Page 4 of 106

Re: Venting thread

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 10:46 am
by linguoboy
jal wrote:
linguoboy wrote:Yeah, when it starts to get me down, I just look at my sister's life. She's on baby #5. I can only assume she hasn't sleep more than four solid hours in a row since 2001.
Wow, #5??? Voluntarily??? Truth be told, my wife and I made sure that after #3 there wouldn't be another one, or we'd be on #5 as well :).
Not exactly. #5 was a total surprise. (I was all for giving him a name which expressed that, but she didn't go for it.)

Re: Venting thread

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 1:33 pm
by Xephyr
linguoboy wrote:There appears to be no way to ban a particular user from posting in a particular thread, otherwise I would be banning sirdanilot from posting in the Venting Thread. He's been warned repeatedly not to bully people who post here and is flagrantly ignoring those warnings.

So here's the deal: sirdanilot can voluntarily refrain from posting in this thread or he can be banned (temporarily or permanently, that's for the mods to work out amongst themselves) from the entire forum. Your choice, sirdanilot.
Does jal get into any trouble for saying "fuck that idiot" in reference to Sirdanilot?

Re: Venting thread

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 2:04 pm
by jal
Xephyr wrote:Does jal get into any trouble for saying "fuck that idiot" in reference to Sirdanilot?
That was indeed a bit strong worded, but I really can't stand bullies. I could've better PM'd that to Chagen instead of putting it here. If you take issue with it, you can of course always report the post to the mods by using the "!" button.


JAL

Re: Venting thread

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 2:22 pm
by linguoboy
jal wrote:
Xephyr wrote:Does jal get into any trouble for saying "fuck that idiot" in reference to Sirdanilot?
If you take issue with it, you can of course always report the post to the mods by using the "!" button.
What he said. We're not combing every post here for every possible violation of the rules. If it's important to you to see that they're enforced uniformly, then it's a very easy way in which you can help us police them.

Re: Venting thread

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 2:24 pm
by jal
linguoboy wrote:What he said.
I have removed the strong language, so we can now all be civil again.


JAL

Re: Venting thread

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 2:29 pm
by Xephyr
linguoboy wrote:
jal wrote:
Xephyr wrote:Does jal get into any trouble for saying "fuck that idiot" in reference to Sirdanilot?
If you take issue with it, you can of course always report the post to the mods by using the "!" button.
What he said. We're not combing every post here for every possible violation of the rules. If it's important to you to see that they're enforced uniformly, then it's a very easy way in which you can help us police them.
So, "no" then? The post below this one is satisfactory.

Re: Venting thread

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 2:31 pm
by linguoboy
jal wrote:
linguoboy wrote:What he said.
I have removed the strong language, so we can now all be civil again.
Remember, it's not the strong language that's the issue here, it's the abuse. It makes little sense to upbraid sirdanilot for something and then turn around and engage in it yourself.

This is not the first time this has been pointed out to you either. Yes, he makes you furious. He makes a lot of people furious. You can't help having that reaction, but between getting mad and posting mad, you have plenty of opportunities to make a better choice.

Re: Venting thread

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 2:34 pm
by jal
linguoboy wrote:Remember, it's not the strong language that's the issue here, it's the abuse. It makes little sense to upbraid sirdanilot for something and then turn around and engage in it yourself. (...) but between getting mad and posting mad, you have plenty of opportunities to make a better choice.
You are right of course, it's definitely one of my character flaws, and I'll try to take better care. I wouldn't have minded sirdanilot calling me stuff, but to attack someone whose clearly n a vulnerable state (even though sir D. didn't consider it attacking himself) burned my fuse.


JAL

Re: Venting thread

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 2:36 pm
by Grunnen
linguoboy wrote:
Grunnen wrote:EDIT
I'm sorry, I missed the warning to Sirdan. I can't remove my posts can I? Removed content.
I don't see any posts of yours responding to sirdanilot. If you ever want a post yours deleted completely, you can use the report button to request this of the mods.
No the post you cited was the one where I responded to Sirdan, before I saw the other post and edited the content.

Re: Venting thread

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 2:50 pm
by linguoboy
Grunnen wrote:
linguoboy wrote:
Grunnen wrote:EDIT
I'm sorry, I missed the warning to Sirdan. I can't remove my posts can I? Removed content.
I don't see any posts of yours responding to sirdanilot. If you ever want a post yours deleted completely, you can use the report button to request this of the mods.
No the post you cited was the one where I responded to Sirdan, before I saw the other post and edited the content.
Yeah, I admit to being a little langzaam van begrip today. Thus my lack-of-sleep gripe. It's also why I only skimmed that whole exchange above. If there's something else I missed which requires action, someone please let me know.

