#it's the adjective that goes with the behaviour at one given moment

[glitter-stained]

Every time someone claims a character can't be considered abusive for a scene where they brutalized their child because "fans who claim that are ignoring all the context", an angel dies btw

[borisartamonovblog]

The people's mob.

    From the outset it would be better to note that, either it is the origin the human from an ape or there are other aspects of Darwin's theory, all this is only a hypothesis actually, not facts proved scientifically. However the likeness of the conformist behaviour can be observed among different species of animals, not only the mammals. The instinct of conformism works efficiently and smoothly. It takes only a member of a pack to notice a danger and to be frightened by something, this fright just is transmitted instantly to all the pack which either runs away or takes one's stand to defend itself, depending on the danger. If to take a space of the time about hundred years, no evolution would be observed, so this instinct of a wild pack, it cannot harm to anything, because there is nothing to be harmed. It would not be unnecessary to note that the conformist behaviour in an animal pack has no any compulsion above it. Nobody pays attention to a becoming separated individual, even nobody would notice it. Also the behaviour of the primitive men, I doubt whether it could differ appreciably from one of the herd animals, it is independently of the human's origin, which is unknown to us in fact.      It could devote a huge number of pages describing the gradual transition from the primitive, savage and herd condition to such one, that is named civilized one, which already is continuing several latest millenniums. Perhaps there would be those who are willing to research from the modern point of view and to describe this transition from the wild condition to the civilized one, even it is possible that it would be some benefit from the researching, but we have not a time machine that we should return in the past to add our own changes, and most likely it is for the better. It's for the better, for an interference in the natural course of events, as a rule, it leads to no good. But we are faced in front of the fait accompli: we are dwelling just in the very taking shape civilized world, unfortunately, with the instinct of conformism remained entirely, and everyone is able to make adjustments into his fate and is free to do it. Therefore we go examine the civilization and the society existing several millenniums we have found, we have been born in the epoch.      Whatever space of time is taken in the historical period of the civilized humanity, it is seen as a regularity, the same model of an interesting aspect of social relations: the model of the confrontation a developed gifted personality and a mediocre and backward crowd, that is the people's mob.      In the Gospels Jesus Christ mentioned over and over again about the persecution the Teachers and the Prophets in the past and after all He Same found Himself as a victim of such the persecution. It seems, that part of the humanity had come to believe in Him, the Christians like in God, and the Muslims like in a Prophet, all of them would get an instructive lesson for the future and make up a right conclusion. But the mob of all the times and of all the peoples, it twists surely all the things on his own way. In the given case it was formed a social opinion, supposedly this is the Jews who are guilty in persecution of Christ. However in fact, there wasn't a nationality that time on the Earth, where Jesus Christ would not be persecuted anyway by the people's mob. Accusing the Jews, practically all the peoples continued no less to persecute those who was cleverer and nobler than they, those who pushed forward the history and the progress. In the critical epoch of the Renaissance under cover of the "hunt for witches", Jan Hus, Jean of Arc and many others outstanding persons were burned at the stake. In every historical epoch of changes this confrontation became aggravated.      In the XX century this confrontation aggravated like never formerly. The prophetic words of Christ came true: " I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him". And they came in his own name: Lenin, Stalin, Hitler. And they attempted to spread a hell on the Earth, but the humanity has won this round against the forces of darkness. The people's mob bowed down before the murderous dictators, spread runners for them, applauded them, believed in their unsubstantiated promises. It's inevitable, the evil seems as all-powerful one, but it has its own foibles. The first foible: the forces of evil cannot be in peace together. The second foible: the life according to the lie, it will affect negatively, sooner or later, on the economy. Just that two factors have saved the humanity.      Let's return to the late Middle Ages, that is the Renaissance. Right in this moment of the history it was laid beginning of the progress not only technological one, but it is more important, that this progress is social too. And here it's time to mention briefly the psychology of a man of the crowd, that is of the people's mob, that is one of a "cog"of the system.      For a man of the crowd it is unthinkable to be opposed to a common opinion. He has not got accustomed to think independently. He has the same developed brain, but he doesn't make use of it practically. Because of this, in most cases it is hard and awful to be alone for him. On the contrary: finding in a crowd, any support of this crowd is able to bring to naught so powerful forces as the instinct of self-preservation and the sexual instinct. Indeed, it's exist a Russian proverb: "In the world, even the death is red" (На миру и смерть красна) If he goes with a crowd together there where it is a danger, the same presence of the crowd how would lulls, sings to sleep, calms him. If anyone fell as though dead beside him, he doubts whether he would have such a misfortune, as the crowd continues to go, so one may. Certainly he doesn't reason this way, this way he feels. Thus he isn't in need of heroic effort to overcome his instincts because the conformist instinct helps him. If he starts to reason, to think, he would understand that he is deceived, that many things aren't right, but he doesn't think, he doesn't reason, because of this he makes possible to use himself as a pawn in some doubtful game. In what way a man of the crowd doesn't feel a danger, in the same way he can do any evil, not diminishing it. In this case beginning to doubt, but he needs only to look at the crowd and if they don't condemn him, but the contrary, they themselves are doing the same thing, he feels himself beforehand justified, the instincts of evil before were hidden in the depth of the subconsciousness, but now they are tearing themselves away with all the possible consequences. The force of the people's mob is really a large one, but it is unreasonable, like a  blind one, but one can rule over this force and different demonic characters use it.      