Logical Structure of Objectivism

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Merlin,

Time zones?

Heh.

I hadn't thought of that.

Once you go down that "gaming the system" path in your mind, imagine how much wiggle room you can imagine that you can uncover with time zones.

Unfortunately for the wiggler, the program works in a way that must be acknowledged if you wish to derive more benefits than are on the surface. You cannot ignore that nature and wiggle out some other stuff unless you get lucky. As a system, it doesn't work.

The time zone standard isn't used by the system for restricting posts. And no amount of pretending will make it so.

I actually think this is cute, It's a metaphysical banshee tree in the OL garden. This little attempt is a metaphorical microcosm of how reality interferes with our whims.

It doesn't matter what the intention is, ignorant or dishonest. Reality will not be denied.

If we don't acknowledge realitym, but try to game it instead, it will block us.

Michael

[Xray]

quote name='Michael Stuart Kelly' date='27 December 2009 - 01:00 PM' timestamp='1261940434' post='86514']

Xray's epistemology is interestingly present in her offline reaction to the 5 post limit.

I mention this because I find this kind of mental handicap (or attempted cunningness--your decide) very interesting. I believe it is a result of years of imprecise thinking.

The forum software program works in units of minutes and hours in the post restriction function, not in terms of calendar days.

What this means (with a 5 post per 24 hour limit) is that if one post was made at 11:00 PM and the following morning the poster wanted to post 5 posts, she would have to make due with 4 posts until 11:00 PM that night. In this manner, more than 5 posts are never made within a 24 hour time span.

I did not set this way of working. The software engineers did. At my present level of coding knowledge, I could not change this even if I wanted to.

Xray complained to me once before that she was not being allowed to post 5 posts in one day, so I explained this to her.

That apparently didn't mean much. Either she didn't understand, or she did understand and thinks she can game it.

She just complained again, mentioning that the program said she could "make 5 posts today." However after the first post, it said her limit was used up. I just looked at the time stamps of her posts and the time limit actually was used up. Here are the time stamps of Xray's posts for Dec 25-26 for a clearer understanding:

Dec 25 2009 09:29 AM

Dec 25 2009 03:50 PM

Dec 25 2009 04:14 PM

Dec 25 2009 04:36 PM

Dec 25 2009 04:40 PM

Yesterday, 10:58 AM

"Yesterday" was Dec 26. She only made one post on that day.

In her mind (as she told me), the software must have a glitch since she is allowed 5 posts a day. The fact is that she would have needed to wait until 03:50 PM yesterday before the software would release any other post from her. Up to then, within that 24 period, 5 posts were already made.

How do you sum it it up if I may ask? I want to this to be cleared up and it is a VERY good idea to do it openly here? Feel free to post my PM you here as well. Your allegation that I tried to mislead you in any way is just plain absurd.

Now let's go through it step by step and not miss anything.

I made 5 posts on Dec 25, right?

The first post on Dec 25 was made at 09:29 AM

The last post on Dec 25 was made at 04:40 PM

Now when is the first time one can can make a post again according to a 24 hour rhythm? After 9:29 AM Dec 26th, right?

When I logged in at Dec 26th, it was already past 9:29 AM. Still with me, Michael?

I then got, as expected, the info "you can make 5 posts today". That's what it said in your software.

But after made only one post on the Logical Structures thread, I suddenly got an information contradicting the previous one, it now said "you have used up your five posts". It wouldn't even let me edit the one I had made. How can that be?

(Just to be clear, you can get a full listing of a poster's posts in the left-hand sidebar of her profile. The link is called "Find Posts." You get a partial listing using the tab called "Posts" in the body section of the profile page.)

I myself told you to check out the find posts section in my profile.

Interesting also that I was listed with 5 posts in the Today's (Dec 26th) Top posters section. Please explain that to me given the fact that I made only post on Dec 26th?

Could Ms. Xray have thought of something like this?

Ms Xray thinks there is a major glitch in the software and asked you in a PM to have it corrected.

For it can't be "You can make five posts today" and after one post "You have used up your five posts".

Getting two contradictory informations via software indicates a flaw in the software.