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Tue May 12, 2015 5:16 pm
by Viktor77
I have never dealt with so much bureaucracy as applying for my and my spouse's visa for Belgium to study for a year. First my university is barely giving me any help so it's basically just, oh figure it out. Second, each document has so many contingencies, so much stuff to gather. I've been on the phone more than 15 hours in two days. I've gone back and forth with the embassy in New York. Now I'm worried the processing time for my spouse's visa will be greater than the time we tend to leave to Belgium. There's another thing to ask them about. Not to mention my Obamacare is a disaster right now. And I'm planning a wedding, well a courthouse wedding. I just booked the judge today in St Paul, MN for early next month.

After doing all this, and with more to come, my basic question is, HOW ON EARTH DO STUDENTS JUST UP AND STUDY ABROAD SO EASILY? Who is doing all of this for them, because I need that person.

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Tue May 12, 2015 6:13 pm
by Rui
Viktor77 wrote:After doing all this, and with more to come, my basic question is, HOW ON EARTH DO STUDENTS JUST UP AND STUDY ABROAD SO EASILY? Who is doing all of this for them, because I need that person.
Which part? For me it was easy as applying to a program and they literally send me all the stuff I'll need, or instructions on what to do (re: visa and stuff) upon acceptance to the program. Actually, in many cases, they request you send them your passport and they take care of all the visa stuff for you. That can be a little nerve-wracking because who wants to mail off their passport to an organization, but it always works out in the end because the study abroad programs are generally trustworthy. If you're having so much difficulty, that's definitely on the program and not your fault, imo.

(I've gone through getting student or working visas 3 times, and none of those countries were even in Europe. The first two times, for China and South Africa, the organization handled all the visa stuff. The third time, for China again, I did everything myself after the organization mailed me all the documents I needed)

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Tue May 12, 2015 6:35 pm
by Viktor77
Rui wrote:
Viktor77 wrote:After doing all this, and with more to come, my basic question is, HOW ON EARTH DO STUDENTS JUST UP AND STUDY ABROAD SO EASILY? Who is doing all of this for them, because I need that person.
Which part? For me it was easy as applying to a program and they literally send me all the stuff I'll need, or instructions on what to do (re: visa and stuff) upon acceptance to the program. Actually, in many cases, they request you send them your passport and they take care of all the visa stuff for you. That can be a little nerve-wracking because who wants to mail off their passport to an organization, but it always works out in the end because the study abroad programs are generally trustworthy. If you're having so much difficulty, that's definitely on the program and not your fault, imo.

(I've gone through getting student or working visas 3 times, and none of those countries were even in Europe. The first two times, for China and South Africa, the organization handled all the visa stuff. The third time, for China again, I did everything myself after the organization mailed me all the documents I needed)
Ah, see, my program is not a program at all, but a university who accepted me to come be a TA there and take classes through my program at Illinois. My department doesn't go through our study abroad coordinators, so it's basically on me to figure it all out. Plus because I am sponsoring my spouse everything is 10 times as complicated. I had to tell my department what I needed for the visa. I'm guessing past students had parents help them, because they are pretty clueless when I ask, but I don't have that luxury. I'm on my own except my spouse.

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 2:23 am
by jal
Viktor77 wrote:And I'm planning a wedding, well a courthouse wedding. I just booked the judge today in St Paul, MN for early next month.
So you're the wedding planner, or are you getting married yourself?


JAL

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 5:45 am
by din
Well, it's extra hard if you want to take your partner with you, because student visas are simply not made for that sort of thing. You are aware that he won't be allowed to work for the first 5 months, right? Unless it's on the US military base

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 7:12 am
by Salmoneus
jal wrote:
Viktor77 wrote:And I'm planning a wedding, well a courthouse wedding. I just booked the judge today in St Paul, MN for early next month.
So you're the wedding planner, or are you getting married yourself?


JAL
I assumed from context that he was getting married - but then he keeps talking about his spouse, which would mean he's married already. Unless he's confusing "spouse" and "fiance"?

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 7:45 am
by linguoboy
Salmoneus wrote:I assumed from context that he was getting married - but then he keeps talking about his spouse, which would mean he's married already. Unless he's confusing "spouse" and "fiance"?
With same-sex couples, you do always have the possibility that there was already a commitment ceremony of some sort with no legal recognition. Most couples I know who then latter contracted civil marriage didn't bother to have a second ceremony, but some did, particularly those for whom the original ceremony was quite a ways back.

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 10:24 am
by vampireshark
din wrote:Well, it's extra hard if you want to take your partner with you, because student visas are simply not made for that sort of thing. You are aware that he won't be allowed to work for the first 5 months, right? Unless it's on the US military base
This is true: bringing any family along isn't easy on a visa like that.

Granted, that's a nicer rule than in the US: people with family of student (F-2) statuses aren't allowed to work. Period. No exceptions. And people with F-1 student* status are generally not permitted to work off-campus absent exceptional circumstances.


