#the other one doesn't *say* personal statement in the list of documents required but like. that can't be right?

[pinktinselmonstrosity]

girls will write one very good paragraph in their personal statement and then stop working as a reward (it's me i'm girls)

[tallerthantale]

Neil and Amanda's Fake Therapist

I originally gathered information relating to Neil's fake therapist in a bit of a messy hyperfocus flurry that included some initial errors, followed by various erratic updates, so I wanted to put the main points together into one coherent place. Some of what I'm putting together here was found by others on the subreddit post.

I once again find myself skirting the edges of my typical rules for myself about analyzing public figures, so disclaimer: this is personal opinion, I'm not scientifically or clinically evaluating anyone based off public appearances / statements, I am commenting on what personal impression I am getting off things, and leaving most speculation about internal states out.

Man does this guy make it hard to stick to that though.

The person I'm talking about here is the supposed 'therapist' that Scarlett interacted with while Neil was (allegedly) pressuring her to say the allegations weren't true. His behavior there (with a paper trail according to Tortoise), and what I was able to gather from Amanda Palmer's podcast made it clear to me that he was not operating within the acceptable behaviour of a therapist, so I decided to see if I could prompt a review of his license. All indications at this time are that he does not have one. But it gets worse.

He claims to be a minister, but like the therapist claim cites no qualifications or organizations in his website's bio. This combination of therapist who isn't a therapist and minister who isn't a minister potentially creates a legal nightmare scenario. I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, but I'm going to give you my best estimate of the situation, which has involved looking up the law and reading some cases.

As long as he isn't claiming to be a mental health professional, he may be protected in calling himself a nonspecific 'therapist.' He can probably argue it as some kind of spiritual therapy. But because he isn't actually a mental health care provider, he is not subject to mandatory reporting. Generally therapists have a legal obligation to proactively report when someone is a danger to themselves or others. He does not have that requirement. He isn't bound by professional ethics, since he is not a member of any organizations and has no licenses. Moreover, it seems to be the case in New Mexico that if a person reasonably believes you to be a minister, that kicks in clergy-penitent privilege whether or not you actually are a minister.

The origin concept of clergy-penitent privilege is that the law cannot force a priest to reveal what was said to them in confession. The First Amendment means all religions get it equally and it doesn't have to be part of a specific Catholic ritual. In New Mexico, it covers anything that was not said publicly or intended to be passed on regardless of the surrounding context. That means anything said to or by this guy that is not said in public or explicitly intended to be forwarded cannot be used by the legal system for any purpose, no matter how documented or incriminating it is to the client or to him personally. There is no mechanism to remove that privilege form him for being misused because it is derived from his representation of himself as a minister, not his actual status.

According to his linkdin he received a Bachelors degree in creative writing from the University of Rochester, in New York. He then got a Masters degree in Divinity in Organizations from Harvard Divinity School, 1982-1985. These are the only points of education claimed anywhere we have seen. He lists no psychology or mental health qualification anywhere, and is most known as an author. His bookselling success might be due to a claimed promotional appearance on Oprah.

His personal webpage has a long 'client list' or list of 'collaborators' who have hosted speaking engagements. This list was last updated in 2012. The events on his calendar page have no year. I think I recall seeing a section of his website that was only accessible to those who were 'fully committed,' or something like that, but it doesn't seem to be there now. It's possible I'm misremembering, it's possible it got taken down when the reddit thread got popular, I don't have the right skillset to check. He won an award from the Institute of Noetic Sciences, which looks to be engaging in pseudo scientific spirituality in a manner similar to Scientology.

From what I can gather from the video's I've watched, the advice he 'preaches' is a mish mash of bits and pieces of metaphors and perspectives from a variety of religions and philosophies that he probably didn't fully understand. (My speculation.) There are pieces of genuine insight that are lifted from others and that can give the impression he knows what he is talking about to vulnerable people even if he doesn't really understand them himself. He doesn't seem to have any genuine religious beliefs or connections to any religious congregation or organizations. It is unclear if he is or is not technically ordained, but that is something anyone can just do online, and he doesn't even claim it.

Particularly noticeable in his talks are traces of Jungian psychoanalysis (which is the nonsense Jordan Peterson seems to have got caught up in, and it has antisemitic and fascist origins) some Buddhist resilience concepts that have been misused by westerners a lot, and Christian (I think) concepts about universal love and togetherness. They end up mashed together into a message that I believe will influence most victims who hear it to blame themselves and remain in toxic situations, while making perpetrators feel better about continuing to perpetrate. Not saying that was the goal, but if a person had that goal, this patchwork philosophy is what you would put together to achieve it. I'm not going to be specific because I don't want to be like, putting out a guide for people on how to do this.

Amanda says she met the guy before she had a child, but after she was married. That is somewhere between 2011 and 2015. Amanda says she met him at something resembling a TED conference, where all sorts of people got together to do various (rich people nonsense.) She had a mental breakdown in a horse paddock, and the fake therapist was the guy with the horse, teaching about horse whispering.

