Well, so, it can't so much as handle the letters, U, R, and L next to each other in sequence. So any occurrence of said string causes the post to fail - even to mention that a link was removed - how lame. Anyway, now knowing that ...
Hello, thought I'd at least say "Hi".
Some wee bits about me:
Asperger syndrome: rather to highly probable. Never seriously suspected before, until four days ago ... er, eight days ago now, as I finally get this thing to successfully post, and then, well ... discovery, ... rather to highly probable (thus far undiagnosed). Quite a bit more about that here: ... okay, can't do that direct, how 'bout rot13: uggc://ovg.yl/C6Ie33
49, male, single (not my preference, but currently is what it is), Berkeley, CA, USA
Also seems rather to highly probable I manage to mess up a lot in certain areas of social interaction - unwittingly, unknowingly, and unintentionally. E.g. some stats that would support that hypothesis:
- less than one per decade: rate at which I acquire quite good close friend(s) or better (including any good relationships) over the last nearly 30 years, despite the majority of the time having quite a lack there and wishing to very much fill that (e.g. much more often than not, zero in that category when I'd want about one). This is also despite lots of efforts to try and make that "better".
- 2.5 from/via online, zero from "other sources": over nearly 30 years, where I "met" and iniitally interacted with particularly good/close friends or better (e.g. also including good relationships). (2.5? Not 2, or 3? One I'm not sure if I should count or not, so calling it a 0.5 at least for now).
- zero: net resultant useful/positive acquaintanceships (or even close) or better following (seemingly) good, positive, even excellent (seeming) initial conversation with complete and total stranger (e.g. strike up conversation with woman, seems to go exceedingly well, she's even interested in my contact information, I provide it to her ... I hear back essentially if not precise never - can't recall a single instance off-hand where I'd ever heard back in such a case - in my entire life - and I'm nearing the half-century mark).
Some other bits I'm "bad" / neutral/mixed / good at:
"bad":
- communication: quite suck at getting from zero to pretty comfortable (if I even ever make it that far), and most notably in face-to-face context.
- distinguishing conversations: if I talk with many, separately and independently, and about even somewhat similar, I'll well remember what communications were had, but very poorly recall, if at all, which particular communications or bits thereof were had with whom
- eye contact: I often rather/quite suck at that, notably when talking to someone - I often find watching their reactions to be highly distracting to me - so I'll not look at them, otherwise I completely lose my train of thought and forget what I was talking about. But it's not always like that. Sometimes I can do that "just fine", without it being an issue at all. Not sure exactly what makes the difference - seems situational/contextual - e.g. can vary significantly even just one-on-one with the same someone I know at least fairly well.
- shy: I am, quite. Most notably initial contacts with folks I don't know. Generally rather to quite worse in groups/crowds/parties or the like, and especially "meeting" lots of folks in rapid succession.
- I suck at remembering names of people - especially first names, and even more so for more common names.
- clumsy?: slightly, but really not that bad
neutral/mixed:
- literal and disambiguating: I take a lot (too) literally, I'm pretty good about removing the ambiguities - not only in what and how I communicate, but resolving ambiguities of significance in communications to me. So, misunderstandings, highly rare, annoyances ... not as rare.
- communication: more generally do fairly well on the verbal; non-verbal, quite a mix, some rather to quite well, other bits, likely rather to exceedingly poorly - really have no clue there, but likely quite not good on much of it.
- detail oriented: "too"(?) detail oriented? "it depends" (context, context).
- non-fiction: highly prefer non-fiction over fiction
- verbosity (can you tell already?)
- sleep: not all that much, and relatively irregular. Ever since roughly my latter college days, I can "survive" on average of 4 hrs. sleep/24, but do much better with - and typically get, a running average of about 5/24 (occasionally much less on shorter term, much more rarely quite a bit more). Sleep is often rather to quite discontinuous (e.g. mere minutes to 3 hours at a time). I transition from asleep (and even REM sleep) to quite fully awake - and vice versa, often very quickly and easily (don't fall asleep if I'm even minimally physically active, but if bored/tired and physically not moving at all, can fall asleep very(/too) readily - and regardless of how many zillion or zip hours of sleep I had earlier).
- sight, sound, and other stimuli? I can tolerate a lot of that, and mostly doesn't bother me, but too, sometimes it's rather to exceedingly distracting to me - really much depends upon what I'm doing or attempting to do - same "distraction" can be unnoticed at some times, and an intolerable distracting continued breaking of my concentration or attention at others - so it's quite contextual.
good:
- communication: I can do rather to exceedingly well ... when I manage to make it so far as to be quite comfortable with the other person and generally get the communication flowing rather to quite well and that they're also at least quite fine with that. (unfortunately, getting to "that" level with anyone, for me, happens way too rarely).
- remembering - at least many things; quite a good memory - e.g. have a conversation with various folks, I'll well remember much of the conversations, what was discussed, etc. (remembering with whom, however (or more precisely when), quite another matter - if there was only one possibility, I "know", otherwise, I'm often quite unsure if I even at all remember who).
- intelligent, kind, caring, giving, passionate and compassionate, honest, ... whole lot 'o that good positive stuff, and some folks rather to quite know (at least generally), and others have about zero clue, or close to it (whatever, not everyone is going to know, or be interested or care to know).
- skilled - e.g. well/highly skilled in my areas of expertise (e.g. certain sectors of Engineering/electronics/IT/computer field, and other random and not-so-random bits of knowledge and skill sets)
- remembering faces: used to be quite good at that, still pretty good at it.
- good/excellent manual dexterity
Other: my dad - though the evidence is somewhat missing and inconclusive (he's highly removed himself from at least all family, and probably "everyone" or almost precisely so, for most all of the last quarter century, and to a large degree for much much longer than that, and possibly since "forever"), but the available evidence compellingly supports the hypothesis that he's got Asperger syndrome, and quite a bit more severely than I (presumably) do.
(Most) all that sound (too) familiar? I thought that's likely the case.
08 Jul 2012, 11:49 am
and welcome to the club 
