifically as they do on account of being funded by the government. The strings attached supposition regarding how government funding is spent is a contractual matter based purely upon how the charity is actually set up to operate - which for the N.A.S. is: 1.) Providing educational establishments for children with autism. 2.) Providing residential services for those children when they leave those schools. 3.) Providing an information and advice service. Wanting more than this is like going to one service provider when another is required. With the information provision of the N.A.S. it provides exactly what it has been set up to do, and being that you favor other websites it is not as if the N.A.S. are going to complain considering how overwhelmed they are with people they 'can' help, and how much more overwhelmed they are with people they 'can't' help. The N.A.S. is quite literally being dumped on regarding the incapacity of the N.H.S. to provide adequate or even any services for people with A.S.D.. The N.H.S. has to refer patients somewhere else before those patients realize there is nothing freely available in terms of any support - being that N.H.S. staff are themselves already being insanely overwhelmed by the people they 'can' help, and even more insanely overwhelmed by those who they 'can't' help. When it comes to the possible A.S. and H.F.A. charity it would not 'have' to integrate with the N.A.S., yet as a charity that it is long established, well respected and knows how to hold its ground in terms of achieve funding requirements - it could be of major assistance to the proposed charity for providing adult practical support to compensate for the N.A.S. in terms of only being able to provide informative support. The reason this might be worthwhile is that the N.A.S. is set up to do as it does, and changing this would involve a massive overhaul of and additions to the entire organization - as would be extremely disruptive to their service provision. Your question as to which year A.S. was publicized by the N.A.S., depending on how much research you wish to do, can be answered to some extent at: http://www.autism.org.uk/timeline

Likewise.

Yes - it is I. And a bonus that it is you - partially on account that you might not of been you at all but someone else entirely different; which might of been tricky. I am not so sure about being likened to Bertrand Russel though - as he did philosophy with mathematics involved. Mathematics is a wondrously amazing system of almost complete and utter confusion to me. Perhaps - 'Me Milo; You Sherlock' - or vice versa and so fourth?

Have we perchance corresponded together before on other forums?

Hi Ferret, Greetings and welcome to the tranquil spaciousness of here - as is rather a welcome sanctuary from the hustle and bustle of other places I find. D.

Money is certainly a issue with any service provision - property to operate from, equipment to use, and all that. As for being more like a government service provider, the N.A.S. (formally the Society For Autistic Children) is still a national service provider - as operates according to its original purpose for becoming a registered charity on the basis of: 1.) Starting a school for children with autism; 2.) Operating a residential service for when these children leave school; and 3.) Providing an information and advice service. These aims have and still are being charitably achieved by the N.A.S., and as such this is the very reason why it is as a charity receiving the public funding that it does. When it comes though to the senior officials of the N.A.S. seeking money from public and private sources, and spending that donated money on those who it has been assigned to - as according to the three objectives listed above - the N.A.S. is as such being by definition a conventional charity. This to many people is not a sad truth. Your statement that there is an argument that people with classical autism who require residential care services should be higher priority than people with H.F.A.S. and H.F.A. does not hold water - is the misnomer then that it could hold water a widely shared consensus? Or have you perhaps mistaken this for my meaning that the more practical services of the N.A.S. are given to Aspergians and Autists who are at the lower end of the socially functional spectrum, and the more informative and advisory services of the N.A.S. are given to those at the higher end? The fact that our needs are different is obviously undeniable, just as you also exemplified well in your statement regarding the different services required by blind people, and people who use wheelchairs. To state that there is much truth that the N.A.S. is acting like a roadblock to more capable and better focused organizations for supporting people with H.F.A.S. and H.F.A. - because it is the organization the N.H.S. and the education authorities refer people with H.F.A.S. and H.F.A.!?! This is not something the N.A.S. is responsible for. Also; expecting more adult support from and at the same demeaning a charity that caters more for young children and young adults with serious personal and social coping problems - this is a very inefficient and roundabout way of achieving a very justified and worthwhile aim. The problem you have alluded to has actually already been addressed from a very well informed perspective, unfortunately I do not recall who the author was other than that she was female. Her analysis of the situation regarding more practical support for people with H.F.A.S. and H.F.A. conditions; was that a new charity be set up to provide the required services, and at some later stage integrate with the N.A.S. to become a singular charity. She theorized that the N.A.S. could be quite supportive of such an aim, especially as it would be of great benefit to it as a charitable organization that has helped so so many many people for fifty odd years now, and as is just like all other charities and service providers that are really struggling to cope with more of the social care burden and the massively vacuous funding problems, and all that at the moment. Does this seem to be a reasonable suggestion perhaps? D.

I would not go as far as to state that A.S. and H.F.A. are very much an afterthought, given the forums, but those who require residential or specialized support are definitely more catered for - just as it should be, and given that that is what the N.A.S. was actually set up for originally in 1962 - as essentially being then a parents group. If though more support for people with A.S. and H.F.A. was to come about through the N.S.A., I think that would be major step forward. But, as many of us know presently, after entering into adulthood most of the support is provided by people with A.S. or H.F.A themselves - by way of written or visual media etc. Perhaps as like the founding members of the N.A.S. in 1962 - there could be a H.F.A.S. say in 2022, possibly?