My3Cents

This question is sort of aimed at IGOTOUT because I know he uses removeable hard drives, but answers from anyone who has experience would be appreciated.

I work in two home offices and I also travel a bit. I want to have the same computing situation wherever I go - at least as far as software. So I take a laptop with me. In my main office I hook it up to an external monitor and keyboard.

In my next iteration, I'm thinking it would be nice to build a desktop as my main machine, but keeping all the same programs and data would mean laborious synching (which is a pain) and not only installing the same software multiple places but making sure to tweak preferences and settings in the same way.

The thought occurs if I could use a single removeable hard drive on all machines - that might do it. And since travel really does require a laptop, the laptop drive would have to be the one that moves. Does anyone know if there's a way to make a desktop so it uses a laptop drive as the main, bootable, C: drive. (not as a slave)?

Thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by justloafing:

Sort of makes me wonder if SOME of the top brass just lived in the secular world period, did not believe a thing they taught, raped and abused, set up the rapes and least of all laughed at us for being such (dummies) to follow them. It was all about their lifestyle and they fought very hard to keep it their lifestyle, still to this day.

I am sure I am way off base here but it has crossed my mind.

I don't think you're way off base at all - but it's not that simple. As most of us can tell from looking at our own lives - what we do, and what we say, and what we believe are not always consistent or logical.

It's quite possible/common for people to really believe something and act in ways that go contrary to that belief without even realizing there might be a contradiction.

When you combine that with how much in denial a person has to be to ascribe to the beliefs in the way it's probably very common. Looking back at my own life, I know I wasn't totally convinced of all the stuff I was propounding but I do think I believed that I believed it (if that makes sense).

I've had goat and it is a lot like lamb so I assume similar cooking methods apply. Some of the best lamb I had was served with a sauce made by cooking whole garlic cloves in balsamic vinegar till the cloves disolved and the whole thing reduced to a thick consistency.

But I like mint jelly too, so what do I know?

In my (limited) experience, that message means Fire Fox can't find the internet. Either your internet provider is having problems, or the problem is in the internal network (cable modem, router, switch etc).

Try rebooting everything. For routers and such, you reboot by unplugging them for 10 seconds and replugging in.

If that doesn't stop it, the intermitent might mean a couple of devices on the network are trying to use the same IP address. Did it start after you added or changed some piece of hardware? If so that would be the likely culprit.

Hope that helps.

If you're not afraid of work, if you'll show up when you're supposed to, keep a good atitude and look for extras to do for customers (and your co-workers) then many companies will be happy to have you.

If you can learn quickly then your excel and typing skills will improve. You may have to start a bit lower on the totem pole till they do, but it will pay more than watching Oprah.

Figure out how many hours (and which ones) you want to work. Starting tomorrow spend every one of those hours looking for a job, every work day for as long as it takes. Check out temp agencies, answer all the want ads that could possibly be relevant, tell all your clients and everyone you know what you're looking for.

If you've done all that and still have time left in your "work" day, then start knocking on doors of companies. But don't ask them for a job. Tell them exactly what you're looking for and ask "Can you point me to someone who might be able to help?" It takes the pressure off for them to offer you a job, or give you another name if they don't have one. Then call or go see that person.

Also check out a book called "What color is your Parachute" - most libraries should have a copy.

Good luck.

quote:

Originally posted by Zshot:

Public telivesion is viewer supported.

If you enjoy public television, send funds to your public tv station.

I think it's proper for government to pool our collective resources and accomplish things that no individual or group would do on its own. If done properly [a HUGE if] this benefits society. If broadcasting (which is done via public air waves by the way) were only supported by viewers we'd all be watching nothing but FOX, and I think as a society we'd be poorer for it.

This is scary, funny and gave me some historical insight about the religious foundations of the USA.

It's a one hour radio show. Click Here - Real Player needed

If you don't think so Check This Out or your kid's kids might never see it.

Lots has been said here from individual perspective. Here's an idea of a group pattern. In a book called "All Marketers are Liars" Seth Godin notes that great marketers tell great stories and they are often successful independent of the truth of the stories.

BUT, he says, we should not blame the marketers. They're just trying to do their job. And the buying public responds to (good) stories even when it can be shown that they are not true - or (more often) not about the facts.

Great examples of this on his blog at Liar's Blog

It made me think of the wonderful story that appealed to us when we got in the way - knowing THE TRUTH, serving God, following the man of God, and changing the world.

At some point we saw a contradiction between what we saw as facts, and the story. Many here express frustration and sadness with friends, family and loved ones who are still in despite the evidence. Perhaps they just still prefer the story.

I don't think seeing their books would be very enlightening. I'm sure they have a lot of leway as to how they classify expenses and still remain within the legal limits of what a 501©3 organization is allowed to do.