"And since then, he’s been my therapist, and he’s also become a true friend, to me, and to my family, and to many other people in my life that he’s taken on, and helped out, in some of their darkest hours of need, and he is my emergency phone call. And in a way, he sort of picked up where Anthony, my old mentor, left off, and I don’t find it a coincidence that Wayne walked into my life right around the time Anthony walked out. "

This is not what a therapist does, this is cult leader behaviour. This is pure speculation on my part, but I wonder if Neil might have known him first and orchestrated their meeting. He is an author with connections to an organization similar to Scientology. It might actually not be a coincidence. Again, pure speculation.

Amanda describes seeking advice from him whenever she was having trouble with Neil, and that talking to him would make her feel like everything was fine again. "Even just to have someone to talk to, to remind me what I’m struggling with, what’s going on, what is home, why does this feel so disorienting, what am I doing? And I can say right now, when I shifted my internal feeling within myself, within my relationship with Neil, around where I was, my feeling in my own house transformed. Because I went, oh, right, none of this fucking matters."

In June 2019 Amanda Palmer has the Portland, OR incident where she tells her fans they need to forgive their r@#ists.

In 2019 the fake therapist did a series of webcasts with The Santa Fe Center for Spiritual Healing over a few months. At times he is titled "Rvrd", and at times he is titled "Dr." there is no reason to believe he is either. In the first one, the host reads a bio she found online, that she says he asked her not to read (she appears to think he was being humble.) This version of the bio claims that he was a Senior Scholar at the Fetzer Institute. When he comes on after she read it, he makes odd comments about whoever might be watching the video online and appears very shaken. The Fetzer Institute has no mention of him on their website. That connection is not listed in his current bio.

In his last video for the Santa Fe Center he claims to be working on an upcoming project in D.C. with a co-facilitator who was famous for brokering a truce between the crips and bloods. He also comes across like he has been asked to stop working with the center and is being super passive aggressive about it. (My speculation.)

His appearance on Amanda Palmer's podcast is recorded in July 2019, about a month after the last Santa Fe Center webcast, in upstate New York. In the descriptor she says it was recorded after a week long retreat with him she set up for 60 of her Patrion supporters. There is a nearly two year gap between the recording and posting, which is not explained. She describes him as a minister, therapist, leadership mentor, and her personal therapist. In the episode itself, she also describes him as her and Neil's relationship therapist. In the description she promotes his books and his website, and says he is still readily contactable there, but to be patient right now because he is mid move. (The description was posted when the podcast was posted, in 2021. As mentioned earlier, there are features of his website that have not been updated since 2012.)

The fake therapist tweeted about Neil being a 'dear friend' in late 2020. He has under 100 followers, not really what you would expect for a best selling author / therapist / minister / community leader / mentor / horse whisper. While I make references to cult leader behaviour, a genuine cult leader would probably have a larger following. But somehow I don't think he lacks for money. I expect there is a market for pseudo-therapists you can freely talk to about the crimes you are actively committing. You can even involve him in the crime, and it still privileged.

The events of Scarlett's allegations date to 2022, about a year after Amanda posted the podcast episode. Sometime in March is when Neil manipulates Scarlett into saying the allegations are false with what is essentially a su!c!de threat, then asks her to repeat her assurances that it was consensual to the fake therapist. Amanda had recently received a scorching message from one of Scarlett's friends about what was done to her. It seems like Neil is doing this to win a fight with Amanda in their "relationship therapy." Scarlett gets a message from the fake therapist.

Tortoise describes it as him "saying he'd be happy to speak to her in complete confidence because he had heard that she found herself in his words 'in the midst of relationships, stories and narratives, not alas necessarily of your own making. Sadly, this is not a surprise. Two creative dynamic people can easily draw others into their orbit unaware of how powerfully the magnetic pull of their influences can have on others.'"

My perception of this message is that it plants the suggestion to Scarlett that her friends are brainwashing her to think she was r@ped by pulling her into 'narratives not of her own making.' I could see how people might interpret the later lines regarding magnetic pull as being about accidental power dynamics abuse, but I read it more as him saying Scarlett's friends are opportunistic manipulators looking to make a name for themselves by taking down a famous person.

Either way, there are a considerable number of things happening there that an actual therapist would not ever do, for a variety of very good reasons. Tortoise's attempt to call him to ask for comment was thwarted by the fact that his phone has been specifically programed not to accept voicemails. Not like, the voicemail box was full or something, he went out of his way to do that. Which means Tortoise can't quite claim that he didn't respond to requests to comment, because they couldn't leave a message. Other organizations probably run into similar difficulties establishing evidence that they have contacted him. It's not a smoking gun, but I don't like it.

A year later Amanda Palmer makes her post on the Russel Brand allegations, where she argues the solution to serial predatory behaviour is to try to get them to stop doing "stupid shit" by trying to heal their lacking and fear with love and compassion and forgiveness, because that the ONLY cause / motivation for abusive behavior. And some unarticulated hope for non-specific accountability vibes.