And no gaming me...

No one was gaming you. I'm not responsible for flaws in your software.

[Alfonso Jones]

Not only having problems with logic, but even basic reading comprehension, Xray?

Note: You have been told how the algorithm works. Was that unclear? Do you expect every announcement or reminder to repeat all the details of the algorithm for you? Is your attention span so short that you forget so quickly?

It's not "5 posts each calendar day." You have been told that. It's instead "no more than 5 posts within any 24 hour period" - which means that if you look back in time for an amount less than 24 hours and find 5 posts by you, you won't be allowed another post. If you made an additional post that would be 6 posts in that time period.

You are having troubles with this, and want to discuss and criticize Rand's contributions to epistemology?

Rand wasn't perfect. She made some assertions she couldn't prove. She was, at times, just plain wrong. At times she equated her preferences with what "any rational person" should think. Nathaniel Branden has documented some of these instances clearly. But you seem amazingly inept in your attempts to find fault with Rand.

Sometimes 5 seems like a very large number.

Bill P

Edited December 27, 2009 by Bill P

[Brant Gaede]

I think the problem can be solved by limiting Xray to six posts a day. However, since I don't like the number 6, make it 7.

--Brant

here to help

[Alfonso Jones]

I think the problem can be solved by limiting Xray to six posts a day. However, since I don't like the number 6, make it 7.

--Brant

here to help

An even simpler solution: 1 per day, meaning: When you post, you can't post again for 24 hours. No other positive number is as easy to explain.

That's clear, and I think within the grasp (remember the crow epistemology?).

Bill P

Edited December 27, 2009 by Bill P

[Selene]

Guys:

Additionally, one (1) is the loneliest number that there ever was...wow we should break out in song!

we could call ourselves The Three Blind Subjectivists and challenge The Blind Boys of Alabama to a sight off...

Remember what the wise Casey Stengel said: The key to winning is to keep those crooked numbers off the other teams scoreboard.

Adam

[Alfonso Jones]

Guys:

Additionally, one (1) is the loneliest number that there ever was...wow we should break out in song!

we could call ourselves The Three Blind Subjectivists and challenge The Blind Boys of Alabama to a sight off...

Remember what the wise Casey Stengel said: The key to winning is to keep those crooked numbers off the other teams scoreboard.

Adam

Does anyone else see what is so hard to understand about "no more than 5 posts in a 24 hour period?" I think this is very telling about Xray's (in)ability to engage in a substantive philosophical discussion, if this is beyond her comprehension. I understand that the verbal short of "5 posts per day" is hardly a full and complete discussion of the restriction - any more than, when you "purchase a house" it is a full and accurate statement to say "you own the house." How about the mineral rights? What restrictions might exist on your ownership due to deed restrictions? Etc. Context matters.

Bill P

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Dragonfly,

Where are you when we need you?

Xray needs cognitive help and no one speaks Xray-speak.

Recognizing and accepting reality is kicking her butt.

Maybe you can explain it to her.

After all, you say Xray thinks like you do.

She does, doesn't she?

But surely you don't have her difficulty with elementary math...

Michael

(PS - Just joking. I am almost 100% sure she is goofing on everyone.)

[Selene]

Oh...so it was supposed to be funny - got it!

This is the way I imagine a discussion with Ms. Xray.

Adam

not sure which role I would enjoy more

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Adam,

That was hilarious and very apropos. I had not seen it before.

Michael

[Selene]

Adam,

That was hilarious and very apropos. I had not seen it before.

Michael

Michael:

Thanks. It is a classic vaudeville skit which they refined to perfection.

Adam

[Xray]

Not only having problems with logic, but even basic reading comprehension, Xray?

Note: You have been told how the algorithm works. Was that unclear? Do you expect every announcement or reminder to repeat all the details of the algorithm for you? Is your attention span so short that you forget so quickly?

It's not "5 posts each calendar day." You have been told that. It's instead "no more than 5 posts within any 24 hour period" - which means that if you look back in time for an amount less than 24 hours and find 5 posts by you, you won't be allowed another post. If you made an additional post that would be 6 posts in that time period.

