Autocratic management nursing style

These are the things I learned about residency that I wish I could tell myself as a July intern on wards service. I know many of y’all here will disagree with a few, but this is how I see it. There’s definitely quite a few missing, so y’all fill in what I forgot.

• You earned the right to be here. You’ve proven you can do it so don’t doubt yourself.
• You’re not expected to know everything on day 1. Your job is to show up with a good attitude and ready to work hard.
• Listen to the nurses. Some of these critical care nurses, especially. Ask for their input and don’t brush them off as mere nurses.
• Write things down. Print a list and make check boxes by each patient for what needs to get done that day. There are interns who forget things and interns who write things down.
• The first thing you need to learn is to tell sick from not sick, and that can be tricky at times. Later on you refine that until you see a whole spectrum of how sick a patient is.
• Don’t waste too much time pre-rounding. Brief pertinent exam, ask patient about changes in symptoms, but the highest yield is asking the nurses.
• Call consults before noon if you can. It’s a courtesy to the consultant/their team plus they’re far more likely to be seen that day, avoiding a delay in workup for the patient.
• Your note doesn’t have to be an essay. Keep things simple and don’t get bogged down in eloquent explanations.
• However, document your reasoning well. Especially in tough cases, drop a paragraph about why you’re doing what you’re doing and the patient agrees.
• Auto text or whatever your EMR uses. Make an arsenal of these. Use them for everything. If you have a kind of case you see a lot, template out a note so you make sure you’re documenting all the important stuff in an efficient manner.
• Be cool to your co-interns. Y’all are about to spend the next few years together. Don’t leave them in a lurch or punt to others all the time.
• Call the seniofellow/attending, especially at first. Even if they give you attitude, it’s ultimately their responsibility and they should know that.
• Try to update families daily if you can, especially for your ICU folks.
• Never, ever lie. Even once will destroy your credibility.
• Have a good attitude in a way that refuses to be bullied - don’t take that shit.
• Read all your own images. Then when rads drops a report, read that and see if you can find what they’re describing for every notes finding. It’ll make you a better doctor.
• Get to your new city as early as possible. Do things like car inspection, dentist appointment, vet appointment, etc. before July kicks off.
• Our profession has a high rate of substance abuse. Do what that what you will.
• Sit down with your family and SO and let them know what to expect and try to explain how intense this job is. When there’s a difference between expectation and reality, you have problems. Either way, it’ll strain your relationships.
• Because of this, be deliberate on spending time with your SO/friends/family even if you’re dead tired.
• Wear comfortable shoes
• Scour the hospital for the best restroom. Sometimes having a proper relaxed shit can turn a day around.
• Get to know your chiefs. Go to them with problems earlier rather than later.
• Use every minute of PTO
• Step outside the hospital for a few minute a day when you can. See the sunshine.
• Make friends with the cafeteria staff and they’ll hook you up to no end.
• Make friends with the transporters and techs - they will save you.
• Appreciate the hell out of what PT/OT/SLP do.
• Know how to tell a patient no.
• Pharmacy is your friend - they know things
• If something is emergent, keep calling to follow up. If your crashing patient needs abx, it’s not like some doctor video game where you put the order in STAT and everyone goes rushing. Call down and check the status, let them know it’s needed now.
• Don’t order everything STAT
• Calling people in general gets so much more done and avoids so many headaches.
• You’re going to lose your first patient. Remember how you feel, and make sure you never forget it. You’ll need it later.
• Hang out outside of work, invite the nurses as well.
• Election ‘24 is coming up in November so work is a great place to talk candidly about politics and try to change others’ beliefs /s
• If you’re struggling, reach out to someone.
• Try to get outside on your days off
• It’s not uncommon to end up on an SSRI
• Take the stairs places as much as you can. Cardio and a nice lower body workout.
• Answer pages as they come in. Anything STAT call back the moment you see it. Aim to get back to everyone within 5 minutes if you can.
• Day to night nurse shift change. Wait 30-45 minutes, then go around and talk to the nurse for all your patients. Let them get report and see if they have questions. Explain the plan, agree on when to call you, make sure orders all look good and make sense. We even used to bring candy from the physicians lounge to pass out for this.
• Put the diet order in
• Keep your presentations short and to the point unless someone wants them longer. Know the details, but you don’t have to recite them. You don’t have to say all the exam findings that were normal and not related to the patient’s disease
• Always be prepared to dodge a punch when near a geriatric patient
• Even a 5-10 minute phone call with your loved ones on a frequent basis can do wonders
• Some people are just assholes and you can’t take things personally
• Other people are mad at something else and want to take it out on you.
• Be cool to the med students
• Get good at delivering bad news
• Celebrate delivering good news
• Fuck prior authorizations man
• When calling a consult, have a specific clinical question you need help answering. Know the patient well. Keep the call centered around what you need from them but be ready to provide details if needed. “Dr. X wants you on board” is resident code for “I know it’s bullshit but my attending made me call.”
• Delirium and sundowning are real af. The trick is to get them home.
• Benzos aren’t just “settle down” drugs. It’s like a whisky shot through the vein in the sense that it can also disinhibit people and make wildness worse
• Get to know 1 thing about each patient other than what’s in their chart. What job did they have? What’s their favorite team? Do they have pets? You’ll remember them better when the list is large and it can make the job more rewarding
• If the nurse is worried ALWAYS go to bedside
• If you feel the urge to get a tattoo, do it
• Read everyone’s note each day on your patients
• Case managers and social workers are heroes. Get to know them and work together to get patients proper dispo
• Don’t wear your damn shoes in the call room bed
• Sit down in patient rooms if you can. It shows you’re listening, it’s less intimidating for them, and they’ll tell you more.
• Talk louder to older patients
• Sternal rub like you mean it
• Sit done one day, caffeinate, and do all those stupid compliance modules in a single bolus.
• Never make the same mistake twice
• If things don’t add up, your math is wrong
• Some patients don’t care about their health and won’t look after it after all you do. That’s just the gig.
• If something adverse for residents goes into place on a “temporary” basis, it never goes back the other way. Fight for your rights.
• You’re not crazy - the patient always tells the attending something completely different or remembers some important detail. We get it.
• Have a good comfort show to stream when you come home half dead.
• Trust but verify (that’s actually a Russian proverb Reagan borrowed when speaking about the USSR)
• Remember to love it more than you hate it. Find a way to make it fun. They say it’s the best time you never want to have again. You get to save and improve human lives. There’s no greater calling in the world than that.

In our latest blog post, Lazarina Stoy split apart the data storytelling process into simple steps. She shared real-world examples and practical tips for avoiding common pitfalls and creating stories that resonate with your audience. We brought you key takeaways from the article, but don't hesitate to read the entire thing.
Key components of a data story include the setup, conflict, and resolution
The Setup paints a picture of the current situation. The Conflict comprises any event that changes this reality and disrupts the status quo. The Resolution is the new reality emerging from the conflict that you can derive actionable insights from.
Data storytelling is a technique that combines various skills
It includes data science, data visualization, relationship management, and narrative skills to communicate data insights and drive action.
Identify the perfect story by monitoring meaningful events
There is almost always a story to tell around the SEO data you work with. Major updates, Google’s new features, and other changes can all largely impact your website’s performance, providing interesting stories to discuss about your SEO data.
Know your audience and focus on the metrics they care about most
Different audiences require different reporting styles. Know who your audience is and tell stories with the metrics that matter most to them. For instance, team members or project managers generally need reports that are more detailed and packed with tactical insights. For C-level individuals, you should emphasize higher-level strategies, KPIs, and business impact.
Create an unbiased data story
Creating fact-based SEO reports is essential for gaining and retaining client trust. One common mistake is to craft narratives that are more appealing than factual. For instance, some companies have been too quick to integrate generative AI and ChatGPT into their SEO strategies. Some even made the mistake of replacing their content teams with AI without solid evidence of its effectiveness. Exaggerated assertions about the capabilities of generative AI led to subpar content quality.
Build a story around one central insight or “protagonist” metric
Focus on one key insight or "protagonist" metric that resonates with your client's emotions and goals to craft a story that captivates and motivates them to take action.
Deliver SEO data story effectively by providing context and benchmarks
SEO doesn't happen in a bubble. Context matters. Provide this context during one-on-one coaching sessions, in report documentation, and even in emails prior to your presentations.
Use clear language, choose the right visualizations and colors, suggest next steps, and encourage discussion through live story broadcasting
Simplify the data to make it easy for your audience to spot patterns and insights. Clarify, don’t confuse (or even worse – offend) your audience. Make your data actionable by assisting your audience in understanding how to use this information to achieve their goals.
Practice data storytelling skills with diverse resources
Becoming a data storytelling pro takes time and effort. That’s why we created this list full of helpful points.

