SB: The whole basis of what you've been saying is that you are a messenger for a story nobody wants to hear.

JVB: That could be true. Of course wanting to and needing to are different things. FWIW, the point has been made.

Er, no, the point's not been made. In a Maslow sense, being a messenger seems to be an essential part of your Self-Actualization Needs set.

See http://www.lifeworktransitions.com/exercises/part1/mazlow.html for a diagram. (Just the diagram -- the text surrounding this particular diagram doesn't apply in this context).

What's apparently twisted here is your need to be a messenger supercedes your Esteem Needs and your Belonging Needs. It doesn't matter what the message contains anymore, whether it's sensible or not, or if people are receptive to it. Regardless, you *need* to be "da man" who delivers it. This has hurt you in incalculable ways.

There is plenty of supporting evidence for this -- It's easily demonstrated in the vast majority of your online posts in the past few years, and repeated pointers back in time to enlightened messages you've supposedly delivered to us then. You don't come to the UT to ask or answer questions, or to socialize, you come to the UT to magnanimously "deliver messages". This is also supported by the obvious desire that people know you're writing .NET articles, irrespective that you don't actually have any practical .NET experience yet, as evidenced by your most recent posts. What's important to you, apparently, is that people recognize you as a valuable bearer of important messages.

You need to understand that some of the messages you're touting, however incoherent and unsubstantiated some of them may be, strike most people in more primal layers than the layer from where your messages emanate. People's livelihoods are in the Safety Needs layer. You know this, I think, because you exploit that au max. It adds personal spice to your messages to be perceived saving people from their own obvious (to you) mistakes or mis-investments in technology.

So here we have a case of someone with a messenger complex, hell bent on being self-actualized. We're beyond the point whether the content of the messages have any validity. You *need* VFP to crash and burn (or whatever else you predict) and the sooner the better, or else your own psychological hierarchy collapses. This because the Esteem Needs layer and the Belonging Needs layer -- at least with respect to the computing community -- have been eroding faster than you can possibly shore them up. This has been happening for some time now.

In short, it's not so much that VFP developers need to hear the message, it's *you* that needs to deliver it, and you desperately need it to turn out the way you've predicted, or at minimum it should appear like it's turning out that way, because otherwise you're nothing, you're just a lawyer with a ruined career in tech, the inevitable result of long eroding Esteem and Belonging layers.

It's just a theory. I suggest you consider getting professional help.

Clearly if you want to stay in tech, you need .NET more than the average VFP bear does because I suspect you've already burned your roots. You need new roots. If there is any truth to this, it's a real stretch to suggest that the average VFP developer also needs new roots at this precise point in time. Not like you do anyway. Maybe it would help you to have ready-made receivers of messages following you to the Other Side. We could invent online personnas to receive and comment appreciatively on your messages, if that'll help. Avitar therapy.

Moreover you're transitioning from being a pretty big fish in a small pond to being who-knows-what in a big pond. That'll take some getting used to, and your messenger complex may help or hurt you, depending on how smartly you play it. Certainly your persistant reappearences here is indicative that the messenger complex isn't being satisfied elsewhere, so you come back for a time, then leave again, then come back...

I could be wrong, of course.

**--** Steve


>
><
>More accurately, you are expressing your own ideas based on your own observaions and conclusions.
>>
>
>Your quick... for this is what I usually do, come up with orginal thoughts..
>
>
>
>>
>Yet you persist with implications that you are clairvoyant, or enlightened, or otherwise privy to information not disclosed to others, and you use this to bolster your arguments. That's 100% bullshit. Express opinions, fine, but invoke "books written long ago" by "people other than myself" and that you are "just a messenger", well, that's just rich reverie.
>>
>
>Then lets just wait and see... FWIW, 3.50 + what you preach would buy a pack of Camels. i.e., I think what you are preaching is BS too, so that makes us even...
>
>
>>
>I think everyone would be better served if you simply just kept things real and stopped making stuff up (fabricating).
>>
>
>I am about as real as it gets Steve... Maybe you should keep it real.
>
>
>>
>Absolutely anything is possible in the future. I wouldn't be surprised if either the very best or the very worse forecasts for VFP were to come to pass. Or anything in between.
>>
>
>Right.....
>
>
>>
>California will fall into the sea, or it won't, or something in between. That's the extent of my knowledge of the matter, and I suspect that's the equivalent extent of your knowledge about the future of VFP.
>>
>
>Again, we shall see....
>
>
>>Good luck with the dot net articles.
>
>
>Thanks...I think...