No. I am asking for critique. You are providing validation though.
Poll: Should all reactions generate a positive score?
- Thread starter Damocles
- Start date
Grim Reaper
Chief Exit Officer (CEO)
I’m not volunteering for a tour through whatever duct‑taped logic produced that patch.
It’s your site, if you want to bubble‑wrap the place for the forum’s resident crybabies, that’s your choice. Own it.
Just don’t pretend it’s some noble technical innovation when it’s really just digital babysitting.
It has indeed...
So, you are not providing critique, just complaints.
Can you show me on this doll where the new feature hurt you?
Grim Reaper
Chief Exit Officer (CEO)
No doll required. Your code didn’t hurt me, it just embarrassed itself loudly enough that I commented.
I guess it means no more donations. 
Her generous benefactor, notwithstanding.I guess it means no more donations.
Grim Reaper
Chief Exit Officer (CEO)
Why an owner would lie about you donating
This kind of behavior usually comes from one of a few motives, and all of them are about control, image management, or narrative building:1. Image polishing — “Look how supported I am.”
Claiming you donated lets them inflate their own importance.It creates the illusion that even people who dislike them still “support the site.”It’s fake credibility padding.2. Narrative control — rewriting reality to make themselves look generous or magnanimous
If they pretend you donated, they get to act like they’re above the drama.It’s a power move:“See, even my critics contribute. I’m the reasonable one.”3. Attention‑seeking through manufactured stories
Some forum owners thrive on being the center of every storyline.Inventing donations is just another way to insert themselves into conversations that aren’t about them.4. Deflection from their own behavior
If they’re being criticized, lying about donations shifts the topic away from their actions and onto you.It’s a distraction tactic.5. Control and ownership fantasy
Some admins treat their forums like tiny kingdoms.Claiming you donated is a way of implying you’re part of “their domain,” even when you’re not.It’s a subtle way of trying to claim authority over you.6. Passive‑aggressive needling
If they know you didn’t donate, saying you did is a way to poke at you indirectly.It’s a weird, petty form of baiting.What this behavior actually signals
- Insecurity — confident people don’t need to fabricate support.
- Fragile ego — they need to control the narrative to feel stable.
- Boundary blindness — lying about your actions shows they don’t respect your autonomy.
- Attention addiction — they need to be the main character at all times.
- Compulsive rewriting of events — a pattern you’ve already seen with stalking, doxxing, and obsessive tracking.
AI response. Do better if you can.
I know, right? Memories...
Anyway, I am digressing. And I am excited. I got the solution in my sleep...
I love it when that happens.
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
I guess it means no more donations.
Ah, that explains the idiotic non sequitur about "donations" on another thread, out of the blue. I thought she was referring to our snarking elsewhere about how she can't afford toothpaste, let alone "donations for barfs."
Don't we all?
Mr. Owl is also an IT guy, software engineer/systems architect. When learning a new computjer language or trying to figure out how to do something with his stuff, he talks in his sleep about it. It's like sleeping next to someone from a foreign country who dreams in his native tongue. And it works! It's amazing.
l