This post looks to me like the perspective of a person who has been continuously exploited, and manipulated into thinking it is their personal responsibility to heal people who have no interest in being healed. It reads to me like a person who has been justifying staying in a toxic situation to themself so long it has warped their entire worldview. It reads to me like the inevitable end result of this fake therapists preaching.

I don't think that absolves her of what ever her role has been in facilitating access to victims, or actively promoting these views to her audience, but it is something to keep in mind.

There is a broad rage of possibilities for what is going on with this guy. The spectrum runs from deeply misguided fool to deliberately exploitative criminal. Either way it looks like he is charging people money for the service of turning them into the "this is fine" dog. This is not fine. This is not ok. Unfortunately it probably is legal.

[demystify-2025]

The Advisory Board

There are 54 groups listed on "The Project 2025 Advisory Board". While most of them are relatively straightforward, there are a few that I don't truly have the background to understand without doing a deep dive. Those are noted in the summary of the group.

Here we go. I hope you all understand just how confused my FBI agent must be right now. (Hi, Ken.)

Alabama Policy Institute: its mission statement claims it "honors the principles of free markets, limited government, and strong families." Looking further down their About page, they support the right of a person to be protected from "liberalizing social conventions". Their "abortion and adoption" page offers a list of Pregnancy Resource Centers and proclaims the "Pro-Life Legacy". Curiously, I am unable to find anything regarding "strong families" under their 'social policies' section.

Alliance Defending Freedom:The main link on Google takes me to a page asking me to "Become a monthly partner and help defend your God-given rights year-round!" I have to delete everything after the ".org" to see their website and any other page, which is a) terrible website design and b) a violation of Google's Terms of Service regarding obfuscating links. Anyway. The ADF's feature article on 7/15/2024 is about challenging the current Title IX, which would include gender identity as a protected class under sex-based discrimination. They are a conservative Christian lobbying group.

American Compass: A conservative economics group that believes "markets require rules and institutions to work well, that they are a means to the end of human flourishing and exist to serve us". This is a group that I don't have the economic background to truly understand, but their "family" page prioritizes marriage and children. Refreshingly, it doesn't say a word about religion or what constitutes a family. I'll have to dig more deeply into this one.

The American Conservative: A magazine that's exactly what it says on the cover. The blog posts seem reasonably fair; one of the ones I read regarding the dismissal of Trump's document mishandling case took care to note that Cannon, the judge in question, was appointed by Trump. According to Wikipedia, TAC "opposes unchecked power in government and business, promotes the concept of the nuclear family, free markets, and supports realism and restraint in foreign affairs based on America's national interests."

America First Legal Foundation: Quote from their front page: "With your support, we will oppose the radical left’s anti-jobs, anti-freedom, anti-faith, anti-borders, anti-police, and anti-American crusade."

American Accountability Foundation: A group that "deploys aggressive research and investigations to advance conservatism, while heavily scrutinizing politicians, political appointees, establishment organizations, and government policies. Every day, our work is exposing the truth behind the people and policies of the Biden Administration that threaten the freedoms of the American people."

American Center for Law and Justice: A group focusing on legal challenges to unconstitutional oversteps. Their "About" page mentions successes that are examples of clear overreach, like people being banned from the National Archives for wearing a shirt reading "March4Life". However, from their "Life & Liberty Drive" page, their underlying philosophy beomces clearer: "Israel is under violent attack, as Biden betrays our ally. The Left is waging war on our Christian faith, banning Bible studies...And Planned Parenthood is using your tax dollars to expand abortion on demand, as the Deep State shreds the Constitution."

American Cornerstone Institute: Again, the link on Google goes directly to a donation page where I'm unable to access the rest of the website. Terrible design choice; I'm trying to learn more about you and your first step is asking me for money. From their About page: "ACI will remain a non-partisan, not-for-profit institute". Their website prominently promotes faith-based solutions.

American Council of Trustees and Alumni: ACTA's mission is to "promote academic excellence, defend academic freedom, and ensure accountability". Their members have testified before Congress about student disruption of guest speakers that "prevent speakers from voicing disfavored (generally, conservative) viewpoints".

The American Main Street Initiative: The 'about' page of AMSI says they focus on issues that matter to most Americans, but gives no details on what those issues are. The front page list COVID conspiracies and claims "Americans are no longer safe in their cities".

American Moment: AM believes that "he American family, rooted in faith and tradition, is the bedrock of this nation and must be supported" and that "Government has a moral responsibility to foster public virtue". The other 8 priorities they list include immigration, China, law & order, trade policy promoting the middle-class lifestyle, and limiting the power of "multinational corporations".

American Principles Project: The APP bills itself as "America's top defender of the family" and proclaims, "We want to impose a political cost on the Left’s anti-family extremism. If they want to attack parental rights, confuse young children about changing their gender, undermine the ability of parents to protect their children’s innocence, or drive a wedge between parents and children in education, then they are going to be punished at the polls."