What by to account then the aforesaid material and social progress? I would even say not social but social-moral, it would be more exact, but the sense of the word "moral" (Russian "нравственность") during last centuries was a lot devalued and distorted. Now the sense of the word doesn't reflect what was originally inserted in it, but the puritanical prohibitive moods of the people's mob. Instead the real purity in freedom, now the meaning of the word renders a sham purity in servitude, that is the submissiveness to the opinions of the foolish crowd. When refusing the word "moral", the adjective "social" applied to the word "progress", must embrace more broadly different positive accompanying concepts, because we are talking about progress, not about degradation. We are reaching, I would remind you, to explain the paradox: at the time of the dominance of the people's mob the humanity tears himself away from the medieval stagnation and progresses. Why is it going like this?      Everyone knows that in any country, without exceptions, the people's mob lives according to a certain well-established mold, without meditate deeply. This mold is called as the traditions. It would not a grave error to concede that the traditions are formed by accident, as a consequence of an accidental collection of circumstances, which either one or other nation has experienced, that is which it has gone through. It is an enough acceptable comparison as every nation is or is not lucky with a geographical situation and territorial budgets, in the same way one may speak about a good luck or a bad luck with the formed traditions. So not in all the nations it was reprehensible to be a bad mixer, to withdraw into the circle of the family and the friends with the same interests (in the broadest sense), and it gave the possibility for certain persons to develop and as a natural consequence to use for the good of the progress his developed potential (without the deterrent inhibiting by the society). But the countries which in it was acceptable to turn into the slavery their own citizens, contrary to all the doctrines of the world religions, there was formed a tradition of the compulsory collectivism and the total control above a person. These countries are fated to stay in the Middle Ages for as long as their traditions will change in trend of the freedom of person, and these things as the slave labor of millions prisoners, the abundance of minerals, the plagiarism of inventions even for military purposes - all this will not help them. The individualistic manners (this is the true morality) are trended to the freedom of Person, to the Truth, to the love for one's neighbor and the countries, where these manners are prevailing, solve well the problems which seemed insoluble one in the recent centuries, for example, such problems as one of the national or racial discrimination, the problem of the misery and the malnutrition, and finally the problem of dominance the puritanical moral which was distorting the veritably Christianity during many centuries.      God gave the mind to human not for failure to act. A man being based on the tradition but not thinking with his own head - this is the same thing like a man with healthy feet but going on crutches. Throw out the crutches and move your own feet! If your gait is the same one - it will be well. If after this your gate is changed - it will be good too. The main thing is that it will be YOURS. If your behaviour go on to fit into the traditions of the social surroundings - okay. If it exceeds the limits of the traditions - it will be nothing terrible too. Just in the last case you have better to look for an environment which will treat you tolerably. To remain free, you have better don't worry about the progress of humanity. You have better to look care of your own personal progress. Realizing yourself as a personality, you would help to all the humanity to become more perfect with only this thing, so this is enough. One needs nothing else from you for the common wealth. If you've stoped to be a part of the people's mob, a cog of system, already you may consider with confidence that all the humanity has moved just a little to the Light because of this.      Entitling this work as "The people's mob", I didn't imply at all a certain estate or a caste. A man burdened with the class, national or racial prejudices, he is a typical member of the people's mob. Such a member can be everyone: a vagabond, a savant, a head of government. To be a free personality can everyone too, and how the historical practice has shown, everywhere, even he can be in such slavish conformist states like the Soviet Union, China, North Korea. To go out of the slavish condition, one doesn't need in money, one doesn't need to falsify his membership of a class or to change a religion (Because all the Teachers of humanity and the Prophets, from whom the different religions had originated by mistake, but in fact they talked about the same doctrine. This is a long subject and it occupies a separate book "The question of the eternal life and the eternal death" and if God allows, soon I'm going to translate it from Russian into English). In fact, nobody can keep you by force in the slavish condition for the simple reason that nobody can read your thought, except God. There is nothing disgraceful or irreparable that you were a member of the people's mob in the past. All the people passed through this because all were brought to the society since childhood. A disgraceful thing can be only an unwillingness to go out of this condition. It depends from only one factor, whom you are going to be, only upon your own choice. It needs only one thing to stop being a part of the people's mob: one has to begin to think with his own head. And at first one must check without fail: is this or that idea yours or it is imposed on you by anybody from outside? Later on, when you will get accustomed to think with your own head, the need in this self-verification will fall away.      So everything is in your hands: to make your life as lively and interesting one (and it remains like this, as the practice shows, even in harsh conditions) or to drag out a miserable and pointless existence where is a still worse chance to become a pawn in strange satanic games.      The conformist instinct once helping to wild human herds, so been quite useful long ago, in the moment of the transition to the civilized condition it becomes a venom spoiling the life. This instinct itself as well as the fire is not evil. The fire can warm, light up, but if it goes beyond the limit of its place, for example, if it spreads over candle to a curtain, so it becomes an evident evil. The conformist instinct becomes a root of evil in the civilized world. And the civilization is not an evil in itself. Just humanity was not ready to go on the civilized way of development. To step on this way, it ought immediately decline the herd thinking.      This essay I'm going to finish with my favourite citation. A. I. Herzen in his book "From the Other Shore" wrote: "Don't look for a recipe in this book. They are not here". But it is enough possible, it was perfectly unwittingly for himself, he had given a very valuable recipe:      "If people want instead of saving the world - to save himself, instead of liberating the humanity - to liberate himself, how much they would have done as for the saving of the world, as for liberating of the humanity!"      To liberate yourself it is enough only your own wish.