Hi!
I am quite new into illustrator and I am trying to improve my skills to the next level when creating avatars so I was wondering how you manage to simulate gradients and more realistic shadows in Illustrator instead of creating new shapes with transparency, etc that makes it look more cartoon style?
As far as I know gradients and effects are not allowed when using SVG.
Any tips you can provide to a newbie like me?

Hello! Just wondering if anyone else has had a similar experience to us or has any advice for things we can try.
Baby is about to turn 9 months. We’ve been doing 2 meals a day for a couple of months. We do blw and purées.
He’s not super into solids. Sometimes he’ll attempt to eat (still spits a lot out or throws up quite a lot of the time), sometimes plays, often just ignores! I know that’s all normal.
However, baby is allergic to eggs and dairy and needs to be eating an ‘age appropriate amount’ of a muffin every day. This is a huge struggle. So far, he’s had a grain sized amount at best.
We’ve tried: - blw style (no interest as of yet. Barely touched) and modelling eating them - putting with a purée on a spoon (some success but not consistent) - having some on a finger (no thank you mum, what the heck is that??) - putting crumbs in some water in a cup - various times of day / after nursing
Between this bloody muffin and the doctor’s advice that he needs to be regularly eating all allergens… I’m quite stressed 😅
Any tips / advice / suggestions??

I worked at a call center of nurses to give advice on whether the caller needed to go to the ER, GP, manage symptoms at home etcetera. As it's health advice it's crucial to document everything, because if someone was for example instructed to stay at home while exhibiting clear stroke symptoms, we'd be responsible.
Well, a new manager was hired above our own "floor" manager to increase productivity as the number of calls increased rapidly (beginning of covid). She felt it was necessary to reduce the time we spent on finishing on documenting after the call had ended. In addition to medical records, we had to fill out a short questionnaire about each call to monitor the reasons people call us (internal purposes, not really my expertise). So, it obviously took a while. Average time I think was around 3 minutes after each call.
The new manager informed us that 90 seconds was going to be enough and she had asked the IT department to make the program push us a new call after those 90 seconds whether we were ready or not. The call would ring (loudly, first on headphones and after 10 seconds on the computer's sound system), new patient information screen popped up, everything unfinished was pushed to the back and we had to either decline the call (only allowed in emergencies) or let it ring and try and work over the ringing which could not be muted.
It was horrible, the noise was unbearable and just in a few hours we workers complained so much that the new manager just told us to take the new call and finish up the old one while talking to the new patient.
Cue malicious compliance.
Patient information law (similar to HIPAA in the US) violations here we come, having two patients' info up at the same time, trying to figure out why the latter called and wrapping up the previous one. How many documentations were written on the wrong patient's records?
We tried. It was even worse than before. It took us about an hour to realize it would never work and so we took the new call, asked them to wait for a second, muted the call and finished up the previous one. The customers were not happy, but us workers gladly directed them to avenues to give feedback through.
The company got so many bad reviews and online complaints in the first six hours that they had to regroup and stay late on that Monday evening to undo everything. We went back to normal on Tuesday, 2 hours later than we should have opened, due to reprogramming. The new manager was with us less than three months, don't miss her a bit.
I had the most chaotic, head ache inducing 8,5 hours of my life that day, still have nightmares of that ringtone.

Hello! Just wondering if anyone else has had a similar experience to us or has any advice for things we can try.
Baby is about to turn 9 months. We’ve been doing 2 meals a day for a couple of months. We do blw and purées.
He’s not super into solids. Sometimes he’ll attempt to eat (still spits a lot out or throws up quite a lot of the time), sometimes plays, often just ignores! I know that’s all normal.
However, baby is allergic to eggs and dairy and needs to be eating an ‘age appropriate amount’ of a muffin every day. This is a huge struggle. So far, he’s had a grain sized amount at best.
We’ve tried: - blw style (no interest as of yet. Barely touched) and modelling eating them - putting with a purée on a spoon (some success but not consistent) - having some on a finger (no thank you mum, what the heck is that??) - putting crumbs in some water in a cup - various times of day / after nursing
Between this bloody muffin and the doctor’s advice that he needs to be regularly eating all allergens… I’m quite stressed 😅
Any tips / advice / suggestions??

Hi there,
I try to create a bot that is sending me simple alert when STC indicator do a color change. I think it will help me to understand and create my STC tradingbot, that im trying to write with chatgpt too.
I believe its all about that chatgpt isnt able to write as condition the STC indicator colorchange. Chatgpt cant write that as condition. Can someone explain me how to write this STC colorchange as condition?
Maybe that is the answer of everything. I managed chatgpt writing Heikin ashi candles right. He everytime write it wrong. I found the right code somewhere so im not totally useless.

//@version=5 indicator("STC Alert", overlay=true) // 200er EMA ema200 = ta.ema(close, 200) // Heikin-Ashi Kerzen berechnen heikinashi_open = request.security(ticker.heikinashi(syminfo.tickerid), timeframe.period, open) heikinashi_high = request.security(ticker.heikinashi(syminfo.tickerid), timeframe.period, high) heikinashi_low = request.security(ticker.heikinashi(syminfo.tickerid), timeframe.period, low) heikinashi_close = request.security(ticker.heikinashi(syminfo.tickerid), timeframe.period, close) // STC Indicator basierend auf normalen Kerzen stc_k = ta.stoch(close, high, low, 14) stc_d = ta.sma(stc_k, 3) // Farbwechsel-Bedingung var float last_stc_signal = na var int stc_signal_time = na stc_signal = (stc_k > stc_d ? 1 : (stc_k < stc_d ? -1 : 0)) if (stc_signal != last_stc_signal) last_stc_signal := stc_signal stc_signal_time := timenow stc_signal_valid = (timenow - stc_signal_time) <= 600000 // 600000 ms = 10 Minuten stc_is_extreme = (stc_k > 80 or stc_k < 20) // Bedingungen für Long und Short long_condition = (heikinashi_close > ema200) and (stc_k < 20) and (stc_signal == 1) and stc_signal_valid short_condition = (heikinashi_close < ema200) and (stc_k > 80) and (stc_signal == -1) and stc_signal_valid // Alarmbedingungen mit Labels if (long_condition and stc_is_extreme) alert("Long Entry Signal", alert.freq_once_per_bar) label.new(bar_index, heikinashi_low, "Long Signal", style=label.style_label_up, color=color.green, textcolor=color.white) if (short_condition and stc_is_extreme) alert("Short Entry Signal", alert.freq_once_per_bar) label.new(bar_index, heikinashi_high, "Short Signal", style=label.style_label_down, color=color.red, textcolor=color.white) // Plotten der 200er EMA plot(ema200, title="200 EMA", color=color.blue, linewidth=2) 