Center for Equal Opportunity: CEO claims to promote colorblind agendas in hiring and diversity. In February, they announced that they had sent a letter to the American Bar Association taking issue with the fact that their Diversity Clerkship Program gave preferential treatment to minority groups - POC, women, and people who are queer, disabled, or come from a disadvantaged background.

Center for Family and Human Rights: You already know what they stand for, solely by the name. One of their core values is "Fidelity to the teachings of the Church" (capitalization theirs); their mission is "To defend life and family at international institutions and to publicize the debate."

Center for Immigration Studies: Per their About page, "The Center is animated by a unique pro-immigrant, low-immigration vision which seeks fewer immigrants but a warmer welcome for those admitted." Their 'topics' menu links to "Biden Border Crisis", "Sanctuary Cities", "Welfare Use", "National Security" and both Legal and Illegal Immigration pages.

That's just the first fifteen! I have to break up the block of bullet points because it turns out Tumblr has a 4096-character limit on these things. Go drink some water.

Center for Renewing America: Their "mission is to renew a consensus of America as a nation under God with unique interests worthy of defending that flow from its people, institutions, and history"; "God, country, and community are at the heart of this agenda."

Claremont Institute: "We take the lead in DC through our Center for the American Way of Life, which is devoted to restoring political liberty by arming the Right with moral confidence, ideas, and new policies, while working to undermine the Left's hold over America's institutions and conscience."

Coalition for a Prosperous America: CPA is "a bipartisan coalition of farmers, ranchers, manufacturers, and labor organizations that make and grow things in the United States. Our members believe that America’s strength and well being is based upon growing America’s productive capacity and quality employment more than cheap consumption."

Competitive Enterprise Institute: The tagline is "40 Years of Eliminating Excessive Regulation and Unleashing Human Potential". They don't provide an easily-findable summary of their major positions to see how their actions back up their tagline.

Conservative Partnership Institute: "CPI provides a platform whereby citizen leaders, scholars, and activists who are committed to conservative values and principles can be connected with the conservative movement, and with Congress, congressional staff, and organization leaders in Washington, D.C.  " They're a networking group.

Concerned Women for America: CWA "protects and promotes Biblical values and Constitutional principles through prayer, education, and advocacy".

Defense of Freedom Institute: DFI is another "Constitutional"/"First Principles" group. From their Civil and Constitutional Rights page: "America is facing a historical moment, when many are pushing for policies that violate core constitutional and civil rights essential to a free society. DFI exists to defend the Constitution and the rule of law and protect civil liberties at school and work."

Ethics and Public Policy Center: EPPC works to "apply the riches of the Jewish and Christian traditions" to public policy.

Family Policy Alliance: FPA wants the USA to be a nation where "God is honored, religious freedom flourishes, families thrive and life is cherished!" (Snarky side note: Nothing says 'religious freedom' like promoting one religion to be honored above all others.)

Family Research Council: FRC wants to "serve in the kingdom of God by championing faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview."

First Liberty Institute: First Liberty "has been leading the fight to reclaim religious freedom in America." You may recognize them from defending the baker who wouldn't make a cake for a gay wedding.

Forge Leadership Network: FLN is a networking group who wants its members to "examine public policy and ethics from a Judeo-Christian worldview".

Halfway there! Just 27 more to go. Now's a good time to stretch it out.

Foundation for Defense of Democracies: FDD is a nonpartisan, nonprofit national security organization. In their individual policy pages, they imply that COVID was a biological weapon.

Foundation for Government Accountability: FGA claims to "advance policies that improve lives." At the same time, they are against ranked-choice voting and claim, "Mail-in and absentee ballot are a big problem when it comes to election fraud and ballot harvesting"

FreedomWorks: FW is a bland website that talks about individual liberty, draining the swamp, and smaller government. They're light on actual policies that they back, and several of their internal links are broken.

The Heritage Foundation: If you're reading this far into a post about the contributors to P2025, you exactly who THF is. Their mission statement: "Heritage’s mission is to formulate and promote public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense."

Hillsdale College: A private religious college with about 1400 undergrads that proudly boasts it was the first to admit both women and men. From their statement, "The College values the merit of each unique individual, rather than succumbing to the dehumanizing, discriminatory trend of so-called “social justice” and “multicultural diversity.""

Honest Elections Project: THey describe themselves as "a nonpartisan group devoted to supporting the right of every lawful voter to participate in free and honest elections". They also want "fair, reasonable, common sense measures" in place to protect against fraud.

Independent Women's Forum: They claim to focus on educating women about relevant policy. Their front page prominently displays anti-transgender messaging. They also back JD Vance as Trump's VP pick.

Institute for the American Worker: A group that claims to protect workers' rights. Going into the 'news' section reveals them to be anti-union.