You are having troubles with this, and want to discuss and criticize Rand's contributions to epistemology?

Rand wasn't perfect. She made some assertions she couldn't prove. She was, at times, just plain wrong. At times she equated her preferences with what "any rational person" should think. Nathaniel Branden has documented some of these instances clearly. But you seem amazingly inept in your attempts to find fault with Rand.

Sometimes 5 seems like a very large number.

Bill P

Both you and I and everyone else here can count to five. But you still don't get what is is about. Even when one assumes a 24 hour frame, there is something substantially wrong with a software, which, when, as soon as a new 24-hour cycle has started, after correctly informing me via the message "You can make 5 more posts today", and then, immediatetely after I made just one post, gives the message, "you have used up your five posts". (??)

It looks like the software developers need some instructions on algorithm, not me.

Right now as I'm sitting here and posting this, it says above in a frame "You can make 5 more posts today". I'm going to copy this right here into my post for verification:

You can make 5 more posts today. This restriction is in place until you have 98439 more approved posts

IconEmoticons

* Remove formatting

* Toggle HTML source

* Other styles

o Post Snap Back

o Topic Link

o Post Link

o Spoiler

o Acronym

o Extract Blog Entry

o Blog Link

o Blog Entry Link

o Horizontal Rule

o Code

o PHP Code

o HTML Code

o SQL Code

o XML Code

o Member

o Optional

As I'm typing this, the "top posters" section lists me with already "2" posts "today". But I have made no post as yet today Dec 28th (this is my first one), and still it says "2 posts made today". Feel free to do the math on this and see how it adds up. (It may go up to three after I post this).

I don't know what is going to happen after I have made that one post of the five listed above in the frame. Maybe it says again wrongly "you have used up your five posts). For it has happened after I made one post (with four to go) that I got the contrary message "you have used up your five". Often, it would not even allow me to edit the one I had just made.

Yesterday, immediately before I wanted to edit my latest post to Michael (I had forgotten to put his words in the quote frame), I got the message "you can make one more post today".

Now when I wanted to edit that post (which I had already made before getting the message), it suddenly said "no posting permitted" - I couldn't even edit. Nor could I make the one additional post the software had announced I could make. Again, how is that?

Imo there is major GLITCH in that software. It has nothing to do with time zones etc.

Getting two contradictory messages from the software indicates a flaw in the system, plain and simple.

I told you this in a PM since I could not post on the board anymore, and PM'd Michael about this as well.

Here is my post again with MKS's words now in the quote frames. (edited and typos hopefuly corrected, wrote this in a hurry)

Xray's epistemology is interestingly present in her offline reaction to the 5 post limit.

I mention this because I find this kind of mental handicap (or attempted cunningness--your decide) very interesting. I believe it is a result of years of imprecise thinking.

The forum software program works in units of minutes and hours in the post restriction function, not in terms of calendar days.

What this means (with a 5 post per 24 hour limit) is that if one post was made at 11:00 PM and the following morning the poster wanted to post 5 posts, she would have to make due with 4 posts until 11:00 PM that night. In this manner, more than 5 posts are never made within a 24 hour time span.

I did not set this way of working. The software engineers did. At my present level of coding knowledge, I could not change this even if I wanted to.

Xray complained to me once before that she was not being allowed to post 5 posts in one day, so I explained this to her.

That apparently didn't mean much. Either she didn't understand, or she did understand and thinks she can game it.

She just complained again, mentioning that the program said she could "make 5 posts today." However after the first post, it said her limit was used up. I just looked at the time stamps of her posts and the time limit actually was used up. Here are the time stamps of Xray's posts for Dec 25-26 for a clearer understanding:

Dec 25 2009 09:29 AM

Dec 25 2009 03:50 PM

Dec 25 2009 04:14 PM

Dec 25 2009 04:36 PM

Dec 25 2009 04:40 PM

Yesterday, 10:58 AM

"Yesterday" was Dec 26. She only made one post on that day.