GOOOOOOOOOOD MORNING SUPERSTONKERS! HAHA. It's me again. Yeah, i slipped past the defenses again to drop this off so you can all refresh yourselves on the state of FUD and disinformation in this protracted fight against the legal larcenists doing their best to try and get you to sell. Please spread this amongst the holders, the more people know the less power they have over us holders. We don't sell until we get a call from marge, and that's always been the play.
TLDR: This is a set of tactics used by the Alphabet Boys(CIA, FBI, DEA) to control and manipulate us into drama to collapse our communities and movements. And should be read in full by anyone willing and wanting to learn how these things work.
I've come to notice recently, people keep asking me to repost this for the sake of keeping the new people abreast on what needs to be done to protect the holders of GME. Beneath here will be a detailed account on what you need to be aware of in your online interactions, to avoid being taken for a fool!
_______________________________________________________________________

1. COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum
2. Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
3. Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
4. How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
5. Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

_______________________________________________________________________
COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum..
There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a 'uncontrolled forum.'
Technique #1 - 'FORUM SLIDING'
If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by 'forum sliding.' In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to 'age.' Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a 'forum slide.' The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a 'forum slide' and 'flush' the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then 'replying' to prepositioned postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting 'slides' down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.
Technique #2 - 'CONSENSUS CRACKING'
A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at www.abovetopsecret.com
) is 'consensus cracking.' To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favor is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger 'evidence' or disinformation in your favor is slowly 'seeded in.' Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then 'abort' the consensus cracking by initiating a 'forum slide.'
Technique #3 - 'TOPIC DILUTION'
Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.
Technique #4 - 'INFORMATION COLLECTION'
Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a 'show you mine so me yours' posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your 'favorite weapon' and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favorite 'technique of operation.' From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.
Technique #5 - 'ANGER TROLLING'
Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to 'stage' a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to 'lead' the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you 'do not care what the authorities think!!' inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.
Technique #6 - 'GAINING FULL CONTROL'
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the 'ultimate victory' as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a 'honey pot' gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.
CONCLUSION
Remember these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must be considered such as initiating a false legal precidence to simply have the forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share then with HQ.
_______________________________________________________________________
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.
_______________________________________________________________________
Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.
4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain. Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial.
Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo.
With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.
7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.
I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.
8) Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:
a) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT - FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.
b) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR - there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to 'get permission' or instruction from a formal chain of command.
c) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay - the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.
_______________________________________________________________________
How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
One way to neutralize a potential activist is to get them to be in a group that does all the wrong things. Why?
1) The message doesn't get out.
2) A lot of time is wasted
3) The activist is frustrated and discouraged
4) Nothing good is accomplished.
FBI and Police Informers and Infiltrators will infest any group and they have phoney activist organizations established.
Their purpose is to prevent any real movement for justice or eco-peace from developing in this country.
Agents come in small, medium or large. They can be of any ethnic background. They can be male or female.
The actual size of the group or movement being infiltrated is irrelevant. It is the potential the movement has for becoming large which brings on the spies and saboteurs.
This booklet lists tactics agents use to slow things down, foul things up, destroy the movement and keep tabs on activists.
It is the agent's job to keep the activist from quitting such a group, thus keeping him/her under control.
In some situations, to get control, the agent will tell the activist:

• "You're dividing the movement."

[Here, I have added the psychological reasons as to WHY this maneuver works to control people]
This invites guilty feelings. Many people can be controlled by guilt. The agents begin relationships with activists behind a well-developed mask of "dedication to the cause." Because of their often declared dedication, (and actions designed to prove this), when they criticize the activist, he or she - being truly dedicated to the movement - becomes convinced that somehow, any issues are THEIR fault. This is because a truly dedicated person tends to believe that everyone has a conscience and that nobody would dissimulate and lie like that "on purpose." It's amazing how far agents can go in manipulating an activist because the activist will constantly make excuses for the agent who regularly declares their dedication to the cause. Even if they do, occasionally, suspect the agent, they will pull the wool over their own eyes by rationalizing: "they did that unconsciously... they didn't really mean it... I can help them by being forgiving and accepting " and so on and so forth.
The agent will tell the activist:

• "You're a leader!"

This is designed to enhance the activist's self-esteem. His or her narcissistic admiration of his/her own activist/altruistic intentions increase as he or she identifies with and consciously admires the altruistic declarations of the agent which are deliberately set up to mirror those of the activist.
This is "malignant pseudo identification." It is the process by which the agent consciously imitates or simulates a certain behavior to foster the activist's identification with him/her, thus increasing the activist's vulnerability to exploitation. The agent will simulate the more subtle self-concepts of the activist.
Activists and those who have altruistic self-concepts are most vulnerable to malignant pseudo identification especially during work with the agent when the interaction includes matter relating to their competency, autonomy, or knowledge.
The goal of the agent is to increase the activist's general empathy for the agent through pseudo-identification with the activist's self-concepts.
The most common example of this is the agent who will compliment the activist for his competency or knowledge or value to the movement. On a more subtle level, the agent will simulate affects and mannerisms of the activist which promotes identification via mirroring and feelings of "twinship". It is not unheard of for activists, enamored by the perceived helpfulness and competence of a good agent, to find themselves considering ethical violations and perhaps, even illegal behavior, in the service of their agent/handler.
The activist's "felt quality of perfection" [self-concept] is enhanced, and a strong empathic bond is developed with the agent through his/her imitation and simulation of the victim's own narcissistic investments. [self-concepts] That is, if the activist knows, deep inside, their own dedication to the cause, they will project that onto the agent who is "mirroring" them.
The activist will be deluded into thinking that the agent shares this feeling of identification and bonding. In an activist/social movement setting, the adversarial roles that activists naturally play vis a vis the establishment/government, fosters ongoing processes of intrapsychic splitting so that "twinship alliances" between activist and agent may render whole sectors or reality testing unavailable to the activist. They literally "lose touch with reality."
Activists who deny their own narcissistic investments [do not have a good idea of their own self-concepts and that they ARE concepts] and consciously perceive themselves (accurately, as it were) to be "helpers" endowed with a special amount of altruism are exceedingly vulnerable to the affective (emotional) simulation of the accomplished agent.
Empathy is fostered in the activist through the expression of quite visible affects. The presentation of tearfulness, sadness, longing, fear, remorse, and guilt, may induce in the helper-oriented activist a strong sense of compassion, while unconsciously enhancing the activist's narcissistic investment in self as the embodiment of goodness.
The agent's expresssion of such simulated affects may be quite compelling to the observer and difficult to distinguish from deep emotion.
It can usually be identified by two events, however:
First, the activist who has analyzed his/her own narcissistic roots and is aware of his/her own potential for being "emotionally hooked," will be able to remain cool and unaffected by such emotional outpourings by the agent.
As a result of this unaffected, cool, attitude, the Second event will occur: The agent will recompensate much too quickly following such an affective expression leaving the activist with the impression that "the play has ended, the curtain has fallen," and the imposture, for the moment, has finished. The agent will then move quickly to another activist/victim.
The fact is, the movement doesn't need leaders, it needs MOVERS. "Follow the leader" is a waste of time.
A good agent will want to meet as often as possible. He or she will talk a lot and say little. One can expect an onslaught of long, unresolved discussions.
Some agents take on a pushy, arrogant, or defensive manner:
1) To disrupt the agenda
2) To side-track the discussion
3) To interrupt repeatedly
4) To feign ignorance
5) To make an unfounded accusation against a person.
Calling someone a racist, for example. This tactic is used to discredit a person in the eyes of all other group members.
Saboteurs
Some saboteurs pretend to be activists. She or he will ....
1) Write encyclopedic flyers (in the present day, websites)
2) Print flyers in English only.
3) Have demonstrations in places where no one cares.
4) Solicit funding from rich people instead of grass roots support
5) Display banners with too many words that are confusing.
6) Confuse issues.
7) Make the wrong demands.
8) Compromise the goal.
9) Have endless discussions that waste everyone's time. The agent may accompany the endless discussions with drinking, pot smoking or other amusement to slow down the activist's work.
Provocateurs
1) Want to establish "leaders" to set them up for a fall in order to stop the movement.
2) Suggest doing foolish, illegal things to get the activists in trouble.
3) Encourage militancy.
4) Want to taunt the authorities.
5) Attempt to make the activist compromise their values.
6) Attempt to instigate violence. Activism ought to always be non-violent.
7) Attempt to provoke revolt among people who are ill-prepared to deal with the reaction of the authorities to such violence.
Informants
1) Want everyone to sign up and sing in and sign everything.
2) Ask a lot of questions (gathering data).
3) Want to know what events the activist is planning to attend.
4) Attempt to make the activist defend him or herself to identify his or her beliefs, goals, and level of commitment.
Recruiting
Legitimate activists do not subject people to hours of persuasive dialog. Their actions, beliefs, and goals speak for themselves.
Groups that DO recruit are missionaries, military, and fake political parties or movements set up by agents.
Surveillance
ALWAYS assume that you are under surveillance.
At this point, if you are NOT under surveillance, you are not a very good activist!
Scare Tactics
They use them.
Such tactics include slander, defamation, threats, getting close to disaffected or minimally committed fellow activists to persuade them (via psychological tactics described above) to turn against the movement and give false testimony against their former compatriots. They will plant illegal substances on the activist and set up an arrest; they will plant false information and set up "exposure," they will send incriminating letters [emails] in the name of the activist; and more; they will do whatever society will allow.
This booklet in no way covers all the ways agents use to sabotage the lives of sincere an dedicated activists.
If an agent is "exposed," he or she will be transferred or replaced.
COINTELPRO is still in operation today under a different code name. It is no longer placed on paper where it can be discovered through the freedom of information act.
The FBI counterintelligence program's stated purpose: To expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, and otherwise neutralize individuals who the FBI categorize as opposed to the National Interests. "National Security" means the FBI's security from the people ever finding out the vicious things it does in violation of people's civil liberties.
_______________________________________________________________________
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.
1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.
2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "How dare you?" gambit.
3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors." (If they tend to believe the "rumors" it must be because they are simply "paranoid" or "hysterical.")
4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nutcase," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and, of course, "rumor monger." Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the "more reasonable" government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to shoot down.
6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).
7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
9. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hangout route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.
10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If evidence exists that the Vince Foster "suicide" note was forged, they would have reported it. They haven't reported it so there is no such evidence. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press who would report the leak.
12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. E.g. If Foster was murdered, who did it and why?
13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing distractions.
14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as "bump and run" reporting.
15. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the "facts" furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.
16. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges "expose" scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.
17. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, "What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?" Don t the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.

