![](/static/253f0d9/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/d3d059e3-fa3d-45af-ac93-ac894beba378.png)
Not sure if they get much hate but they sure get a lot of shit
Not sure if they get much hate but they sure get a lot of shit
I used to feel the same as you. But the short answer here is because the law chooses to focus on the welfare of the child over either of the parents. It isn’t about being fair to the mother or the father. The mother and the father made the child. The child needs care. The mother and the father are the most reasonably responsible for its care.
Fair enough. Sounds like A is going to have to decide whether they talk to B directly, complain to the supervisor that B still isn’t meeting expectations, or drop it. But keeping you in the middle isn’t going to solve the problem and it needs to stop. You can say that firmly but nicely and with validation. (The validation is important to maintaining your relationship with A.)
At the end of the day, this sounds like a failure at the management level. If B is known to be underperforming, it’s on management to either find a way to help B improve or replace B. Management’s failure here is hurting all 3 of you. A has a right to be pissed. B needs guidance or the boot. And you need to be free of this mess.
I think you need to tell A that sharing this feedback with you won’t help B change, and that they need to address B directly or talk to their supervisor.
You can also say that sharing this feedback with you is putting you in an uncomfortable position, as you are friends with both of them, and you need it to stop. It’s perfectly okay to validate A’s complaints (“I understand why you feel the way you do”) so that A doesn’t feel like you are dismissing them. But that doesn’t mean you have to be in the middle.
Having spent many years in corporate life, I can tell you that one of the biggest blockers to people improving is that no one tells them there is a problem to begin with. Person B may have no idea they’re underperforming. And to be fair, I can’t tell from this whether their supervisor would even agree that B is underperforming; B may be doing just fine from management’s perspective, in which case A needs to let it go.
Good luck!
That demo struck me as a cherry-picked example. Can it work? Sure. Is it always that smooth? I highly highly doubt it.
I see you’re getting a lot of answers from both sides of the spectrum. But if you’re struggling, I want to help.
Being in a behavior health ward is good for when you can’t help yourself anymore, or need significant treatment that’s difficult to handle via outpatient (like electroconvulsive treatments). It’s not like a hospital stay where you walk out cured of some infection. It’s more like a stay in the hospital after a huge car accident. They’ll get you stable, they’ll set you up with a therapist for long-term recovery, and meds to manage the symptoms.
You’re right that talk doesn’t fix money problems and things like that. But what it does do is help you keep from suffering alone AND it teaches you how to manage the feelings in a healthier way. That can be the difference between falling apart in the face of money trouble and having the skills to focus on finding a solution–or even just a way to survive.
The thing about depression is that it makes everything feel worthless and hopeless. You have to trust that you can’t properly interpret whether a solution will work for you, and that the medical experts you align with are going to have a clearer view of what will help bring you out of the depression.
That doesn’t mean all therapists are good. Or that a good therapist for someone else will fit you. But those are problems you can start to manage once you’ve taken a few steps toward recovery (assuming they turn out to be problems at all).
I’ve been in therapy for over a decade, on meds for just as long, and once in a ward for a week. Does it suck to be “trapped” in the unit? Yep. It’s not a party in there. I don’t ever want to go back. But when I did go in, it was because I felt like I legitimately couldn’t take care of myself or see a way forward. In that regard, it saved me. So if my biggest complaint is that I felt stuck for a few days, well… so be it.
But there are many other options before being admitted. There are social workers, psychologists, psychiatrists, intensive outpatient programs, ketamine therapy, and more. You may never need to be admitted at all if you can get to treatment before you’re completely overwhelmed. Sometimes the solution is incredibly simple, like getting more vitamin D and a proper sleep schedule. Sometimes it takes a little ongoing medicine with weekly talk sessions. Sometimes it’s more. But whatever it is, it’s worth it. You can be happy in tough situations, but if you’re depressed you can’t be happy even in good situations. And that’s no way to live.
Long story short: if you’re depressed you aren’t equipped to judge whether a solution will work without trying it, you have very little to lose by trying therapy, and the potential gains are the difference between misery and a fulfilling life. A mental institution is an extreme measure that’s only part of a longer-term solution, and you may never need it. But it can be the literal difference between life and death if you’re at the end of your rope.
I have a similar thing, but I got over it by committing to robbing every vendor of everything they have. Then there’s no one to buy the stupid fork.
It blows my mind that so many questions in this community could be instantly answered by Google. Just typing “whinging” gives its definition and identifies it as British.
The question wasn’t stupid. But OP was too lazy to even try and do their own research. Which ironically resulted in more work for them.
It’s not necessarily lazy. If I want to go back to a particular post I saw on page 1 when I’m on page 2, but it was knocked off the front page, how would I find it? It’s no longer on page 1, so back would miss it. I’d have to go to 1 and then back again to 2 to find a post that moved.
It gets even more complicated when the algorithm also changes post order.
Sometimes simple with minor inconvenience is the best option.
Excellent point. My apologies.
“Those aren’t two pillows!”
“Nobody leaves this place without singin’ the blues.”
“It’s showtime!”
“That’s not a motorcycle, baby. It’s a chopper.”
"You’re a daisy if you do.’
“Mr. Blutarsky. Zero-point-zero.”"
“I want my two dollars!”
“So THAT’S how it is in their family.”
I dunno. We can manipulate entangled electrons to look like a yin yang symbol and that’s not cool?
Edit; photons. My bad.
I love the discussion here as to possible reasons why the labeling is different.
That said, there’s a very good chance it’s just because the initial version had 3, got translated, then someone added a 4th item and it never got translated.
I think it’s, “but my god is the journal itself atrocious”
OP is saying they’ve heard people claim it but hasn’t seen evidence. They’re wondering if anybody has some, because otherwise they’re treating it as a rumor.
I don’t know. Ford was a lot of shitty things. But he was also an actual innovator, not just an investor who thought he was an innovator.
And as egocentric as he was, he still saw the value in providing free healthcare, food, reasonable hours, and good wages to workers.
He was a collosal asshole but I don’t think it’s fair to compare him to Musk.
Don’t be too stressed. They’ve demonstrated that time arises from matter. From “outside,” our universe is like a giant book, and time is like pages. Everything that ever was or will be is there. We just can’t can’t perceive it that way since we’re trapped inside.
Ad algorithms might be using more complicated analytic combinations than just “similar sites” as a qualifier. Maybe you’re a fan of a product or show (or combination thereof) that typically map to right-wing readers or likely converts.
If they’re getting (just making this up) a 5% click-throughs rate with this targeting vs 2% with just similar-site matching, then they probably don’t care about a high rate of views by left-wing users.
Maybe? But I know what I’m getting with Sync. Donations to FOSS don’t guarantee anything.
And really, once we start talking about donating to free software with the expectation of specific returns, we’re basically talking about paying for software. If a specific set of FOSS is only good when people pay for it, there’s a problem with the incentivization to work on that set of software.
Stop trying to make fetch happen.