Institute for Energy Research: They believe that "freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions" and that "Government policies should be predictable, simple, and technology neutral."

Institute for Women's Health: From their "What We Do" page: "The Institute for Women’s Health is committed to building coalitions that revolutionize women’s access to care." Looking through their op-eds, they are primarily an anti-abortion group.

Intercollegiate Studies Institute: Their header proclaims, "Your time at college is too important to feel isolated or attacked for questioning the ever-narrowing range of debate on campus. Get the education you deserve. Explore intellectual conservatism; Join a vibrant community of students and scholars; Defend your principles".

James Madison Institute: Not to be confused with James Madison University, JMI believes in "free markets, limited government, and economic liberty".

Keystone Policy: A group focused on "bringing leaders together". They focus on education, civic engagement, and tribal policy.

That's 40! We're almost through.

The Leadership Institute: TLI "provides training in campaigns, fundraising, grassroots organizing, youth politics, and communications. The Institute teaches conservatives of all ages how to succeed in politics, government, and the media." They furnish lists of their recruits to other conservative organizations.

Liberty University: A private religious college.

National Association of Scholars: From their about page, "We expect that ideas be judged on their merits; that scholars engage in the disinterested pursuit of the truth; and that colleges and universities provide for fair and judicial examination of contending views. We expect colleges to offer coherent curricula and programs of study."

National Center for Public Policy Resarch: NCPPR is a "non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think tank" whose mission is "to grow the freedom movement by taking our message to new constituencies to secure liberty now and for future generations."

Pacific Research Institute: PRI claims, "public policy is too important to be left just to the experts." Their mission "is to champion freedom, opportunity, and personal responsibility for all individuals by advancing free-market policy solutions".

Patrick Henry College: A "conservative Christian college" that is "equipping Godly leaders".

Personnel Policy Operations: PPO believes "There are many opposition groups to the policy implementation of an America First agenda, such as the radical left, corporate media, tech companies, leftwing NGOs, and other activists". They firmly believe in the America First ideology.

Recovery for America Now Foundation: An addictions recovery group who believes "the Miracle of Recovery should be available to all. Our foundation was born out of our belief that all human beings possess intrinsic value, and that nobody is too sick to recover." They are currently working to repeal IMD, which limits recovery options available to Medicaid subscribers.

1792 Exchange: They work to "develop policy and resources to protect and equip non-profits, small businesses and philanthropy from “woke” corporations, to educate Congress and stakeholder organizations about the dangers of ESG (environmental, social, and governance) policies, and to help steer public companies in the United States back to neutral on ideological issues so they can best serve their shareholders and customers with excellence and integrity."

Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America: An anti-abortion advocacy group.

Texas Public Policy Foundation: "The Foundation’s mission is to promote and defend liberty, personal responsibility, and free enterprise" (emphasis theirs). Their front page mocks Democrats for not winning a statewide election in 30 years, then their about page says "The public is demanding a different direction for their government".

Teneo Network: The Teneo Network believes in limited government; a "transcendent order" based on religion, philosophy, or tradition; strong national defense; and free enterprise.

Young America's Foundation: Another group decrying the state of conservatives on college campuses. They want to make sure that American students "understand and are inspired by the ideas of individual freedom, a strong national defense, free enterprise, and traditional values."

And that's it for the listed contributors! Next post, we'll be getting into the meat and potatoes of Project 2025.

[saiyanqueenreads]

Former executive office level banker here. I dealt with legal and regulatory complaints. And let me tell you, the number of times that I had to break the news to folks that the significant other / family member that "stole" all their money had not actually done anything that we (the bank) could have stopped them from doing... was tragically high.

So here are a few do's and don'ts that I'm hoping might help.

Don't have joint accounts. The previous posters listed great points. And like, there are PLENTY of reasons why it's actually a smart move for couples to have separate accounts. General fraud and ID theft come to mind immediately. If someone steals your s/o's wallet, do you want them to get ALL your combined money, or just your s/o's half? When you have completely separate accounts and only carry your own account's cards or checks, casual thieves can't get at the other person's money.

Do add 2FA and verbal password protection to your bank accounts. Again, good for casual fraud prevention too. But if you have someone trying to get at your account via phone or in-person branch visits, adding this to your account FORCES the banker to throw that blocking hurdle at them. And many banking systems make bypassing them impossible or at the very least traceable directly back to the banker. And NO banker wants to loose their job and face potential criminal charges when the paper-trail leads back to them...

Don't share your login credentials or set your devices to "remember you." With ANYONE for ANY REASON. Entering a password into online banking does more than just grant access to the person logging in. It's also establishing the IDENTITY of the person logging in. It's saying John is the one accessing John's account right now. Anything done at that point was done by "you", and it's gonna take some deep investigation of things like IP addresses and such to prove otherwise. And if the person defrauding you lives in your own home, like an s/o or child or step-child, it's even MORE likely that the bank will rule against you if you file fraud. Because it was YOUR password and YOUR home network.