My friend was diagnosed with a rare endocrine cancer and is dealing with a significant amount of mental health issues coming with the territory of having a stage four cancer… anxiety/depression, body image issues, financial stress, navigating the healthcare system stress, symptoms keeping her from going to work. She’s a nurse. She was never referred to a psychiatrist that specializes in cancer. Does anyone have any recommendations within the Portland/Vancouver area, providence insurance. Her oncologist/case manager haven’t been very helpful.

After being in a relationship with two pwBPD (yes I know lol), one relationship lasting two years and the other lasting a month, and reading through this sub, I notice a lot of pwBPD using therapy speak as a way to justify their abusive/wrong behavior. I think there is a time and place for “therapy speak”.. and that is AT THERAPY. They have also used their therapist as a way to escape accountability— example being “Oh my therapist said you need to ___” etc.
In my recent month of dating my exBpd, the final argument was when I didn’t heart her instagram story one time, after a build up of arguments over her not liking an inside joke we both have, and her being upset for me calling out her talking about her exes too much, and many other things. Im not sure what she wanted from the conversation (its in my post history) but I wasnt validating her enough and she said it was degrading.
Important context: I am autistic. She knows this and honestly brought it up DAILY. As an autistic person (diagnosed last year), being bombarded with long, emotionally charged paragraphs is overwhelming and draining.
My ex would romanticize? me being autistic, saying its “stoic and mysterious”.. but never held actual space for the things I experience and when I act authentically autistic she says i am not communicating well or Im being like a “cold vault”. Even though she made my autism my entire identity, as she did with her adhd and bpd.
I was expected daily to essentially "mind-read" and manage her long emotional outbursts, that were disguised in a “mature” way, using therapy speak, written like a letter to H.R, overuse of the words “boundaries” and “anxious/avoidant attatchment” , Me not wanting to deeply delve into a wall of texts back and forth for days on end about how me forgetting to like her story meant to her that i was “stonewalling” and “avoiding” and “not communicating” and she “doesnt deserve this treatment”. I communicated quite clearly and shortly while sticking to my boundaries and this upset her. She’d say “But you’re so emotionally intelligent, why arent you communicating with me?”
People who aren't truly committed to growth and healing honestly use these words /terms as a smokescreen to avoid taking responsibility for their own actions. It's a lot easier to say that you're "all about growth and healing and communication" than it is to actually do the hard work of examining your own behavior and making meaningful changes and having empathy for others. She also was not in therapy so its strange. My ex often asked me to “think for her” and work her through HER emotions like a therapist, and if i declined I was “stone walling”
Ive noticed this epidemic not just in bpd relationships but its the point where misuse/abuse of terms like “boundaries, attachment style,gaslighting,” and very long messages airing out your entire stream of consciousness to your partner has caused me an extreme burn out and become a bit of a red flag to me.
Im interested in anyone else’s experiences with this. Also if anyone else had to deeply delve into deep talks with them daily?