Vent: So, regarding that thing I mentioned last week... my parents are separating. After 35 years. I feel horrible about the whole thing, even though my mom says things are civil and going well. And my dad keeps trying to call me to talk about the situation, but he (a) calls at horribly inconvenient times, like when I'm in a meeting, and (b) it's not a phone call I'm looking forward to at all.


*There are actually three kinds of student visas here (F student, M vocational student, and J exchange), each of which with their own rules about dependents, maximum length of stay and program, changes of status, work restrictions, and how long you get when your program ends before you have to run away. Fun.

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 11:26 am
by Dewrad
linguoboy wrote:
Salmoneus wrote:I assumed from context that he was getting married - but then he keeps talking about his spouse, which would mean he's married already. Unless he's confusing "spouse" and "fiance"?
With same-sex couples, you do always have the possibility that there was already a commitment ceremony of some sort with no legal recognition. Most couples I know who then latter contracted civil marriage didn't bother to have a second ceremony, but some did, particularly those for whom the original ceremony was quite a ways back.
This is my situation. My husband is my husband, regardless of what the law might say: it's between me, him and the gods, and all the rest can go to hell. We intend on gettingg legal recognition, but frankly at the moment it's not a priority. (As and when I plan on offing him and making it look like an accident, it'll be a priority as I'll want to be able to legally take out a life assurance policy on the bugger.)

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 11:37 am
by linguoboy
Dewrad wrote:My husband is my husband, regardless of what the law might say: it's between me, him and the gods, and all the rest can go to hell.
Yeah, my response to all the well-meaning people who told us, "Now you can get married!" when Illinois finally got around to legalising same-sex marriage was, "We always could've gotten married. It just wouldn't've been recognised by the state." Neither of us felt the need to commemorate our commitment to each other with a public ceremony, so we never did. We did want as much protection as possible when it comes to navigating our country's baroque and ridiculous health care system, so we applied for a marriage licence. (There was actually a year's transition where I called him my "spouse" but not my "husband" because we were legally spouses under Illinois law but not according to the Federal government, which only recognises "marriage".)

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 2:49 pm
by Salmoneus
Yeah, I get that (and other-sex partnerships can also have non-legal (eg religious) commitment ceremonies, although of course at least in this country they don't get the privilege of civil unions, damnit*). But maybe why that didn't spring to mind was that in my experience people are either "we're not married until we're officially married" (in which case he wouldn't be calling him his spouse), or they're "we're already married even if you don't recognise it", in which case I'd expect him to say "we're having our marriage recognised/registered/etc" rather than "we're having a wedding". I guess for me "wedding" is pretty strictly limited to "ceremony where people who are not married to each other become married to each other".

But then, I know somepeople speak of "weddings" when they talk about marriage-rejuvenation things (you know, those 'saying our vows again' things, like remarriage but when there hasn't been any separation in between), which is equally alien to me but people do say it, I think. So you're probably right that that's what Viktor was aiming at.

[And to be fair, I do know one couple who have gotten married to each other twice already in quick succession (without any separation in between) but only had two weddings, and talk of having another 'wedding' at some point too, as though a 'wedding' were just a big party thing.]

I don't understand linguoboy's distinction between 'spouse' and 'husband', though. How does that relate to federal vs state law? Surely if he is your spouse, and is male, he is by definition your husband?





*Seriously, this is fucking stupid. Gay couples can have a marriage or a civil union. Straight couples can't have civil unions legally recognised, only marriages. Not that I personally give give the slightest about the semantic differences between the two, but the inequality is utterly absurd, and I can't think of any coherent reason for it whatsoever.

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 3:10 pm
by linguoboy
Salmoneus wrote:I don't understand linguoboy's distinction between 'spouse' and 'husband', though. How does that relate to federal vs state law? Surely if he is your spouse, and is male, he is by definition your husband?
IME, most people only use "husband/wife" when there has been an actual "marriage" (civil or otherwise). We didn't have a marriage at the time, only a "civil union". But under Illinois law, participants in a "civil union" are "spouses" for all legal purposes. Socially, we've been treated as a couple for 15 years now, and as long as that happens I don't really care what terminology people use (although it irks me that one friend of mine unaccountably insists on calling him my "roommate" for no reason that I can fathom). But I got in the habit of introducing him as my "spouse" since that's what I kept telling various officials and service providers in order to clarify our legal relationship for relevant purposes.

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 3:11 pm
by ol bofosh
Salmoneus wrote: I can't think of any coherent reason for it whatsoever.
I often think that of any marriage or civil union. :mrgreen:

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 4:55 pm
by Thry
Have you told your friend he's being disrespectful?

Re: Venting thread that excludes sirdanilot

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 5:03 pm
by linguoboy
Thry wrote:Have you told your friend he's being disrespectful?
Yeah, I called him on it yesterday evening. Before that, I thought he was just being forgetful, since he'd never actually met my husband before. And maybe he was; we'll see if his behaviour improves.