Do ditch paper statements. Yes, even for tax purposes! (Banks are required to keep your account statement documents for 5 years, and many banks keep them available for 7 or more.) Your bank statement letter in the mail can easily be intercepted by those wanting to defraud you, especially those that share your home or know where you live. And there are details on that paper than can be used against you. You balance for starters. But also your FULL account number on many. Even your address, deposit and transaction history, and name of the bank you're using can be useful for folks looking to steal from you or looking for proof of your financial situation (like an abusive spouse).

Do check your accounts often. At least twice weekly if you can't be bothered to do it daily. Particularly sneaky s/o's, family members, or professional fraudsters know that sometimes the best way to get the most money from a person is to do it tiny bits at a time. I once handled a case where we found out that the person's step-son had been using their account for relatively small purchases (mostly under $30, but all under $100) for at least 7 years. I just couldn't see any further back than that... And it was happening on 3 of their accounts. The amount they'd lost was easily over the total amount that they currently had in any 1 of their accounts total at the time. And that's the thing. If someone steals all or the most of the money they can right away from you, you notice it, close the account, and update all your security. Meaning that they likely can't do it again. They've killed the goose that lays the golden eggs. But if they just take $30 daily and you never notice.... well the account stays open. The goose continues to lay those golden eggs for them. It just doesn't happen to notice when a couple eggs go missing.

Do be VERY VERY wary about who you grant rights of Power Of Attorney to. Even temporarily. This applies to wills, guardianship, fiduciary, conservatorships, living trusts, and other types of legally binding ways for others to assume control of you or your loved one's financial decision making too.

Don't co-sign for anything that you are not fully prepared to have to pay for entirely yourself. I cannot tell you the number of creditcards and loans that I saw s/o's, new spouses, and parents get dumped on them because the main signer just took the money/stuff and ran. Fiancées especially should be VERY leery about signing for things with their s/o when there is no other legal protections in place in regards to shared debts and nothing really tying the s/o to them.

While we are on the subject - financial abuse is not always just physically taking money away or not having a savings account or escape stash. For a lot of people it is the other spouse sabotaging your credit score, constantly overspending, and you being unable to trust that joint household bills and loans are paid. Did you know that once you add an authorized user to your bank account it’s nearly impossible to remove them without their permission? Did you know that your spouse, who likely knows your birthday and SSN, can often gain access and reset passwords for any online accounts and create new ones?

Financial abuse will ruin your life and there’s really nothing except significant time that fixes it. If you are in a situation where you think this might happen to you you should freeze your credit with all three major agencies. You can find info on how to do this at USA.gov/credit-freeze

This is not something that only happens to tradwives. You are not exempt because you are independent or competent.

[krakenartificer]

When I got my ADHD diagnosis, I looked at the questions on the screening form and thought, "If this result comes back positive, then I'm definitely not the only person in my family who has it." Questions like

"Have difficulty finishing one activity before starting another one" and

"I finish others' sentences before they can finish it themselves" and

"have trouble staying on one topic when talking"

...I thought were just weird quirks of my family, but no. When I got my results, I contacted my cousin, and she contacted her sisters and mother, and .. .. yeah. Basically everyone in my dad's side of the family is ADHD.

Now there are some problems with that, obviously, (getting family reunions to stick to a schedule is lol no) but there are some really fantastic perks. For one thing, no one in that family minds if I interrupt them while they're talking ... everyone's happy to keep 3 conversations going at the same time .... and no one minds if you fidget constantly.

But the best perk -- at least that I've found so far -- is that all of our parents have coping mechanisms, and passed them on to us. When I found myself unable to handle tasks with more than one step, my father didn't say "WTF are you talking about? It's easy! Just do the thing! Stop being lazy!" No, he could relate completely, and he sat down and taught me how to handle that.

So today, I'm going to pass on to you the coping mechanism my dad taught me for handling the "cannot put tasks in order / cannot get started / forget what I'm doing" problem. You'll need to adjust it for your own needs and your own struggles, but hopefully it'll be helpful in setting up your own process.

I'm going to walk through it with a big project I'm doing at work, just to have a concrete example. That will make some of the discussion specific to computer programming and technical writing, but I do the same thing for all my projects, so hopefully it'll be generalizable.

So to set the stage:

I was supposed to modify this piece of code -- we'll call it "Rosetta" -- to make it handle call data as well as what it was already doing. I did that.... but we now need the code to be able to handle calls (if that's wanted) but also to be able to handle NOT having calls (if THAT'S wanted).

Which is just .... ugh. So much. SOOOOOOOO much.

So. Break it down.

Step one is to get some recording mechanism - pen and paper, whiteboard, blank computer document, whatever

(Technically, this is a different coping strategy, so we'll just take a quick detour: WRITE THINGS DOWN. Your brain is shit at remembering things, and anyway you've already got limits on your working memory; why would you choose to tie up some of that limited resource in something that could be accomplished with literal stone-age technology? Don't even try to remember things. WRITE THEM DOWN.)