Well i've already been typed as infp 6w7 but I've recently been pondering whether it's really something that fits me so I wanted to get other people's opinions on my typing.
• How old are you? What's your gender? Give us a general description of yourself.
— I'm 19 years old and identify as non-binary (he/they pronouns). I am extremely extra, I am eccentric, I love alternative styles, I love arts in all its forms, I am extremely sentimental, I can be considered strange to many, I talk too much, I seem extroverted around introverts and I seem introverted around other extroverts, I get tired easily in social situations, so I always prefer to talk more via cell phone or computer. I'm very extreme and I can end up feeling very angry, very happy or very sad out of nowhere, I usually try to be kind but I can be rude or insensitive if I'm very angry, I'm a person who really likes to fight for causes aimed at minorities since I'm from several minority groups, I hate injustice, I'm very stubborn and I don't like being contradicted while I always try to be someone who takes various arguments into account.
• Is there a medical diagnosis that may impact your mental stability somehow?
— I'm autistic, adhd, i have gad (generalized anxiety disorder) and i might also have depression.
• Describe your upbringing. Did it have any kind of religious or structured influence? How did you respond to it?
— I grew up in a Christian family, which hurt me a lot when I got older since my family's religion is against my existence as a queer person, and it took them a long time to admit that I needed psychological help and things like that. It's difficult to leave my roots but in the end I ended up stopping believing in my parents' religion after everything I went through.
• What do you do as a job or as a career (if you have one)? Do you like it? Why or why not?
— I'm studying animation design at college, it's one of my passions and I really enjoy learning about the topics, I just hate the structure of taking exams and tests.
• If you had to spend an entire weekend by yourself, how would you feel? Would you feel lonely or refreshed?
— I would feel crazy, insane. I need the company of some people close to me to regulate myself and talk about things I like, being alone makes me feel empty and strange. So yeah i would feel lonely.
• What kinds of activities do you prefer? Do you like, and are you good at sports? Do you enjoy any other outdoor or indoor activities?
— I'm terrible at sports and I hate them, my motor coordination is horrible. I prefer indoor activities because there is less chance of me overloading myself with something (example: feeling unwell because of the sun, heat, etc.)
• How curious are you? Do you have more ideas then you can execute? What are your curiosities about? What are your ideas about - is it environmental or conceptual, and can you please elaborate?
— I'm very curious, I love discovering new things, I have a lot of ideas at terrible times (in the middle of the night) and I really end up getting disorganized with the amount of things I think about. My ideas and curiosity are generally focused on creative processes like creating characters, universes, stories, but it can also simply be focused on a topic of interest to me (hyperfocuses / special interests). These are things that end up being more of a concept because I'm terrible at executing my ideas.
• Would you enjoy taking on a leadership position? Do you think you would be good at it? What would your leadership style be?
— I don't like being the leader of projects and things like that for the simple fact that I'm not good at handling responsibilities, so I prefer to just execute some order, my problem is that I also really like doing things MY way so it's a bit contradictory. However, in the moments when I have had to be a leader (I was forced to since my colleagues didn't want to do anything) I haven't been a bad leader, I research the project topics and let people choose their topics to present.
• Are you coordinated? Why do you feel as if you are or are not? Do you enjoy working with your hands in some form? Describe your activity?
— I'm not good at being organized or at things that involve motor coordination. For example, it took me decades to be able to tie my shoe laces, know which direction is right or left and I keep forgetting important dates. I don't like using my hands to do activities because they shake a lot and so I'm always horrible at things that involve using my hands. The only things I think I'm good at are playing games and drawing, and even then, drawing is an extreme challenge since I always put a lot of pressure on the pencil when I'm drawing or writing.
• Are you artistic? If yes, describe your art? If you are not particular artistic but can appreciate art please likewise describe what forums of art you enjoy. Please explain your answer.
— Yes, art is something that I have loved since I was young because of the fact that I can express my creativity, ideas and feelings. I've always been passionate about cartoons so my drawing style is very cartoony. I really like seeing fanart from media that I love, but I also love seeing old paintings, especially from Roman and Greek times. I not only like drawing and painting, but I also love art in general. I love cinema, theater, books, sculptures, etc. One day I want to know how to write very well and be able to make books or even draw well enough to be able to make a cartoon. I want to be able to share the comfort I experience by seeing art that makes me feel happy and represented by doing something that also makes people happy through my art.
• What's your opinion about the past, present, and future? How do you deal with them?
— I have some regrets from the past, but in general I was more "normal" and happy back then, I wouldn't change anything because I follow the idea that my mistakes and successes made me who I am today. As for my present, I try to make the most of it but I'm not going to lie that I'm not a big fan of my current state, I feel a bit useless and very behind compared to most people I know my age so I end up preferring to think more about the future and how things will get better later. At the same time that I really appreciate some current moments of my present, like being able to play with my girlfriend most days, this makes me very happy.
• How do you act when others request your help to do something (anything)? If you would decide to help them, why would you do so?
— I like helping people, sometimes I even try to help people who didn't ask for my help if they are people I really like (I may end up being seen as inconvenient because of this). I always want to be able to help everyone, but currently because of my mood I may end up not being very helpful as my mental health is not the best, even so, I always try to be very patient and friendly with people who are going through difficult times, even when sometimes I just want to be left alone and I'm not in the mood to help anyone, especially because I know what it's like to be in a bad place and i don't want people to feel rejected.
• Do you need logical consistency in your life?
— I'm very sentimental and I often don't think very logically BUT in arguments and other serious situations I need people to use logic and proven arguments just like i do in those situations so that the debate or serious situation isn't just a bunch of nonsense. I am a sentimental person, but to develop some thought, I need logical arguments
• How important is efficiency and productivity to you?
— In general, I think it's very important, but I personally can't be productive and efficient since I have a lot of executive dysfunction. I KNOW it's important but I can't be like that.
• Do you control others, even if indirectly? How and why do you do that?
— I like things to be my way but I don't really think I control people? I always impose my opinions a lot but I don't really control people.
• What are your hobbies? Why do you like them?
— I like games, reading books, role-playing, drawing and even trying to write books. I really like fantasy things. It seems more fun than my reality and I like to distract myself from real life things.
• What is your learning style? What kind of learning environments do you struggle with most? Why do you like/struggle with these learning styles? Do you prefer classes involving memorization, logic, creativity, or your physical senses?
— I like learning things when they involve what I like or at least are more interactive and I hate math, chemistry and physics btw. I have a lot of difficulty with classes in subjects that require a lot of memorization, I prefer things that are relative and interpretative like arts and literature and I really like classes that involve creativity. I also hate classes where the teacher just talks and talks and talks and doesn't do anything interactive and fun. I generally prefer to study at home for very short periods of time because I learn easier alone and study very briefly because I have difficulty studying for long periods of time.
• How good are you at strategizing? Do you easily break up projects into manageable tasks? Or do you have a tendency to wing projects and improvise as you go?
— I'm terrible at planning things, I usually do things at the last minute and I improvise a lot.
• What are your aspirations in life, professionally and personally?
— I think I get a lot of inspiration from artists I like, such as Rebecca Sugar, Tyler Joseph and others. They are very creative people who do things that I really like (I love Steven Universe, which Rebecca Sugar created, and I love Twenty One Pilots, which is the band where Tyler Joseph is the lead singer).
• What are your fears? What makes you uncomfortable? What do you hate? Why?
— My biggest fears are being alone, because it's scary not having anyone who understands you and who supports you and loves you, and being a burden to the people I love, because I don't want to be an extremely dependent and useless person and disappoint the people I love.
• What do the "highs" in your life look like?
— These are the days when I feel excited to do things and I can be productive doing everything I need in my routine as well as doing my hobbies and being able to relax.
• What do the "lows" in your life look like?
— These are the days when I feel sad, empty and discouraged, I can't do my routine tasks and I force myself to do them anyway in an extremely bad mood, my hobbies may even distract me on those days but it will be a strange feeling as if I'm not really excited to do what I like and I'm just distracting myself from my problems.
• How attached are you to reality? Do you daydream often, or do you pay attention to what's around you? If you do daydream, are you aware of your surroundings while you do so?
— Ah, I don't have much attachment to reality and I prefer fantasy things, I constantly get caught up in my own thoughts and I prefer to create happy fantasy situations so I don't deal with my real problems. I'm also pretty distracted in general so regardless of whether I'm fantasizing or not I end up missing a lot of details and dissociating
• Imagine you are alone in a blank, empty room. There is nothing for you to do and no one to talk to. What do you think about?
— I would probably try to distract myself by thinking about things I like or talking to myself, depending on if the day was bad I would eventually end up thinking a lot about my personal problems and becoming depressed.
• How long do you take to make an important decision? And do you change your mind once you've made it?
— I'm very slow and indecisive when it comes to choosing things, I always want to gather as much information about each option in my mind or by researching on the internet about it and then I always end up between multiple options and changing my mind several times until I arrive at a concrete result.
• How long do you take to process your emotions? How important are emotions in your life?
— Some of my emotions may be processed much later than they should have been processed or simply be different from what people usually have. For example, I'm not very good at dealing with grief and I end up not showing the sadness that my other relatives do, but generally I feel my emotions in a very extreme and volatile way. I feel happy for very silly things and when I'm happy I'm VERY HAPPY and I get sad very easily and when I get sad I get VERY SAD.
• Do you ever catch yourself agreeing with others just to appease them and keep the conversation going? How often? Why?
— Yes. I really like demonstrating my opinions and being authentic, it's a very important thing for me, but even so, I sometimes end up just remaining silent or agreeing with something that I don't really agree with because I'm too afraid of being hated and I generally want everyone to like me, even people I'm not very close to. However, I can also be a person with very strong opinions and be very stubborn about what I believe in if it is something linked to social issues or linked to things that I REALLY like.
• Do you break rules often? Do you think authority should be challenged, or that they know better? If you do break rules, why?
— I break rules that I believe don't make sense, if it's something that I think makes sense I'll follow that rule, but if it's stupid and I don't understand why I have to follow it I'll probably break the rule. I've also never been a person who understands authorities, for me anyone has the right to question something if it's not a useful or logical rule. I agree that rules are important but that they can be adapted, eliminated and added if necessary for people.

