|
Post by jaeksmith on Dec 29, 2020 7:19:09 GMT -5
Discord is a really good suggestion Scotty-- creating a Discord 'server' could revitalize ShyUnited, presuming people aren't just expressing nostangia about this forum. Message boards have morphed into messaging platforms - and Discord makes it easy/light-weight to be present and interact. Where as one might visit ShyUnited when they recall, if ShyUnited ~moved to Discord, it - or, more-so, we - would be more ambiently omnipresent. If people are seriously interested in reactivating ShyUnited, this should be considered... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Jacob Nickname on SU: JaekSmith Update: Have avoided finding a new job for ~11 years. Current cat count: 9.5 . VR is life 1. Had first (and probably last) relationship - it was strange and life breaking. Reasons for coming back to Shy United: Nostalgia and activity check. Areas of Improvement on ShyUnited: Lighterweight communications and more presence - see discussion at top of post. Wishlist: Zero calorie vegi-based 'beef' jerky that tastes like the real thing... (Oh, right, for ShyUnited, see discussion at top of post). Fun Fact: Lately I can be found in VRChat 1 being an emotional support cat ... sometimes babysitting drunk people ... sometimes being dragged around by like a stuffed toy ... If you're present, feel free to friend me. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1If you don't have any other options for a social life, try a VR social platform ... Many support non-VR interactions now - though, the presense achieved by VR can be phenomenal. (It may not be for everyone... but for those who it is, it can be life changing).
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Nov 20, 2017 17:37:08 GMT -5
Rec Room for PSVR is in open beta real-soon-now (21-Nov).
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Sept 5, 2017 17:19:15 GMT -5
If you have social issues - whether anxiety or Asperger's - and you have little social activity - whether due to opportunity or fear - and you have access to the tech - such as the Oculus Rift or Htc Vive - try dropping into Rec Room. You will find people of various social capabilities, including trolls unfortunately ... but you will also find plenty of people who are friendly enough. Further, a good amount of the people present also have various social issues - as, from what I gather, they also have found this to be a generally positive social experience. There's something about it that makes it more comfortable - possibly due to being hidden behind an avatar. The setup seems to leads one to be more expressive bodily - you wave, fist-pump, high-five, and shake hands quite a bit. Also, you get a face that auto-emotes positively - something my physical face doesn't seem to do correctly. Social VR experiences (and VR, in general) provide a feeling of presence that is very realistic - even when your avatars are not - it's something you have to experience to really understand. There are other social VR spaces also. I don't believe in cures, per se, but I believe some of these spaces have good potential for providing social experiences that many of us otherwise have trouble achieving.
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Feb 19, 2017 18:44:05 GMT -5
'ello ... not sure if anyone would remember me?
Still programming...
Been kicked around a bit more so a little more capable - or maybe less caring - in the shy department - though still not extemporaneous.
Poop!
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Oct 11, 2014 6:16:43 GMT -5
After my last cat passed away, I decided that I'd not get another pet as I generally can't handle ... er ... well ... anything in general. . . . The four legged tribbles* (especially one stray female we had to 'fix' up) would have none of it... *species: catus tribbleus. . . (About half of the cats that currently reside here). D:
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Jul 27, 2007 18:43:28 GMT -5
True - I was being rather facetious... (bad habit of mine) For momentary bit of seriousness- I actually have no problem with letting prisoners masterbate. It does seems like an almost free way of letting them deal with urges / needs (and maybe would save a few other inmates rears ). I must say that I hope the prisoners clean up after themselves... I'm seriously unsure there's anyone who would want that job. (Yeah, I can't stay serious for more than a sentence or two ). The fact that the woman seriously addressed the question of whether she called in the SWAT team with "I wish I had" strongly suggests to me that the woman is lying through her teeth when she says she doesn't have a problem with masturbation in general. I do wonder how serious her response about the swat team was. We all say crazy stuff in the heat of emotion. If she was serious, then, yeah, I'd be leary of her. If, on the other hand, she was getting upset with the way people handled her ideals, then it's easy to see how such a comment would be made. As is, I'm trying to keep from personally judging of her since I don't personally have a good understanding of the situation. She sounds easily offended, and as such I'm really not sure why she chose to be in a position in which the whole idea is to closely observe a bunch of, let's face it, bottom-of-the-barrel, icky penis-posessors in their daily lives. Interestingly, there was an article that talked about how sexual harrassment in the work space is often of a similar nature. That is, women enter an already hostile situation - it's not so much a result of them entering. (Note: I'm not agreeing nor suggesting that this makes it ok - but it it has a strange parallel to the things you mention above).