In her mind (as she told me), the software must have a glitch since she is allowed 5 posts a day. The fact is that she would have needed to wait until 03:50 PM yesterday before the software would release any other post from her. Up to then, within that 24 period, 5 posts were already made.

How do YOU sum it up if I may ask? I want to this to be cleared up and it is a VERY good idea to do it openly here. Feel free to post my PM you here as well. Your allegation that I tried to mislead you in any way is just plain absurd.

Now let's go through it step by step and not miss anything.

I made 5 posts on Dec 25, right?

The first post on Dec 25 was made at 09:29 AM

The last post on Dec 25 was made at 04:40 PM

Now when is the first time one can make a post again according to a 24 hour rhythm? After 9:29 AM Dec 26th, right?

When I logged in at Dec 26th, it was already past 9:29 AM. Still with me, Michael?

I then got, as expected, the info "you can make 5 posts today". That's what it said in your software.

But after made only one post on the Logical Structures thread, I suddenly got an information contradicting the previous one; it now said "you have used up your five posts". It wouldn't even let me edit the one I had made. How can that be?

(Just to be clear, you can get a full listing of a poster's posts in the left-hand sidebar of her profile. The link is called "Find Posts." You get a partial listing using the tab called "Posts" in the body section of the profile page.)

I myself told you to check out the find posts section in my profile.

Interesting also that I was listed with 5 posts in the Today's (Dec 26th) Top posters section. Please explain that to me given the fact that I made only one post on Dec 26th?

Could Ms. Xray have thought of something like this?

Ms Xray thinks there is a major glitch in the software and asked you in a PM to have it corrected.

For it can't be "You can make five posts today" and after one post "You have used up your five posts".

Getting two contradictory informations via software indicates a flaw in the software.

And no gaming me...

No one was gaming you. I'm not responsible for flaws in your software.

Michael Stuart Kelly

Dragonfly,

Where are you when we need you?

Xray needs cognitive help and no one speaks Xray-speak.

Recognizing and accepting reality is kicking her butt.

Maybe you can explain it to her.

After all, you say Xray thinks like you do.

She does, doesn't she?

But surely you don't have her difficulty with elementary math...

Michael

What has poster Dragonfly to do with software glitches here?

It is you who needs help from a techie in case you can't fix it yourself.

I asked you in a PM to have the flaw in the software corrected. I also asked you if I can contact the technical staff.

I also told you that the glitch may have to do with the 'top posters' section possibly not in sync with my post counts.

Have you checked it out, contacted anyone?

After all, you say Xray thinks like you do.

DF and I are posters who have stated here that values are subjective, and who have backed up their statements with convincing arguments, including examples.

Again, Michael, I ask you, what does this have to do with the software problem here?

Note to all: I don't know what is going to happen after making this post, maybe I'll again get a (wrong) message "you have used up your five posts", so in case I can't even edit anymore, apologize beforehand for any uncorrected typos, etc.

Edited December 28, 2009 by Xray

[Alfonso Jones]

Xray -

Do you really not understand what the algorithm does? It has been explained several times.

Yes, the notices you report getting don't seem consistent with what the algorithm does. But hopefully when you get the notice you don't assume everything has suddenly changed again. The algorithm is still there and working as before, I would presume, pending clear evidence to the contrary.

So, for example, if you post at 0100, 0200, 0300, 0400 and 0500 on Monday, you will next be able to post (ONE POST) at 0100 Tuesday. Another post will become possible at 0200 Tuesday, etc... You can always ask "how many posts did I make in the last 24 hours" to determine if you can post. If the answer to "how many" is 5, then you can't post. You have to wait until the answer is 4 or fewer.

I urge you to get over this obsessive fixation with the notices and focus instead on dealing with the root issue: Reform your posting behavior (nature of posts, developing logical argumentation, etc...) so that Michael does not find it essential to limit your posts.

Bill P

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Xray hits this from every angle she can think of and still refuses to see the obvious. (Or she is playing us, which I strongly suspect.) I only skimmed her post, but that's the gist of what I got. It's like a person who shuts her eyes and complains that there is no light.