Where to even start with this one. I promise you it’s not even what you think.
My Dad has been ill for many years with a condition that is now finally stable. He’s had a couple of horrible other conditions running alongside the original, one of which was pretty damn gruesome and still gives me PTSD dreams. There were a fair few surprise trips to the emergency room to get that one under wraps but we managed to get it settled down with the correct medication.
He was generally fine day-to-day, but anything serious that needed to be dealt with he struggled with which left me managing all his medical correspondence and financial affairs went through me for the past 5 or 6 years since he couldn’t mentally cope with any of it and there was me who could step in for him other than the nurses who still attend his house once a day even now since he can’t manage his own medication.
We had quite a good relationship, he’d come over for coffee and chats and would watch silly TV with me, show interest in my life and included me in his hobbies. We spoke a lot on the phone and things generally ticked along quite nicely in between medical problems.
Enter: The girlfriend.
I’ll start by saying I’m not in any way opposed to him having a girlfriend or partner at all. I even helped him do online dating for a little bit since he felt he wanted to get back on the scene after recovering. He met his now girlfriend through friends and ever since she’s been around him things have been off between us. She was living with her long term ex partner and was seeing my Dad at the same time, before leaving him and moving in “unofficially” with my Dad.
I expressed concerns about this situation and have been branded the bad guy, and am being seen as “attacking” him and having a problem with her. I’ve never met this woman. How could I dislike someone I’ve never met? I’m morally opposed to cheating and felt it was my right to say I didn’t agree but I have never once said I had anything against his actual girlfriend, only the decisions she’s made. I tried to be tactical and gentle in my approach as well but this was met with defensiveness and aggression.
I’ve spent the last few years trying my best to help him and sometimes making myself ill with stress because I love and care about him. He’s my Dad.
But now he doesn’t call, only tells me selective information about what he’s doing and has basically moved his girlfriend in full time after about 2 months, they’ve also booked various vacations together and he seems to be spending far more money than he has.
I feel like he has explicitly made it clear he no longer wants my help with anything and is no longer interested in my life. He no longer welcomes me into his life.
How do I get my own life back after I’ve spent so many years tending to his? I’ve had to abandon my hobbies since I had to be on call for him and make room in my life to help in his medical emergencies. I live nearby in case he needs my help, but I now find myself in a place where I’ve gone from being “on call” to no longer needed in less than a couple of months.
How do I adjust to this and rediscover who I am outside of all this mess, so so can start living for myself again?
TL;DR: I spent many years caring for my ill father who struggled with medication and treatment. I did my best and we became close and talked a lot. Now he has a new girlfriend who he has moved in after 2 months and he’s pretty much stopped talking to me. How do I adjust to this jarring change in my life?

I've browsed many posts on this subreddit and found some valuable information but still have some questions. I'm a recent grad looking for a job in CA (unableto move out of state). My dream since childhood is NICU although I know odds are against me starting out here as a CA new grad. I'd be happy to start in pediatrics, L&D, or postpartum. I've taken neonatal resuscitation on my own to try and show my commitment, I have a bachelor's in biology (not sure if this is even relevant or helpful), I'm a certified doula, but not other real work experience in these departments. I've put a handful of applications in over the last few days including one to a position in L&D specifically advertised as a new grad position. My main queation is how long should I wait to hear back before checking on my application. And when I do check on my application who do I contact? How do I find the nurse manager or HR that I should be contacting? I'm so anxious to start working and even more anxious after reading how long it took some people to get employed as a new grad in CA. Thanks in advance for any advice!

I recently was fired from a law firm. It was my first legal job out of law school, and I worked there for five months. Despite feeling like I was making a lot of progress and understanding the niche practice area, apparently, the firm didn't think I was making progress and fired me. They seemed understanding, and all seemed to like me as a person, but I just don't think my work product was at a place where they wanted it.
I already feel a huge amount of shame over it despite all the support from family and friends. So no need to remind me that I screwed up. I know.
I am thinking about my next move and am not sure if I want to continue being a lawyer or if I need a different environment. I would love to get some advice from people on alternative things I can do with a law degree and jobs that will make me happy.
I was not happy working at the firm. While the subject matter was fun and unique, I was constantly writing and submitting memos. Writing is not my strong suit. I suffer from petty bad dyslexia, and I think that was a major part of the problem. I know I will need to write in every job, but I am hoping to find one where it is less of an issue and where I'm not writing a dozen memos a week.
It might have just been the environment, but it felt less like I was learning and more like I was being judged. I went into every meeting with the partner who managed me, thinking, "okay this memos probably not perfect, but I'm gonna learn something, some tip or trick to make this memo and all my other memos better." But the Partner really just seemed to tear it apart, give me little to no instruction, and get angry at me for not immediately understanding the subject area and his writing style, which was 100% the opposite of everything I learned in law school.
I know this sounds like venting, but I'm trying to give a good image of what I was struggling with at this firm so I can find something different where I can enjoy life. I'm thinking of something like HR or contract management, but I'm not sure. I feel frustrated because it feels like you do all this work to get a job you don't really know if you'll enjoy because you're not allowed to try it until you invest all this time and money.
Thanks in Advance.

I recently was fired from a law firm. It was my first legal job out of law school, and I worked there for five months. Despite feeling like I was making a lot of progress and understanding the niche practice area, apparently, the firm didn't think I was making progress and fired me. They seemed understanding, and all seemed to like me as a person, but I just don't think my work product was at a place where they wanted it.
I already feel a huge amount of shame over it despite all the support from family and friends. So no need to remind me that I screwed up. I know.
I am thinking about my next move and am not sure if I want to continue being a lawyer or if I need a different environment. I would love to get some advice from people on alternative things I can do with a law degree and jobs that will make me happy.
I was not happy working at the firm. While the subject matter was fun and unique, I was constantly writing and submitting memos. Writing is not my strong suit. I suffer from pretty bad dyslexia, and I think that was a major part of the problem. I know I will need to write in every job, but I am hoping to find one where it is less of an issue and where I'm not writing a dozen memos a week.
It might have just been the environment, but it felt less like I was learning and more like I was being judged. I went into every meeting with the partner who managed me, thinking, "okay this memos probably not perfect, but I'm gonna learn something, some tip or trick to make this memo and all my other memos better." But the Partner really just seemed to tear it apart, give me little to no instruction, and get angry at me for not immediately understanding the subject area and his writing style, which was 100% the opposite of everything I learned in law school.
I know this sounds like venting, but I'm trying to give a good image of what I was struggling with at this firm so I can find something different where I can enjoy life. I'm thinking of something like HR or contract management, but I'm not sure. I feel frustrated because it feels like you do all this work to get a job you don't really know if you'll enjoy because you're not allowed to try it until you invest all this time and money.
Thanks in Advance.