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Jul 27, 2007 11:47:05 GMT -5
and if a sight of a masturbating man from 100ft away in a jail cell offends her sense of beauty so much SHE SHOULD GET A DIFFERENT JOB Heh - ok, I'll play the localized logic validation game... Maybe if people wanted to masterbate they shouldn't go to jail.
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Jul 27, 2007 11:26:45 GMT -5
Did anyone read the whole original article linked (there's more below the picture - I almost missed it myself)?
"Ms Veal, who has charged seven other inmates with the same offence, said she was not against masturbation, but she objected to Alexander performing it so blatantly. She told the court that most inmates masturbated in bed, under the blankets.
The deputy said it was the third time she had caught Alexander masturbating, and she had had enough."
Thus, she probably would have left the guy alone if he wasn't masterbating in front of her. If anything, I'd wonder if the guy might be taunting her a bit...
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Jun 28, 2007 12:10:31 GMT -5
yeah, i agree...and i'd like to keep more of my own money and manage it myself rather than having the government take it from me and give it to multinational corporations as 'incentives'. Nice one.
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Jun 28, 2007 6:45:32 GMT -5
i am not sure what you are referring to I can't find the main article I listened to (I think it was from the New York Times)... It discussed how some extremely wealthy people were pushing for a more fair economy lately - something that would be seemingly more adverse to their wealth. The article mentioned that this has occurred in the past (again, with extremely wealthy people) and reasoned that these people understand that their own wealth depends on economic stability. It should be noted that the article was somewhat interpretive On the other hand, I did find the Remarks of Bill Gates at the Harvard Commencement - which was one part of the spark for the article. Here's a small, somewhat relational quote: "We can make market forces work better for the poor if we can develop a more creative capitalism – if we can stretch the reach of market forces so that more people can make a profit, or at least make a living, serving people who are suffering from the worst inequities. We also can press governments around the world to spend taxpayer money in ways that better reflect the values of the people who pay the taxes." i am just not a socialist fan it just makes sense to me that people manage money better when its their own, rather then managing someone else's money for common good You keep applying strong labels (communism, socialism) that I think are far beyond (and in a different direction from) what Hillary was pushing - at least as represented by that particular article. (Note again that I don't know Hillary's stance and maybe you have some other general information that shows she's pushing the notions you suggest she is). Far as I can tell her main point is to promote "opportunity for all and special privileges for none", "promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed". In the article you linked to, she continuously talks about supporting fairness and opportunity in the free market. (Alternately we could allow pirates to be legal in a free market - yarr! ;D ).
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Jun 28, 2007 6:11:47 GMT -5
I can see a woman becoming President eventually, but i'd like to see one become President on her own merits, and not be attached to an already influential and powerful politician. Somehow I think that if Hillary Clinton made it into office, it would be in spite of Bill Clinton, not due to her (nor our) attachment to him. Edit: Just to be sure, I don't really know anything about Hillary's positions and so am neutral in my opinion of her.
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Jun 27, 2007 20:15:03 GMT -5
taking money away from people on behalf of the common good is not going to increase economic stability - it will make people less productive I'm curious as to who exactly you think will be affected? Note that Gates & other rich people were the ones pushing the ideas. I haven't suggested a personal opinion. You're debating them apparently.
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Jun 27, 2007 14:29:14 GMT -5
she sounds like a communist I read the article and disagree with your interpretation. "We're not coming to you, many of whom are well enough off that actually the tax cuts may have helped you, and say 'we're going to give you more.' We're saying, 'you know what, for America to get back on track and be fiscally responsible, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." I believe she's saying that we should stop giving rich and large tax breaks because it's not exactly fair ... and that we should focus on economic stability as a nation. (Speaking of which, I read recently that Gates and others are 'pushing' similar ideas... evening out the field a bit more between rich and poor. ... and apparently this has occurred in the past before - when the rich saw possible stability issues in the economy. According to the article, they see their own stability (and positioning) very immednently tied to the stability of the economy. Thus, it is in their interest to support stability as a lesser cost to themselves).
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Jul 15, 2007 22:51:37 GMT -5
Rootbeer-float! Rootbeer-float!
|
|
|
Post by jaeksmith on Jun 25, 2007 18:16:12 GMT -5
Edited for good taste?
|
|