my journal 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
I went a little further in my study of the potentially good systems to add to the presently traded ones. I ranked them in a descending order by back-tested performance, as measured by the "average" column (average of sharpe ratio and profit factor) and then I analyzed the top 15 or so, one by one, and defined why we're not trading them.

Snap2.jpg
 
3 prospective systems

I will go yet another step further.

Soon we will have the opportunity to scale up the investment (once we reach a given profit from the traded systems).

On that day, I will be able to propose probably two or three systems to be added (or contracts to be added to the traded systems).

I will now focus on those 3 systems. Of course I will largely use the table shown in the post above.

I don't want to blow my chances and add systems that trade once a month. So, forget the CL_ON_3.

Let's do some brainstorming and list a few systems that seem to be potential candidates:

GBL_ON: it is not as good as the GBL_ID (only half as good) but it produces a lot of trades and a lot of profit. I want to add this one.

Three systems that use the same exact code, and which have all been profitable in forward testing:
GBP_ID_7, AUD_ID_2, CAD_ID_2

And i will add to the above the CHF_ID_2, which has lost money so far, but seems to be a good one, too, because it uses the same exact code.

ES_ON_2, yeah.

Also, I want to doble the contracts on GBL_ID and ZN_ON_2.

Now. I have not added 3 systems/contracts but... 8.

The investors are not going to be happy to go from 9 to 17 contracts overnight, and will feel like I am sweating them.

On top of it, I've recently changed 5 of the 10 systems (removed 5 and added 4) we were trading, so I can't rush things and I cannot afford to do what I did again. If there's new systems, it has to be a permanent change I am positive about. Not a temporary thing, that I take back as soon as the system loses and I analyze its performance more in detail.

Ok, i've got it.

FIRST ROUND
We double the GBL_ID and we add the GBL_ON, so it's a clear statement that the GBL_ID is twice as good.

Then we have taken care of the GBLs for a good while.

SECOND ROUND
Next round, after an increase in profit of another 50%, with more trades, we add:
ES_ON_2 and this whole group of ninth wave WITH_ID_TREND systems: AUD_ID_2, CAD_ID_2, CHF_ID_2, EUR_ID_8, GBP_ID_7, JPY_ID_4. Yeah: I've decided to add all of them, even the ones that still have not traded, because the group looks very good: they trade scattered, never at the same time. The only thing that puzzles me is why the EUR_ID_8 still hasn't made one single trade. I've checked the code and everything seems correct.

ninth_wave_WITH_ID.jpg



THIRD ROUND
Later on, we add the CLs: CL_ON_2 (back, because we'd been trading it) and CL_ON_3. But before doing so, we have to double the CL_ID_3, to state clearly that it's better than them. Also, we have to double the contracts on ZN_ON_2 which has been our best system so far.

Ok, now let's see how it looks on our equity curve.

Present situation (looks really good):
Snap1.jpg


After round one:
not different, because we're missing the GBL data (damn!). Forget this part: the GBLs are reliable, as they made 150 trades apiece in the forward-tested period.

After round two (four months-long drawdown but not very deep):
Snap2.jpg


After round three (not good):
Snap3.jpg

Ok.

Present situation is just perfect.

Round one we're in the dark, but it's fine because we have plenty of forward-tested trades.

Round two is also fine.

Round three is no good. In round three...

NEW THIRD ROUND
Double contracts on ZN_ON_2, add ES_ON, double GBP_ID_5, add GBP_ID_2 and GBP_ID_3.

Snap4.jpg


Later rounds go like this: doubling all contracts above, one by one, and then we can finally add the CLs.


LAST MINUTE CHANGE:

Since there's too many ninth wave on our second round, six of them, we will still add them all, but we will anticipate adding the ES_ON_2 on our first round, along with GBL_ID (contract from 1 to 2) and GBL_ON. So it will be 3 more systems at x profit, 6 more systems at 2 x profit (or even less). And then everything as explained. Yeah, profit increases more rapidly than drawdown as we add systems/contracts, so we're able to add them faster and faster, without worrying about the increased drawdown.
 
Last edited:
Why do some countries drive on the left?

http://users.telenet.be/worldstandards/driving on the left.htm#history

Fascinating: it all began from the sword.

History and origin

About a quarter of the world drives on the left, and the countries that do are mostly old British colonies. This strange quirk perplexes the rest of the world; but there is a perfectly good reason.

In the past, almost everybody travelled on the left side of the road because that was the most sensible option for feudal, violent societies. Since most people are right-handed, swordsmen preferred to keep to the left in order to have their right arm nearer to an opponent and their scabbard further from him. Moreover, it reduced the chance of the scabbard (worn on the left) hitting other people.

Furthermore, a right-handed person finds it easier to mount a horse from the left side of the horse, and it would be very difficult to do otherwise if wearing a sword (which would be worn on the left). It is safer to mount and dismount towards the side of the road, rather than in the middle of traffic, so if one mounts on the left, then the horse should be ridden on the left side of the road.