I like sticky notes: they're readily available in all offices, they're pretty cheap, and (most importantly) they can be rearranged if it turns out that I forgot a step or put the steps in the wrong order (which, like, let's be honest, I am definitely going to do). But they kill trees and create unnecessary methane emissions, so I've recently switched over to using virtual sticky notes. That's the format I'm going to use for this example, but you can use anything that meets your purposes.

So, you've got something to write with, you're ready to start.

The first question is: what are you trying to accomplish here? What would "done" look like? What is our goal?

I need to end up with a version of Rosetta that will make the correct results if you don't want calls, and will also make the correct results if you do.

The goal here is that you end up with a statement that you can definitively say (a) Yes this is what I wanted or (b)No this is not right because _______

In this case, in order to do that, I'll need to define "correct results" for both call- and non-call versions. But if I have that nailed down, then this statement meets that criterion: I'll be able to say "Yes, this is what I wanted: see, it makes the correct result for calls, and it makes the correct result for not-calls". Or else I'll be able to say, "No, this is wrong: see, it makes the correct result for calls, but on not-calls it does X and we wanted Y."

I have a clear, definitive standard about what I need to do and whether or not I've done it.

But there was a prerequisite there: I need to define "correct results".

So that goes on a sticky note: Create test that will compare my results to existing call!Rosetta-results and to existing not-call!Rosetta-results.

[ID: Two blue boxes, one on top of the other. The top one says in white text "Create test to compare my results to call!results" The bottom one says "Create test to compare my results to not-call!results"] OK. So now we know what we want. The second question is: what do we need to do in order to get that? Here's where the sticky-note recording system really shines, because you don't have to answer this question sequentially. You just start writing down every single thing that is not the way you want it to end up.

I need it to remove commas in the python script, not the bash script

I need to delete the first part of the get_runs() function, which doesn't do anything

I need to delete the rest of the parameters passed to build_query_script() function, because runs encompasses all the others

while we're on that subject, runs doesn't even need the group_variable, so let's pull that out of the parameter document

we also have a dmf defined, which the bash script demands but doesn't use; let's change that demand

since we're changing the structure of the parameter document, we don't need to pull new metrics for each run, so let's move that outside of the runs() loop and only run once

right now the parameter document is ALMOST but not quite "one row per template". Make it so it's actually one row per template.

among other things, that's going to require making it possible for a template to be followed by nothing at all, since it's the assumption that a template will have a metrics block after it that makes it not quite one row per template. So make it possible to publish a template with a null block

the other thing that's weirdly hard-coded is the definition of what a block looks like. Would it make more sense to separate that out into an input file, like the parameters document? On the one hand, that would make it much more flexible; on the other hand, that's another piece that can break. Don't know. Put a question mark on it.

etc

Here's what it looks like at the end of this step:

[ID: A black and white background showing many boxes in two different shades of blue, all with white text. Some of the boxes are overlapping each other.]

As you can see, at this phase you don't need to worry about any of the following:

ordering the tasks. Just stick 'em right on top of each other for now

how you're going to do any of this. Right now we just need to know what, not how

sticking to only one project. As I was working on this, it occurred to me that this whole process would have been a heck of a lot easier if someone had just made a user manual for this, and since I have to go through all the code line-by-line anyway, I might as well write up the documentation while I'm at it. (To help out future-me, if nothing else.) So I put those tasks on another color of sticky note.

making notes that make any ***ing sense to anyone else. This process is for you, and only you need to understand what you're talking about it. Phrase it in ways that make sense to your brain, and to hell with anyone else.

on that topic, also don't worry about making steps that are "too small" or "too dumb" to write down. This is for you. If "save document" feels like a step to you, then write it down.

You also don't need to get every single step involved in the project right now. Get as many as you can, to be sure, but the process is designed on the assumption that you ARE going to forget important steps, and is designed to handle that.

When you can't think of any more steps, then the third question is: what order does it make sense to do these in? Are there any steps that would be easier if you did another step first? Are there any that literally cannot be done unless another step is complete?

This is also a good place to group steps if they fit together nicely. When I used physical sticky notes, I used two different sizes; digitally I can of course make them whatever size I want.

So I have several documentation steps that (a) do need to be written to make sense to other people and (b) I really need to know what's going on before I can do that. I could write them now, but if I did, I'd just end up re-writing them based on things that change as I'm coding. So we'll move those to the end:

[ID: Three dark blue boxes with white text. They read "Create step-by-step instructions for creating your own metric agg", "Create step-by-step instructions for modifying a metric", "Create step-by-step instructions for modifying a query."]

These parts, though -- if I had all the variable structures written down, I could look at them while I'm coding. Then I won't have to keep scrolling back and forth in the code, trying to remember if it's an array or a dictionary while also trying to remember what part of the code I was working on. Brilliant. Move that to the front.