The original Russian text:

https://www.proza.ru/2010/06/11/588

[onlinelettingagent-blog]

Who is A "Rogue or Dubious" Estate or Lettings Agent?

Each and every association hold to the claim that their principal objectives are often to support and streamline members' professional competence via an related code of conduct, newsletters and instruction possibilities.

This principle is laudable. But in the event the mantra behind one particular association and an additional is extra or less comparable, then there will be cohesion to deliver the most effective service for its membership. There would not be the require for splinter groups. Would there?

Let's now discover a bit further what the words "rogue", "dubious" really imply.

Frequent English definition describes "rogue" as a dishonest or unprincipled individual. This accommodates any act construed as insincere, unethical and not playing inside set rules of engagement by any particular person or group.

Dubious, on the other hand can be a qualifying adjective for any act that would result in doubt; of doubtful quality or propriety; questionable!

Basically place, both words suggest dodgy, deceitful behavioural act either by commission or intent.

Having a broad definition as this, who then can be a rouge or dubious agent? And what qualifies a secure agent?

There is certainly none extra appropriate candidate to provide such unbiased appraisal than the final client who basically utilised the service on supply.

Every client deserves a affordable degree of superior service. But given that there is absolutely no such factor as a definitive best service, somebody somewhere would often have a rant and also a moan, even though it's only for the heck of it. That is human behaviour!

Then once again, there are actually extremely undesirable services around. So to attempt and convince a client who strongly believes that they have been poorly served by an agent will be like asking the proverbial mountain to move towards the left.

Justified or prejudiced, every single client reserves the appropriate to possess an opinion on the service they received, provided that it's fair and doesn't cross the mudslinging slander/libel line. Nonetheless, mere perception just isn't proof sufficient. Why? Unless you've used a service, your opinion could only be based on third celebration data, not your personal encounter.

Service within this context is reminiscent to obtaining agreed with applicable terms and circumstances of that service, the subsequent signing of a binding contract and accepting keys for possession at check-in. To phone an agent for the goal of comparing service charges would thus not count as a fulfilled service. It really is only a conduit for information and facts gathering.

If then you definitely have never employed a particular agent's service, how would you identify irrespective of whether they are the top or rubbish in what they do? Are all service levels the identical across estate/letting agencies? Definitely not!

Similar goes for each and every other commercial enterprise model, no matter if it really is a Doctors' surgery, or possibly a fish mongers. You are able to only make like-for-like comparisons in order to get a fair conclusion.

Everyone with some kind of reasoning and intent could presently setup an estate or letting agency and consequently make achievement of the enterprise. Similarly, any one could set up a utilised auto lot. They don't must gain any 'superior' qualification to produce a results of that small business model either.

Reasoning, within this context would be the ability to interpret the best point, as opposed to that which can be not proper. Intent would be the ideal to make a profit, possibly provide employment and potentially delight in the eventual rewards which accomplishment brings.

So why do home agents have a lot head battering in the public domain as 'rogues with dubious intent,' although the incredibly essential role they play is genuinely to strive to bridge and much more generally than not, hasten the course of action of giving critical accommodation within a expert manner for all those who want it, and for a service fee?

There is at present no legislation figuring out minimum entry level qualification as base requirement to become identified as a scrupulous estate/letting agent, or to set 1 up. There is certainly none for the motor trade either. Really should there be one? Most agents who've been by means of any committed degree of study and written examination would drum its added benefits. Cause becoming that such devoted study affords invaluable depth of understanding which is necessary to remain at par together with the ever changing regulations covering the UK housing act. Presently it looks like a mine-field.