I recently was fired from a law firm. It was my first legal job out of law school, and I worked there for five months. Despite feeling like I was making a lot of progress and understanding the niche practice area, apparently, the firm didn't think I was making progress and fired me. They seemed understanding, and all seemed to like me as a person, but I just don't think my work product was at a place where they wanted it.
I already feel a huge amount of shame over it despite all the support from family and friends. So no need to remind me that I screwed up. I know.
I am thinking about my next move and am not sure if I want to continue being a lawyer or if I need a different environment. I would love to get some advice from people on alternative things I can do with a law degree and jobs that will make me happy.
I was not happy working at the firm. While the subject matter was fun and unique, I was constantly writing and submitting memos. Writing is not my strong suit. I suffer from petty bad dyslexia, and I think that was a major part of the problem. I know I will need to write in every job, but I am hoping to find one where it is less of an issue and where I'm not writing a dozen memos a week.
It might have just been the environment, but it felt less like I was learning and more like I was being judged. I went into every meeting with the partner who managed me, thinking, "okay this memos probably not perfect, but I'm gonna learn something, some tip or trick to make this memo and all my other memos better." But the Partner really just seemed to tear it apart, give me little to no instruction, and get angry at me for not immediately understanding the subject area and his writing style, which was 100% the opposite of everything I learned in law school.
I know this sounds like venting, but I'm trying to give a good image of what I was struggling with at this firm so I can find something different where I can enjoy life. I'm thinking of something like HR or contract management, but I'm not sure. I feel frustrated because it feels like you do all this work to get a job you don't really know if you'll enjoy because you're not allowed to try it until you invest all this time and money.
Thanks in Advance.

Hey all,
For those who trade the 111 or 112 on futures options, is anyone willing to compare mechanics of how you exit a losing trade.
Suppose I entered this trade on MES (Sep 20, 2024 expiration, 122DTE) using the listed strikes:
Put debit spread-
BTO 5200 STO 5150 ($43 debit, max profit $207)
Naked put- STO 4850 ($143 credit)
Total opening credit for 111: $100
Many say they use the max profit of the PDS as the stop loss.
In that case, would you only be looking at the loss of the naked put, and not the overall trade?
(I.e. regardless of the P/L on the PDS, close the naked put when it hits a loss of $207?)
For campaign style trading I know people usually leave the PDS on after closing winning naked puts at 90 or 95 percent since the PDS will serve as a small hedge for future trades.
But for a losing trade, are you pivoting to close the PDS to recoup a portion of your realized loss on the naked put?
Also curious if anyone has done these on non-equity futures and would share how they manage losers for those. I have been experimenting with naked puts and 111s on CL.
For example, this 111 on CL (Sep 17, 2024 expiration, 119 DTE):
Put debit spread-
BTO 70
STO 68
($430 debit, max profit $1,570)
Naked put-
STO 62
($700 credit)
Total opening credit for 111: $270
For this CL trade, how would you determine your exit criteria? If the PDS max profit of $1,570 is used, that would mean one loss would wipe out more than 5 winners. Would you use a smaller multiple of the net credit received instead?
Thanks in advance to anyone willing to share!

I recently was fired from a law firm. It was my first legal job out of law school, and I worked there for five months. Despite feeling like I was making a lot of progress and understanding the niche practice area, apparently, the firm didn't think I was making progress and fired me. They seemed understanding, and all seemed to like me as a person, but I just don't think my work product was at a place where they wanted it.
I already feel a huge amount of shame over it despite all the support from family and friends. So no need to remind me that I screwed up. I know.
I am thinking about my next move and am not sure if I want to continue being a lawyer or if I need a different environment. I would love to get some advice from people on alternative things I can do with a law degree and jobs that will make me happy.
I was not happy working at the firm. While the subject matter was fun and unique, I was constantly writing and submitting memos. Writing is not my strong suit. I suffer from petty bad dyslexia, and I think that was a major part of the problem. I know I will need to write in every job, but I am hoping to find one where it is less of an issue and where I'm not writing a dozen memos a week.
It might have just been the environment, but it felt less like I was learning and more like I was being judged. I went into every meeting with the partner who managed me, thinking, "okay this memos probably not perfect, but I'm gonna learn something, some tip or trick to make this memo and all my other memos better." But the Partner really just seemed to tear it apart, give me little to no instruction, and get angry at me for not immediately understanding the subject area and his writing style, which was 100% the opposite of everything I learned in law school.
I know this sounds like venting, but I'm trying to give a good image of what I was struggling with at this firm so I can find something different where I can enjoy life. I'm thinking of something like HR or contract management, but I'm not sure. I feel frustrated because it feels like you do all this work to get a job you don't really know if you'll enjoy because you're not allowed to try it until you invest all this time and money.
Thanks in Advance.