If she ain't playing folks, she'll just have to live with the way the program works instead of the way she thinks it works and keep saying it is wrong without understanding it, I guess. I'm not going to explain it further. She'll have to do her own thinking, especially this elementary stuff.

I know the elementary stuff makes up the hardest steps for an impaired cognitive faculty. I even empathize with that, but it's something no one can do for another. She will have to start by wanting to see what she is missing. Until that want is greater than her other wants, she will keep her eyes closed. Pushing a desire to see clearly over all other cravings inside yourself is a giant step for anyone with her level of cognitive fogginess.

This really is a beautifully played out microcosm of how some people face reality. They do everything they can imagine to blank out their understanding, then they preach to others (often passionately) that reality is wrong.

Michael

[merjet]

Xray,

Both Bill P and I have said how the software probably applies the "5 per day" limit. Live with it.

There is an easy way to tell if you can post or not before even trying. Click on "Today's Top 20 Posters". If your name appears in the list with 5 under "Posts Today", you can't post. Otherwise, you can.

If you want the messages and some other wording to be fixed, IPS might happily accept your money to fix it. IPS is who licenses the software to Kat and Michael. See the lower right corner of any OL page.

[Alfonso Jones]

Xray hits this from every angle she can think of and still refuses to see the obvious. (Or she is playing us, which I strongly suspect.) I only skimmed her post, but that's the gist of what I got. It's like a person who shuts her eyes and complains that there is no light.

If she ain't playing folks, she'll just have to live with the way the program works instead of the way she thinks it works and keep saying it is wrong without understanding it, I guess. I'm not going to explain it further. She'll have to do her own thinking, especially this elementary stuff.

I know the elementary stuff makes up the hardest steps for an impaired cognitive faculty. I even empathize with that, but it's something no one can do for another. She will have to start by wanting to see what she is missing. Until that want is greater than her other wants, she will keep her eyes closed. Pushing a desire to see clearly over all other cravings inside yourself is a giant step for anyone with her level of cognitive fogginess.

This really is a beautifully played out microcosm of how some people face reality. They do everything they can imagine to blank out their understanding, then they preach to others (often passionately) that reality is wrong.

Michael

Michael -

"How some people face reality" - - - that's quite a phrase to use in description of Xray's behavior.

I would phrase it "how some people avoid facing reality."

Otherwise, I agree with your post.

Bill P

[Brant Gaede]

Xray: Who's been convinced with these "convincing arguments"? That most values are subjective doesn't mean all are. That all values are subjectively valued doesn't make all values subjective. That Ayn Rand may have made a mish-mash of this is another matter. That a very smart man, DF, agrees with you is more understandable than that all you can do is keep repeating yourself because you have no other frame of reference. I admit, btw, my desire to burn you at the stake at la Jeanne d"Arc is only a subjective value preference. Or share that cask of wine in my cellar.

--Brant

I need a match--anybody got a match?

Edited December 28, 2009 by Brant Gaede

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

There is an easy way to tell if you can post or not before even trying. Click on "Today's Top 20 Posters". If your name appears in the list with 5 under "Posts Today", you can't post. Otherwise, you can.

Merlin,

I didn't even realize that this particular function worked the 24 hour calculation way. But I checked and that's the way it worked with my posts and those of another. It says "today," but it includes posts in the count from yesterday within up to 24 hours.

Here is a very clear case where a word ("today") has more than one meaning. It might sound wrong to our everyday usage ears, but it is 100% accurate as used by the geeks who made this program.

"Today" to us means a 24 hour period we are currently in that starts at 12:00:01 AM and ends on 12:00:00 PM.

"Today" to the geeks means a sliding 24 hour unit we are currently in.

I don't care for geek-speak. Never have, although I have learned to speak enough of it (unlike Xray-speak, which I can't seem to get a handle on).

Geek-speak is always accurate and learnable, but to me it is often like an old joke about Microsoft:

A helicopter was flying around above Seattle yesterday when an

electrical malfunction disabled all of the aircraft's electronic

navigation and communication equipment. Due to the clouds and haze

the pilot could not determine his position or course to steer to the

airport. The pilot saw a tall building, flew toward it, circled, drew

a handwritten sign and held it in the helicopter's window. The sign

said "WHERE AM I ?" in large letters.