The onus as a result rests with all the industry's Mr Bigs to initiate a collective framework necessary to formulate and implement industry accepted minimum entry levels.

At the moment, associations like the RICS (Royal institution of chartered surveyors,) National Association of Estate Agents (NAEA), Association of Residential Letting Agents (ARLA - wrapped up beneath the banner of National Federation of House Experts - NFOPP), UK Association of Letting Agents (UKALA), The Guild of Home Experts (TGP), National Approved Letting Scheme (NALS), Association of British Home Professionals (ABPP), provide some sort of leadership initiatives on matters regarding the market.

Membership just isn't inexpensive although. What really is being paid for in disguise is this 'great opportunity' to work with affiliation branded stickers as identification marks of participation on shop-fronts, printed supplies or web sites. What is becoming missed but equally important is the truth that registration with the property ombudsman (TPO) and adhering to its code of conduct is even a far better option. Exactly where there is a dispute, a contesting client tends to feel far more confident bringing matters to a head with an independent redress scheme than to a member only association.

The fact that some associations seem to become tougher in executing the principles of their applicable code of conduct, bottom-line is - most are in it to create a profit. However, profits usually are not ploughed back necessarily to support the basic membership.

Die difficult members would affirm, even swear to the valuable sentiment what joining one particular association or one more has brought to their balance sheet. Other individuals may tell of considerable increase in their portfolio or landlord/vendor consumers. Even so, based only around the straightforward matter of joining a stress group? It will be tough to prove.

Association membership has its location in the wider scheme of items. It serves a goal for people today wishing to belong to a group. It might also be a good place for networking and passage of business news, encourage structured training possibilities and maybe extra.

What it doesn't do is; cease the agent with dishonest intent to defraud, irrespective of how several membership stickers they show on shop windows. It all comes down mainly to that very simple matter of honesty, fair play and decency. All things being equal, (they never ever typically are) no one really requirements the whip of a certain code of conduct hanging over them to do the best issue. In case you ever locate your self in the point exactly where it's essential to, it will be worth reappraising your intentions.

The question that bothers me though is this; when the typical goal is geared toward the benefit of their members, particularly for the little independents, why are there a lot of house associations? And how is it that during the last twenty-five years or much more, none of them have already been in a position to come collectively as a sturdy force to combat the rip-off marketing portals? Certainly this is what most agents would want. Why have agents continually paid high rates to keep house portals afloat? Agents retain portals in business enterprise. Without agents feeding portals, portals have no small business. That is fact. Together with the revenue wasted by these operating NFOPP, shame House reside didn't work for its members.

No matter spurious claims of influencing government policies on business particular matters, the house sector with its several pressure groups, time and once again have failed to make any substantial gains either by standing up against the monopolistic pride of portals or influence any policy adjustments to legislation that might enable those who operate within the private rental sector boot out defaulting tenants with out costing the landlord a fortune in lost revenue when the lengthy judicial approach slowly grinds to obtain possession.

Why is it that each of the associations covering lettings have failed to stem the tide where recalcitrant tenants are becoming encouraged in particular quarters to stay in properties, rack-up rental arrears and in some instances bring about damages, till the day the bailiff turns up in the door.

The true losers are certainly not the associations, nor the portals, but the extended suffering landlord client as well as the distressed agent.

All said, how then do you then define a rouge agent?

Is he the a single who levies a prospective tenant a important administration fee to course of action their application, which usually requires getting the tenant client to complete a tenancy questionnaire, send out for references, verify IDs and proof of addresses simply to ensure that people are who they claim to become? Agents must be hugely commended for this kind of due diligence. The point remains, it truly is a payable service. Is it the 1 who charges for solutions rendered to cover his ever increasing operation cost?

How concerning the agent who slips a note wherever there is a notice, indicative of an empty property out there for sale or for let, and tries to steal custom from yet another agent? Would this deplorable agent fall in to the rogue agent classification? Take into consideration it. Some agents are worse at this than other folks!

Is it the one particular who trawls the net seeking out recently advertised stock in the competitors, then rings up pretending to become an interested celebration just to get the property's address, then deceitfully tries to plunder the lead?

Oh, how in regards to the agent who liberally gives over inflated property appraisal so as to obtain an instruction? If he does not reach the quoted value, does he qualify as a rogue agent or will he just stroll away with a dishonest badge?

Now, as a customer, you most likely would not have provided this a really serious believed. You most likely have followed the trend and scorned off on the usual suspects. But having a little insight for the everyday duties of an estate/letting agent, I'm certain you could have a different opinion as to who a rogue agent might seriously be, or do you? Find out more info click Best online letting agents