Seeing "the books" is a lot different in most cases from knowing how the money was really spent.

quote:

Originally posted by Oakspear:

Here's what Howie wrote above his signature at the end of the POP:

quote:

I read it & all is true. I've felt it & didn't know what to do. So I will change(?) to do my best for the man I helped to kill. 3/22/86

And why would anyone assume his insights, opinons or judgement was anymore valid at this point in his life than before or after?

Just curious.

quote:

Originally posted by signals:

Martindale was given the legacy of TWI, huh? But did he bring it down, or was trouble bubbling on the horizon?

Both. trouble was brewing for a number of reasons. 1. Nobody could fill the shoes of vpw from a personality perspective and he had built the whole thing on that.

2. The world was changing. It wasn't cool anymore to live in squallor while moving around the country pursuing spiritiual goals. Instead we got the 80's and they never adapted

3. As a lot of the youth grew up they saw through the same old same old. "research" was not fooling anyone.

And craig did screw it up. He was stupid, emotionally unstable and didn't have the ability to cover his problems up with an appealing veneer the way vpw did.

Hell, I have mixed feelings about my children. Sometimes I love 'em and sometimes I want to kill 'em.

One thing we were taught in the way was that it's all one way or the other. It's not. Life is good, bad, neither, both, sometimes all of the above and sometimes none of the above.

And another thing we weren't taught - there's a difference between feelings and opinions. And judgement is another thing all together.

vpw would never have been as "successful" as he was in getting people to follow him, to pay him money, to dedicate their life to his ideas and to get naked for him if he didn't inspire a lot of possitive feelings.

Mixed feelings are part of life. You can get into problems when you mistake feelings for judgements.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Hammeroni:

Steve, that makes more sense than any other explanation I have heard for the insanity.

Insanity doesn't need a reason.

I knew martindale and wierwille though I left before WayII. I don't think either of them consciously believed they were ripping people off, or abusing people (though of course they were).

People with the kinds of emotional problems these men had don't really think like normal people [he said, speaking as a "normal" person who spent 16 years in a cult]. In fact they don't think as much as they just emote and then string words together after the fact to justify what they've done.

You can see similar patterns in other leaders today who think what they are doing is god's will. This happens on both sides of the war on terrorism.

quote:

Originally posted by igotout:

I see it more like someone who fought their way to the top who is avoiding the LIGHT and living comfortably on the millions available to them while not being productive in any real manner of speaking.

Living comfortably except that to keep up the charade, she has to live and work in the middle of a cornfield in the boonies.

I wouldn't do that for $50 million. Money's easier to make than time doing what you love!

[No offense to those who love cornfields, but it's just not me.]

quote:

Originally posted by ChasUFarley:

In the New England area (ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT...) I know of only two Way Corps couples who were full time in the late 90's - one was the Limb Coordinators of CT, the other was the Regional Coordinators!

Are you saying that CT had one of the largest fellowships in New England? Hard to believe!!

quote:

Originally posted by GarthP2000:

TWI was the loser. They were the winners. Winners get to pick the conditions. The losers get to whine. ... That's how it works in our wonderful American legal system.

It's not always so cut and dried. From a legal perspective, settlement means there is no (declared) winner or loser. Both sides come to an agreement.

Even if a person has a pretty sure case there may be reasons they'd prefer to settle and to do so they may have to give some things the other side wants. Some of the reasons may be that even a sure case has been lost on occasion. Even one that has been won has been changed or the award lessened on appeal. Sometimes it's just not worth any more time, expense, emotional turmoil even if you could "win" more money than you settled for. And also when you win a civil lawsuit you don't walk out of court with the money. You get a judgement against the other party. You still have to collect to get the money. There are delaying tactics they can use to delay or avoid paying. Especially when there are different corporate interests that legally own the money.

When you settle, it's paid, no appeal, done, finished. So even if you're the "winner" you might decide to give up something to settle.

quote:

Originally posted by vickles:

If I decide to get this hobby farm is it better to get a business loan or a home loan?

The best loan is the one where you can get the most money for the least interest over the longest amount of time. Doesn't matter what they call it.

Usually that means the one with the most collateral. Banks don't lend money on the potential of your business. They lend money based on protecting their down side. They ask "What can we sell and for how much it if all goes south to get our money back." The surer they are, the less interest they charge.

You can "google" how to write a business plan and learn enough. Or you can "library" it. DON'T hire someone to write it for you. Even if you get the loan, you'll miss out on all the learning and you'll run out of money faster and still owe the bank a bunch.

And if you can start the business without a loan - or have income on the side to pay it off - the business will have a better shot at succeeding. Businesses almost never turn out the way you think (ask HAPe4me :D-->) so the more flexible your funding is the better. And the less money you have the more creative you get in figuring how to make 4 pennies spend like a nickle.

If you're really going to be in business, have you worked at the kind of business you're going to run? Have you made friends with others in that business so you can pick their brains? If not do so.