[ID: Seven dark blue boxes with white text, three large, four small. The first one is large and says "Write up explanation of how Rosetta works." The second one is large and says "Document structure of all variables." Attached to that one are four smaller boxes that say "All_blocks", "Runs", "metric", "New_block". The third large one says "Document what qb_parameters.csv contains"]

Also, while I'm at it, I should get the list of variables I need to document -- then I won't have to keep scrolling to find them. Make those sub-steps.

I definitely keep needing to look up what's in the parameters document, so I should write that down, too. For the user manual I also should write down what's in the metric document, but I don't need that for myself, so I can send that to the end.

[ID: The same three dark blue boxes from two screenshots ago (create step-by-step instructions for metric agg, modifying a metric, and modifying a query), now with another dark blue box in front of them with white text that says "Document what granular_metrics.tsv contains."]

These five are all small steps, and are all related in that they don't actually (hopefully) change the functionality of the code; they're just stuff left over from prior versions of this code. So we can lump them all together.

[ID: Five light blue boxes with white text that say "Delete first part of get_runs()", "Have build_query_script only receive the "run" parameter" "Delete dmf" "Move metrics=get_metrics() outside build_all_blocks (all the way up to the top level?" "Delete group_variable from qp_parameters"]

My brain likes this better, so that I can keep track of fewer "main steps", but that's just a peculiarity of me -- you should lump and split however you prefer to make this process easier for you.

[ID: The same five boxes from the prior screenshot, now all made smaller and attached to a larger box that says "Remove Legacy Code"]

Keep going, step by step, sticky by sticky, until you've got them in order. If -- while you're doing this -- you remember another thing you need to do, write it on a sticky and slap it on the pile; you don't have to stop what you're doing to deal with it, because it's written down and it's on the pile and it will get processed; you can just keep working on the thing you're on right now.

[ID: All the same boxes from the first screenshot, now in a neat row. Some of the original boxes have been grouped together. The ones that were said to be at the beginning of the process are on the left and the ones that were said to be at the end are on the right.]

Step four: for the love of all that's holy, SAVE THIS LIST.

Write it on your cubicle whiteboard where it won't be erased

write it on a piece of paper and tape it to the office wall

send an email to yourself

take a picture with your phone

I don't care but save it.

When I used physical sticky notes, I kept them all on the hood of my cubicle's shelf. Now, as you can see, I use Powerpoint, which is irritating af but does allow me to keep everything in a single document, which I can write down the path of.

[ID: White text on a black background says "open ~/Documents/Rosetta\ Modifications\ and \Documentation.pptx" The next line says "Notes in Rocketbook pg 10-12, 16" The next line says "Turn that into documentation that can be used for making modifications."]

And now (finally) you can answer the question "How would I even get started on that?" You look at the first thing on the list, and you treat it as its own project. You can hyperfocus on this step and completely forget about everything else this project requires, because everything you need to remember for the rest of it is written down.

If, as you're working a step, you think of something else you need to do for the big project, write it on a sticky and slap it on the pile. Don't even worry about trying to order it or identify sub-steps; as long as it's not blocking the thing you need to work on right now, you don't have to care. Just stick that bugger anywhere at all on the list, and go back to what you were doing. When you un-hyperfocus and come back to look at your list, there'll be a big sticky note stuck sideways across all the rest of the steps, and you'll remember to file and order it then.

Other benefits of this system

1) The first question really helps with unclear directions from your boss. You can take whatever they told you to do, and translate it into a requirement that is clearly either met or not-met, and then run it back by the boss.

If they say, "No, no, we want ______" then phew! You just saved a huge miscommunication and weeks of wasted work! What a good employee you are! What an excellent team player with strong communication skills!

If they say "Yes, that's what I want," then you know -- for sure -- what it is you're trying to accomplish. Your anxiety is reduced, and your boss thinks you're super-conscientious.

(And if your boss is a jerk who likes to move the goalposts and blame it on their subordinates, then have this conversation over email, so you can show it to their boss or to HR should it become necessary.)

2) Having this project map means that when you spend an hour staring at the requirements and trying to figure out how to get started (which, let's be honest, you were definitely going to do anyway) ... When your boss/coworker comes by and says, "How's it going?" Instead of having to say "I haven't even started 😞" You can say, "Pretty well! I've got all the steps mapped out and am getting ready to start on implementation!" and show them your list, and they think you're very organized and meticulous. 3) Sometimes, especially in corporate jobs, you and your coworkers will run into a problem that's too big for even Neurotypicals to hold all in their heads. At that point, the NTs will be completely lost -- they've never had to develop a way to handle projects they can't just look at and know how to get started. So then you pipe up in the meeting and say, "OK, well, what exactly are we trying to accomplish?" and everybody at the conference table looks at you like you're a goddamned genius and you don't have to tell them that you use this exact same process to remember how to make a sandwich 😅

4) Having this project map makes it so much easier to stop work and then start it up again later, but this post is already really really really long, so I'm going to address that in a separate (really really long) post.