People in the tall building quickly responded to the aircraft, drew a

large sign and held it in a building window. Their sign said, "YOU

ARE IN A HELICOPTER." The pilot smiled, waved, looked at his map and

determine the course to steer to SEATAC (Seattle/Tacoma) airport and

landed safely.

After they were on the ground, the co-pilot asked the pilot how the

"YOU ARE IN A HELICOPTER" sign helped determine their position. The

pilot responded, "I knew that had to be the MICROSOFT building

because they gave me a technically correct but completely useless

answer."

Michael

[Selene]

Xray: Who's been convinced with these "convincing arguments"? That most values are subjective doesn't mean all are. That all values are subjectively valued doesn't make all values subjective. That Ayn Rand may have made a mish-mash of this is another matter. That a very smart man, DF, agrees with you is more understandable than that all you can do is keep repeating yourself because you have no other frame of reference. I admit, btw, my desire to burn you at the stake at la Jeanne d"Arc is only a subjective value preference. Or share that cask of wine in my cellar.

--Brant

I need a match--anybody got a match?

I just could not resist!

Adam

[Alfonso Jones]

There is an easy way to tell if you can post or not before even trying. Click on "Today's Top 20 Posters". If your name appears in the list with 5 under "Posts Today", you can't post. Otherwise, you can.

Merlin,

I didn't even realize that this particular function worked the 24 hour calculation way. But I checked and that's the way it worked with my posts and those of another. It says "today," but it includes posts in the count from yesterday within up to 24 hours.

Here is a very clear case where a word ("today") has more than one meaning. It might sound wrong to our everyday usage ears, but it is 100% accurate as used by the geeks who made this program.

"Today" to us means a 24 hour period we are currently in that starts at 12:00:01 AM and ends on 12:00:00 PM.

"Today" to the geeks means a sliding 24 hour unit we are currently in.

I don't care for geek-speak. Never have, although I have learned to speak enough of it (unlike Xray-speak, which I can't seem to get a handle on).

Geek-speak is always accurate and learnable, but to me it is often like an old joke about Microsoft:

A helicopter was flying around above Seattle yesterday when an

electrical malfunction disabled all of the aircraft's electronic

navigation and communication equipment. Due to the clouds and haze

the pilot could not determine his position or course to steer to the

airport. The pilot saw a tall building, flew toward it, circled, drew

a handwritten sign and held it in the helicopter's window. The sign

said "WHERE AM I ?" in large letters.

People in the tall building quickly responded to the aircraft, drew a

large sign and held it in a building window. Their sign said, "YOU

ARE IN A HELICOPTER." The pilot smiled, waved, looked at his map and

determine the course to steer to SEATAC (Seattle/Tacoma) airport and

landed safely.

After they were on the ground, the co-pilot asked the pilot how the

"YOU ARE IN A HELICOPTER" sign helped determine their position. The

pilot responded, "I knew that had to be the MICROSOFT building

because they gave me a technically correct but completely useless

answer."

Michael

Yep. I read that old joke (heard several versions before) and smiled. I work with many such people (professor, working with techies/geeks some of the time) and often derive amusement by the peculiarly uselessness of the information. And the fact that the profferer of the information is typically totally unaware that what they are offering is totally useless information.

I'm fairly certain that Ba'al/Bob can relate to this.

Bill P

[Xray]

Xray hits this from every angle she can think of and still refuses to see the obvious. (Or she is playing us, which I strongly suspect.) I only skimmed her post, but that's the gist of what I got. It's like a person who shuts her eyes and complains that there is no light.

If she ain't playing folks, she'll just have to live with the way the program works instead of the way she thinks it works and keep saying it is wrong without understanding it, I guess. I'm not going to explain it further. She'll have to do her own thinking, especially this elementary stuff.

I know the elementary stuff makes up the hardest steps for an impaired cognitive faculty. I even empathize with that, but it's something no one can do for another. She will have to start by wanting to see what she is missing. Until that want is greater than her other wants, she will keep her eyes closed. Pushing a desire to see clearly over all other cravings inside yourself is a giant step for anyone with her level of cognitive fogginess.