Welcome back to my running series of WWF PPV Reviews from a ‘blind’ perspective (I have no idea what’s going to happen; the results, the feuds or how good any of the matches will be). I have always heard stories of the attitude era and golden age but never watched it myself so I set myself to watching every single PPV event chronologically. I am also watching Wrestling Bios ‘reliving the war’ series to keep me updated inbetween the events with the feuds, and to get excited about upcoming matches.
Before I review the matches, based on the past few episodes of raw and last PPVs I’ll let you know, going into the event, which match I’m most excited for and which feud I’m most excited to see.
The match and feud I’m most excited to see is Shawn vs undertaker. I mean what needs to be said their feud is absolutely legendary, and with my favourite match of all time coming in the future between these two I cant wait to see how they perform together in these early years.
WWF In Your House - Ground Zero 1997 Match Ratings
Goldust vs Brian Pillman 2/5
Scott putski vs Brian Christopher 1/5
Savio vega vs Faarooq vs Crush 0.25/5
El torito vs Max Mini 1.5/5
Tag Fatal 4 way elimination match 1.75/5
The patriot vs Bret Hart 3.25/5
Shawn Michaels vs Undertaker 4.75/5
I cannot believe they pulled the “she’s my love child” story it’s so funny to look back on these storylines. Goldust and Pillman are set to fight and there’s a huge grudge for Goldust here so I’m hoping to see a physical bout.
Which it wasn’t… while it was a good bout with no botched or anything, and it was better than their Summerslam match. I saw pillman was limited due to an ankle problem he had, which is kinda weird with the amount of running around he did, but they still had a decent match. Honestly though this draw of this match was where the story was going and it definitely went 😂 Pillman managed to win the match by whacking Goldust with a brick concealed in marlenas bag, and literally drags marlena to his car where he drove off with her. Classic wwf is so hilarious.
The next match was the first time I’m seeing putski and Christopher wrestle and it was actually going well until that ending. I thought they pulled off some very clean looking spots but the crowd was completely dead for almost all of this match, especially after the match, just no one seemed to care. I didn’t really care for this Brian Christopher he was laughing like a clown or something, not even a figure of speech it was literally like a clown. He might’ve been trying to impersonate Lawler but it was just weird. I’m not sure if putski was actually injured or not it was pretty hard to tell but this match seemed like it was 3 or 4 minutes long of pretty dull action.
Going into the next match and honestly I’m pretty bored of these pointless gang wars but let’s see if it can deliver. Maybe rock will get involved and liven it up but all three competitors in this triple threat have yet to put on a good show during my journey through the new gen/attitude era. Also I feel like this is the first triple threat match I’ve seen since KOTR 1996 so there’s some level of excitement for me as it can make for a really entertaining match when done right.
I was surprised to see crush get a pop as I hadn’t heard one before when he made his entrance, but a big biker dude coming in on a massive Harley will get an American crowd going I suppose 😂. But oh man once the match got going there was actually boos going throughout the stadium for the last 1/3 of it. They were trying some weird thing where they played on the fact that they both used to be part of the NOD in which they’d team with farooq on sadio vega but oh my lord it didn’t work at all, it just came off like they had no idea what they were doing. There were no highlights at all, and the last 5 minutes was crush throwing vega out the ring to use moves solo on farooq to which he’d come back in the ring, break the pin and repeat the process. Then he randomly wants to team with crush after all that?? It made no sense at all and was just a bad match, the crowd wasn’t into it and booed during quite a bit of the match, big miss.
I’m just gunna call it a ‘mini-match’ and I’m sure you’ll know what I’m talking about but it ended up being entertaining for what it was in all fairness, much better than the match I’d just seen anyway. It was more of a funny performance than a match; they both end up biting everyone’s asses? Including the referee, and mini goes and steals lawyers crown too. El torito is bloody nuts, his character is basically to act like a bull so he chases refs and officials around trying to headbutt them, fu**ing nuts 😂. I do think it went on a little too long though, if they’re going to book this kind of match then it should be short and sweet filler rather than dragging it on. There was however a pretty good looking springboard move close to the end so that was cool. There were some impressive moves and the crowd was getting involved but It’s just some filler while the show gets going in the end.
Very good idea having dude love and Austin come out inbetween the matches to relinquish the titles as this crowd REALLY needed some livening up after the past hour of the show. And when Steve starts his promo the crowd eats up every second of it and it’s no surprise because he kills it as usual, what a breath of fresh air SCSA is in the WWF during this era. He’s throwing insults to Vince, to the sergeant to JR and it’s f***ing brilliant. It’s cool seeing dude love backing him up as well I think they actually make a really cool looking tag team. And then out of god damn nowhere he delivers a stunner to JR and the crowd absolutely loses it. I would say at this point he is truly the face of the WWF and it really does suck that he suffered that neck injury and couldn’t wrestle properly for a while, having to change his entire wrestling style because of it, but it was never to his detriment, we’re truly in the stone cold era now.
Before the fatal four way, while the LOD get interviewed I couldn’t help but notice how young Michael Cole looks, I mean obviously it’s over 25 years ago but still cool seeing how long he’s been involved.
I really don’t understand these fatal four way tag matches, they always come off weirdly as you can have two people from the same team in the ring that have to wrestle… but it makes no sense because why not just tag someone else in? I don’t know it’s a weird dynamic and I’m not surprised they dropped this type of match in the future.
It’s a shame LOD was the first to be eliminated because they randomly started beating the godwinns with a metal bucket? It makes 0 sense for them to blindly DQ themselves from getting the tag titles since they were crowd favourites, but okay you do you Vince. I wanted them to win too. I know a few people don’t care for LOD but they’re top 2 tag teams in the wwf right now beside Owen and bulldog. The godwinns get eliminated next (thank god), and they just feel like the most filler tag team I’ve ever seen they’re SOOO bland and basic, they don’t even play up to their hillbilly characters anymore which is a new level of bad I won’t lie. I was really REALLY surprised that headbangers took away the belts though, with the massive push of the hart foundation I thought it was a no brainer. It was awesome seeing Austin come in and disrupt the match, he absolutely brings the whole arena completely alive whenever he does anything. Overall though the match was bad and it went on far too long even with four teams. I think the ending was pretty fun but that was only about 2 minutes of the match that was entertaining the rest just felt veryyyy slow.
Man this event has really gotta pull out some f***ing 5/5 main events for it to be worth watching because we’re 1 hour 45 minutes in without a match over 2/5 at most.
When I hear Kurt angles theme playing I was so happy, excited, confused, and then disappointed when I realised it was 3 or 4 years too early. I had no idea they kept this theme and used it for Kurt angle as well as patriot.
I have a small inkling that Bret hart didn’t perform as well as he could’ve in this match because he was annoyed about Shawn getting the top spot after everything that’s gone down and him working more regularly recently than Shawn. Patriot wasn’t a bad wrestler but his character was extremely bland, what would happen after this feud? He’d just be a guy that’s proud to be from America that looks like a Mexican wrestler… in the time of big characters making the main events he unfortunately doesn’t really fit in that well. His in ring ability was good though, no botches or anything but I just couldn’t really feel myself getting into this match. I didn’t really know if they’d book patriot in to take the wwf title as I was pretty sure they wouldn’t want hart to lose his title being such a huge name in the business right now. It was pretty fun when Vader and bulldog came out for some extra drama with them interfering with each of the wrestlers but it’s not a good sign when a match needs drama like that to elevate it. It’s better than what we’ve seen tonight but not particularly worth watching. If you love Bret hart give it a watch as he was his usual fantastic in ring performer but it’s not one of his best for sure. The crowd was really into it, making the hard camera shake chanting “USA USA”, so that was cool, but I’m not entirely sure if it’s because of the crowd or because it was such a small venue. Also worth noting Bret hart is a perfect heel character, he’s a massive star with a character that works perfectly as a heel because he sprinkles some IRL elements into everything he does. The move of breaking the American flag pole and the strangling patriot with the flag is just brilliant, makes it that extra bit more believable and I love it, Americans however must’ve hated it!
Shawn Michaels entrance was so hilarious, he gets hit by a… idk what that even was, a brown cabbage? He makes BJ notions to the crowd, his pyro doesn’t go off properly in the ring like it usually does, and he still pulled it off because he’s HBK, fantastic. This FEELS like main event material though and I’m really excited for it. Sometimes main events don’t really build up properly and just haven’t got that hype behind it but this match should be great. The first of many times we’d see these legends in the ring together.
Starting off the match right too with undertaker taking out the referee and allowing undertaker to take it to the outside and absolutely lay into Michael’s without a count out. I absolutely loved Shawn’s selling during this match too, it’s so over the top that it’s brilliant, with one of his famous vertical presses while he gets kicked in the belly whilst in the corner, love it. Him begging to the ref to dq undertaker, trying to escape through the door of the set and banging on the door, it all works really well and he plays up undertakers character perfectly. I hate when wrestlers forget they’re supposed to play up this undertaker being very scary it really takes away immersion but Shawn does it perfectly. The boos for undertaker seem to be from the women only and the cheers for Shawn seem to be from the women only, of course 😂. I also love seeing the origins of d generation x, one of my all time favourite tag teams as I’m sure is the same with everyone else. HHH makes his way down to the ring with a referee to replace the numerous ones that have been taken out during this match, and they are just the perfect team together I love it.
The actual match I thought was really really fun. It was absolute chaos and maybe not a wrestling masterclass but you can’t deny it was fun. From start to finish we go through 3 referees, we get strangling with power chords, we get triple H and HBK telling the crowd to suck it, and an amazing back and forth showcase from Michael’s and undertaker. I think this match did an absolutely fantastic job and reinstating the undertaker as the most intimidating wrestler in the wwf. The poor referees during this match though, they got absolutely abused. The only thing I didn’t like about this match was the ending. Another random referee comes to the ring to end the match as a DQ, which is a really stupid ending because illegal stuff had already happened when the other referees came to the ring so why wouldn’t they have ended it then? The action continues after the match with undertaker almost soloing Michael’s and HHH. More officials come to the ring as Michael’s beats the hell out of them. And then other wrestlers are forced to come to the ring to try and break the two up which was awesome to see. This really sets up further matches between the two, and I think that’s was the whole idea of the match which worked well, it’s just that I hate these random DQ endings to main events. We see the undertaker flying over the top rope for… I think the first time? Correct me if I’m wrong but I’m pretty sure that’s the first time I’ve seen it in this era which was of course AWESOME!! Overall a really fun match that sets up for further main events but it’s held back by its weird and stupid decision. It’s still well worth a watch if you enjoy this feud however.
Overall, whilst the main event hit all the right places for me I just don’t think the WWF was ready for a 3 hour event yet. They simply didn’t have the roster for it to be enjoyable and so many of these matches went way longer than they had any business doing. I think Bret hart is always gunna deliver so he was fun to watch but it just want one of his best but the main event hit in every single way apart from the finish which I understand is setting up for further matches but ughhhh it was done weirdly and poorly. If you’re gunna watch this event, skip everything but the main event it’s just not worth sitting through everything else.
Overall rating 2.75/5