Lindy,

My parents had a kid in the way but I've never had a parent in. It must be awful. Probably worse than them being dead. At least then they wouldn't continue to hurt you. I don't know how you'd do this but if at some emotional level you could grieve like they died and not expect them to be there for you anymore then all your surprises would be pleasant ones.

Just remember this is not about you. You did nothing wrong.

My ex-wife has a condition that prevents her from experiencing the normal emotions that people have. Thus she does some very painful things to the kids. As they've grown and I've been able to explain it to them, I've said that if she had a physical disability (like blindness) they might be more sad than angry at the things she couldn't do for them. If they can see her problem in a similar light, perhaps they will feel sad as well as angry. Sadness is less corrosive.

The way is very different from when I was involved. I have to believe that anyone who's still there has a lot of inappropriate emotional reactions, and may have conditions that make it impossible for them to be otherwise. If you learn about them, perhaps some of your anger can mutate to sadness.

As for the accident - I'm so sorry. Sounds like you're getting medical attention. It's worth it to seek attention from someone who specializes in what you need. Go for the best at times like this. It does make a difference.

I chat on a couple of woodworker forums. Hope you have some like that for support and fellowship. They are real good about making me feel I'm not alone when I make dumb mistakes.

Yes he knew a lot and didn't do anything. Sometimes he would berate other for not doing anything about it too.

But it's like people that head up a corporation that has engaged in criminal behavior and say they didn't know. If they knew, they are complicit. If they really didn't know they are incompitent and should be held legally liable for allowing such behavior to happen.

Reminds me of a guy who sends others off to war under false pretenses, but this is the wrong thread.

quote:

Originally posted by Stayed Too Long:

Apparently Idaho doesn't believe it is murder either.

Most people don't.

Fiduciary responsability is more than a matter of trust. I'm not a lawyer but I think it means the responsibility to put others self interest ahead of yours (especially in regards to finances).

It's certainly not about misusing the feelings most associate with the word trust.

It is commonly used when someone manages YOUR money for you in a relationship where you expect to get that money back with an increase. Someone like an investment advisor or a director of a company in which you hold stock.

I doubt that abundant sharing would legally fit this definition regardless of what we believed when we gave it (or the source of those beliefs) because it is legally a gift, not an investment.

I have no doubt one could prove the way leadership violated their fiduciary responsability. But the hard part will be to prove they actually had that responsability over the average "follower".

Perhaps the responsability could be proven for someone who was on staff. Employment doesn't usually convey that kind of responsability to an employer but the way's employment practices were pretty bizare.

Having said all that - as long as the Peelers (or anyone else) aren't being mislead as to what their chances of winning are for the pain, hassle and expense they are going through - then I'm happy to see any and all folks go after the way and have as much info as possible come to light.

Just my 2 cents and one for inflation.

Marriage counseling is for people who both want to make their marriage better. You are not sure what you want to do, so marriage counseling won't help, even if your wife would go.

I'd suggest you go see a counselor on your own to help you figure out what you want. Remember you can't control another person - just yourself.

I believe a divorce can be bad for kids. But I also believe a bad marriage can be as bad and sometimes worse. If you decide to divorce, you can still be a good parent. I'm able to be a better parent since my divorce.

FYUI - I don't believe in the bible and don't care what Jesus said about it. That may color your opinion of my advice. I think marriage has historically been primarily an economic institution. That's one reason it was important to stick it out no matter what.

In our times it still is an economic necessity for many people but for many people it is not. Many people's idea of being poor is being down to one car and no cable TV. Hardly life threatening.

I think our society is working on new ways to understand what marriage means when it's not economically vital to survival. I think that will take a couple generations (and still won't apply to everyone).

Just my two cents and one for inflation. Best wishes.

Insurance is a bet of sorts.

You pay money to "bet" that something won't happen (a car accident, your death, a fire, whatever). The insurance company takes your money and that of a lot of other people and pays back more money than you put in if the thing happens.

Obviously the aggregate odds are in their favor. If they didn't take in more money than they pay out over time they'd be out of business and there would be no one to take your bet. So for you it's a "bad bet" and that's a good thing otherwise there would be no one to take it.

So when does it make sense? It makes sense when the unlikely but possible thing could have a devistating financial effect. Not unpleasant, but devistating.

If I am the major bread winner in the family and my family would be financially (remember all we're talking about is money) devistated by my death it's probably a good idea for me to have life insurance. If my kids are grown, the spouse makes more money than we need etc. The it probably doesn't make sense because my death would be financially devistating. In both cases, the odds are that the insurance company will "win" the bet but in one case my death would be catastrophic so I "bet". In another case it wouldn't so I don't.

Financially prudent people insure only what will be financially catastrophic events with high deductibles because having to pay a high deductible is uncomfortable but no catastrophic and it saves you premiums. So they buy as little as they need to be financially secure if the unlikely happens.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

quote:

Originally posted by smurfette:

Is this a symptom of "waybrain" or lack of smarts/common sense?

I'm not sure there's a difference.