In the late 1700s, however, teamsters in France and the United States began hauling farm products in big wagons pulled by several pairs of horses. These wagons had no driver's seat; instead the driver sat on the left rear horse, so he could keep his right arm free to lash the team. Since he was sitting on the left, he naturally wanted everybody to pass on the left so he could look down and make sure he kept clear of the oncoming wagon’s wheels. Therefore he kept to the right side of the road.

In addition, the French Revolution of 1789 gave a huge impetus to right-hand travel in Europe. The fact is, before the Revolution, the aristocracy travelled on the left of the road, forcing the peasantry over to the right, but after the storming of the Bastille and the subsequent events, aristocrats preferred to keep a low profile and joined the peasants on the right. An official keep-right rule was introduced in Paris in 1794, more or less parallel to Denmark, where driving on the right had been made compulsory in 1793.

Later, Napoleon's conquests spread the new rightism to the Low Countries (Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg), Switzerland, Germany, Poland, Russia and many parts of Spain and Italy. The states that had resisted Napoleon kept left – Britain, the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Portugal. This European division, between the left- and right-hand nations would remain fixed for more than 100 years, until after the First World War.

Although left-driving Sweden ceded Finland to right-driving Russia after the Russo-Swedish War (1808-1809), Swedish law – including traffic regulations – remained valid in Finland for another 50 years. It wasn’t until 1858 that an Imperial Russian decree made Finland swap sides.

The trend among nations over the years has been toward driving on the right, but Britain has done its best to stave off global homogenisation. With the expansion of travel and road building in the 1800s, traffic regulations were made in every country. Left-hand driving was made mandatory in Britain in 1835. Countries which were part of the British Empire followed suit. This is why to this very day, India, Australasia and the former British colonies in Africa go left. An exception to the rule, however, is Egypt, which had been conquered by Napoleon before becoming a British dependency.

Although Japan was never part of the British Empire, its traffic also goes to the left. Although the origin of this habit goes back to the Edo period (1603-1867) when Samurai ruled the country, it wasn’t until 1872 that this unwritten rule became more or less official. That was the year when Japan’s first railway was introduced, built with technical aid from the British. Gradually, a massive network of railways and tram tracks was built, and of course all trains and trams drove on the left-hand side. Still, it took another half century till in 1924 left-side driving was clearly written in a law.

When the Dutch arrived in Indonesia in 1596, they brought along their habit of driving on the left. It wasn't until Napoleon conquered the Netherlands that the Dutch started driving on the right. Most of their colonies, however, remained on the left as did Indonesia and Suriname.

In the early years of English colonisation of North America, English driving customs were followed and the colonies drove on the left. After gaining independence from England, however, they were anxious to cast off all remaining links with their British colonial past and gradually changed to right-hand driving. (Incidentally, the influence of other European countries’ nationals should not be underestimated.) The first law requiring drivers to keep right was passed in Pennsylvania in 1792, and similar laws were passed in New York in 1804 and New Jersey in 1813.

Despite the developments in the US, some parts of Canada continued to drive on the left until shortly after the Second World War. The territory controlled by the French (from Quebec to Louisiana) drove on the right, but the territory occupied by the English (British Columbia, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland) kept left. British Columbia and the Atlantic provinces switched to the right in the 1920s in order to conform with the rest of Canada and the USA. Newfoundland drove on the left until 1947, and joined Canada in 1949.

In Europe, the remaining left-driving countries switched one by one to driving on the right. Portugal changed in 1920s. The change took place on the same day in the whole country, including the colonies. Territories, however, which bordered other left-driving countries were exempted. That is why Macau, Goa (now part of India) and Portuguese East Africa kept the old system. East Timor, which borders left-driving Indonesia, did change to the right though, but left-hand traffic was reintroduced by the Indonesians in 1975.

In Italy the practice of driving on the right first began in the late 1890s. The first Italian Highway Code, issued on the 30th of June 1912, stated that all vehicles had to drive on the right. Cities with a tram network, however, could retain left-hand driving if they placed warning signs at their city borders. The 1923 decree is a bit stricter, but Rome and the northern cities of Milan, Turin and Genoa could still keep left until further orders from the Ministry of Public Works. By the mid-1920s, right-hand driving became finally standard throughout the country. Rome made the change on the 1 of March 1925 and Milan on the 3rd of August 1926.

Up till the 1930s Spain lacked national traffic regulations. Some parts of the country drove on the right (e.g. Barcelona) and other parts drove on the left (e.g. Madrid). On the 1st of October 1924 Madrid switched to driving on the right.

The break-up of the Austro-Hungarian Empire caused no change: Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Hungary continued to drive on the left. Austria itself was something of a curiosity. Half the country drove on the left and half on the right. The dividing line was precisely the area affected by Napoleon's conquests in 1805.

When Germany annexed Austria in 1938, Hitler ordered that the traffic should change from the left to the right side of the road, overnight. The change threw the driving public into turmoil, because motorists were unable to see most road signs. In Vienna it proved impossible to change the trams overnight, so while all other traffic took to the right-hand side of the road, the trams continued to run on the left for several weeks. Czechoslovakia and Hungary, one of the last states on the mainland of Europe to keep left, changed to the right after being invaded by Germany in 1939.