This really is a beautifully played out microcosm of how some people face reality. They do everything they can imagine to blank out their understanding, then they preach to others (often passionately) that reality is wrong.

Michael

You said you only skimmed my post alerting you to a problem in the software.

Answer me just one question: how is it that it says immediately before I make a post you can make five posts today, and after I make that one post, I get the message "you have used up your five".

This can't be explained with a 24hour rhythm.

Not only that, I even recall occasions when it announced "you can make 2 more posts until ..." and then it gave the precise time of day (which btw was on the next day in one instance - any 24 hour rhythm is not the problem), but then, when I made one of two, got the message you have used up all five. THAT's the problem. The software saying one thing and then giving a contradictory message. Why is that so hard to grasp? But if you only skim my posts, it looks like you miss this each time. Nor did the 'posts to go' add up with the count I had in the top posters section.

24-hour-rhythm or not, the 'top poster count' has to be in sync with whatever message I get via software on the remainder of posts I can make if the software works. Right or not, Michael?

And a software telling me "You can make 5 more posts today" and then, immediately after I made one, says "you have used up your five" has a glitch. Right or not, Michael?

This has not happened every time, but on several occasions.

This is a beautifully played out microcosm of how some people face reality.

Indeed it is.

For example, having the 'top poster' count aligned in sync with other info on 'posts to go' is required in order to tie info to reality.

MJ: There is an easy way to tell if you can post or not before even trying. Click on "Today's Top 20 Posters". If your name appears in the list with 5 under "Posts Today", you can't post. Otherwise, you can.

The info I got via the top posters section was, on several occasions, not in sync with info I got via other software when I logged in to reply to posts.

For example, if according to the top posters section, I had not yet used up my five (so there was three to go, and the software when I logged in to reply said just that), but after I made one post, it suddenly said "you have used up your five").

The opposite happened as well: yesterday for example, I was listed with "2" already made posts in the top posters sections, and when I logged in to reply, it said "You can make 5 more posts today". The glitches are multiple; I hope it gets fixed soon.

Edited December 29, 2009 by Xray

[Alfonso Jones]

Xray hits this from every angle she can think of and still refuses to see the obvious. (Or she is playing us, which I strongly suspect.) I only skimmed her post, but that's the gist of what I got. It's like a person who shuts her eyes and complains that there is no light.

If she ain't playing folks, she'll just have to live with the way the program works instead of the way she thinks it works and keep saying it is wrong without understanding it, I guess. I'm not going to explain it further. She'll have to do her own thinking, especially this elementary stuff.

I know the elementary stuff makes up the hardest steps for an impaired cognitive faculty. I even empathize with that, but it's something no one can do for another. She will have to start by wanting to see what she is missing. Until that want is greater than her other wants, she will keep her eyes closed. Pushing a desire to see clearly over all other cravings inside yourself is a giant step for anyone with her level of cognitive fogginess.

This really is a beautifully played out microcosm of how some people face reality. They do everything they can imagine to blank out their understanding, then they preach to others (often passionately) that reality is wrong.

Michael

You said you only skimmed my post alerting you to a problem in the software.

Answer me just one question: how is it that it says immediately before I make a post you can make five posts today, and after I make that one post, I get the message "you have used up your five".

This can't be explained with a 24hour rhythm.

Not only that, I even recall occasions when it announced "you can make 2 more posts until ..." and then it gave the precise time of day (which btw was on the next day in one instance - any 24 hour rhythm is not the problem), but then, when I made one of two, got the message you have used up all five. THAT's the problem. The software saying one thing and then giving a contradictory message. Why is that so hard to grasp? But if you only skim my posts, it looks like you miss this each time. Nor did the 'posts to go' add up with the count I had in the top posters section.

24-hour-rhythm or not, the 'top poster count' has to be in sync with whatever message I get via software on the remainder of posts I can make if the software works. Right or not, Michael?

And a software telling me "You can make 5 more posts today" and then, immediately after I made one, says "you have used up your five" has a glitch. Right or not, Michael?

This has not happened every time, but on several occasions.

This is a beautifully played out microcosm of how some people face reality.

Indeed it is.

For example, having the 'top poster' count aligned in sync with other info on 'posts to go' is required in order to tie info to reality.

MJ: There is an easy way to tell if you can post or not before even trying. Click on "Today's Top 20 Posters". If your name appears in the list with 5 under "Posts Today", you can't post. Otherwise, you can.

The info I got via the top posters section was, on several occasions, not in sync with info I got via other software when I logged in to reply to posts.

For example, if according to the top posters section, I had not yet used up my five (so there was three to go, and the software when I logged in to reply said just that), but after I made one post, it suddenly said "you have used up your five").

The opposite happened as well: yesterday for example, I was listed with "2" already made posts in the top posters sections, and when I logged in to reply, it said "You can make 5 more posts today". The glitches are multiple; I hope it gets fixed soon.

It's amazing how well Rand could capture a concept. For instance - - - "crow epistemology." Captures the situation perfectly, I think.

Bill P

[merjet]

I didn't even realize that this particular function worked the 24 hour calculation way. But I checked and that's the way it worked with my posts and those of another. It says "today," but it includes posts in the count from yesterday within up to 24 hours.

Here is a very clear case where a word ("today") has more than one meaning. It might sound wrong to our everyday usage ears, but it is 100% accurate as used by the geeks who made this program.

"Today" to us means a 24 hour period we are currently in that starts at 12:00:01 AM and ends on 12:00:00 PM.

"Today" to the geeks means a sliding 24 hour unit we are currently in.

I don't care for geek-speak. Never have, although I have learned to speak enough of it (unlike Xray-speak, which I can't seem to get a handle on).

I don't know if the second use of "today" is common enough to qualify as geek-speak. I expect it would not be a lot of work to change "today" to "last 24 hours" or similar on a few webpages and messages, but I can also accept IPS considering it very low priority.

Answer me just one question: how is it that it says immediately before I make a post you can make five posts today, and after I make that one post, I get the message "you have used up your five".

This can't be explained with a 24hour rhythm.

Not only that, I even recall occasions when it announced "you can make 2 more posts until ..." and then it gave the precise time of day (which btw was on the next day in one instance - any 24 hour rhythm is not the problem), but then, when I made one of two, got the message you have used up all five. THAT's the problem. The software saying one thing and then giving a contradictory message. Why is that so hard to grasp? But if you only skim my posts, it looks like you miss this each time. Nor did the 'posts to go' add up with the count I had in the top posters section.

24-hour-rhythm or not, the 'top poster count' has to be in sync with whatever message I get via software on the remainder of posts I can make if the software works. Right or not, Michael?

And a software telling me "You can make 5 more posts today" and then, immediately after I made one, says "you have used up your five" has a glitch. Right or not, Michael?

This has not happened every time, but on several occasions.

This is a beautifully played out microcosm of how some people face reality.

Indeed it is.

For example, having the 'top poster' count aligned in sync with other info on 'posts to go' is required in order to tie info to reality.

[snip]

The info I got via the top posters section was, on several occasions, not in sync with info I got via other software when I logged in to reply to posts.

For example, if according to the top posters section, I had not yet used up my five (so there was three to go, and the software when I logged in to reply said just that), but after I made one post, it suddenly said "you have used up your five").

The opposite happened as well: yesterday for example, I was listed with "2" already made posts in the top posters sections, and when I logged in to reply, it said "You can make 5 more posts today". The glitches are multiple; I hope it gets fixed soon.

The above is your hearsay, and we know how accurate your hearsay is about what Ayn Rand said. Like I said earlier, IPS might happily accept your money to fix it.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I feel sorry for Xray.

I wish I didn't, but I do.

I feel sad to feel this...

Michael

[Alfonso Jones]

[

The above is your hearsay, and we know how accurate your hearsay is about what Ayn Rand said. Like I said earlier, IPS might happily accept your money to fix it.

To tie Xray to reality - priceless.

LOL.

Bill P