Meanwhile, the power of the right kept growing steadily. American cars were designed to be driven on the right by locating the drivers' controls on the vehicle's left side. With the mass production of reliable and economical cars in the United States, initial exports used the same design, and out of necessity many countries changed their rule of the road.

Gibraltar changed to right-hand traffic in 1929 and China in 1946. Korea now drives right, but only because it passed directly from Japanese colonial rule to American and Russian influence at the end of the Second World War. Pakistan also considered changing to the right in the 1960s, but ultimately decided not to do it. The main argument against the shift was that camel trains often drove through the night while their drivers were dozing. The difficulty in teaching old camels new tricks was decisive in forcing Pakistan to reject the change. Nigeria, a former British colony, had traditionally been driving on the left with British imported right-hand-drive cars, but when it gained independence, it tried to throw off its colonial past as quick as possible and shifted to driving on the right.

After the Second World War, left-driving Sweden, the odd one out in mainland Europe, felt increasing pressure to change sides in order to conform with the rest of the continent. The problem was that all their neighbours already drove on the right side and since there are a lot of small roads without border guards leading into Norway and Finland, one had to remember in which country one was.

In 1955, the Swedish government held a referendum on the introduction of right-hand driving. Although no less than 82.9% voted “no” to the plebiscite, the Swedish parliament passed a law on the conversion to right-hand driving in 1963. Finally, the change took place on Sunday, the 3rd of September 1967, at 5 o’clock in the morning.

All traffic with private motor-driven vehicles was prohibited four hours before and one hour after the conversion, in order to be able to rearrange all traffic signs. Even the army was called in to help. Also a very low speed limit was applied, which was raised in a number of steps. The whole process took about a month. After Sweden's successful changeover, Iceland changed the following year, in 1968. Ghana swapped sides in 1974.

In the 1960s, Great Britain also considered changing, but the country’s conservative powers did everything they could to nip the proposal in the bud. Furthermore, the fact that it would cost billions of pounds to change everything round wasn’t much of an incentive… Eventually, Britain dropped the idea. Today, only four European countries still drive on the left: the United Kingdom, Ireland, Cyprus and Malta.

On 7 September 2009 Samoa (population 189,000) became the first country ever to change from right- to left-hand driving. It had been driving on the right since it had become a German colony in the early 20th century, although it was administered by New Zealand after the First World War and gained independence in 1962. Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi wanted to swap sides to make it easier to import cheap cars from left-hand driving Japan, Australia and New Zealand.


Rome made the change on the 1 of March 1925 and Milan on the 3rd of August 1926.
Wow, I couldn't believe it and I checked and they're right (last 10 seconds of video):


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_on_Rome
 
Last edited:
more on sharpe ratio

The question I was asking here has been clarified by a subsequent search on the web:
http://www.google.com/search?q=shar...-us&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1

The best web page I came across was this one:
http://www.quantnet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5811

I will quote some of the most important things that were said:

Deadmony:
My question is how to annualize the daily returns and standard deviation?

frankc:
To annualize your standard deviations, multiply by the square root of the number of trading days. In the case you described, you would multiply by the square root of 150.

Frankc would seem to agree with my objection. Are we multiplying by the square root of actually traded days or trading days in a year? He would seem to say square root of actually traded days.

The investors seem to mean it as "trading days in a year".

But here's another forum member who explains to us how this thing is a bit flexible.

PatM:
...how you annualize depends on how you are bearing risk - if you are holding a position even on the days you don't trade, you have exposure and you should count those days, because the market could move, which obviously would affect your mean and st dev. If you have a position every day, you annualize the daily mean (log returns, now) by multiplying by 252, the number of trading days in a year, not 365, because the market isn't open and doesn't move every day. The st dev is multiplied by the square root of 252. If you are out of the market and have no position most of the time, then you annualize by multiplying by a lower day count.

In my case, I would use a lower day count, because whether we're using an intraday or overnight system, we're always talking about trades that last (in most cases) less than 24 hours.

So I would have to disagree with the investors on this one. Not just me but also frankc and PatM.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ennio_Morricone

 
Last edited:
been thinking... been discouraged...

I've been discouraged by someone on this thread, but I feel that even if just one reader appreciates my writing, for the style and for what I write, it will be worth it for me to keep writing. And since that is definitely the case, I won't let this naysayer keep me from writing my journal.

It sure is a discouraging thing to hear (that my journal is worthless), because to me one naysayer is more powerful than 10 people paying compliments, but I'll ignore such posts altogether next time they happen. I will not even get into an argument, debate, or discussion. From now on, if there's too much negativity in a post on this journal, my reaction will go from ignoring the post to placing the author on my ignore list (which will prevent more posts on this journal). I am officially quitting the job of telling them what the **** is wrong with them, since they don't listen to me at all and just keep spitting negativity all over me. It's like Vito, when he asked me if I loved him. I felt like saying "yes, like a little cousin who busts my balls and whom I'd like to avoid as much as possible". It will be like this for all these people on my ignore list: little cousins who are busting my balls, and whom I'll lock in another room, while I try to focus on my work here.

So here I am, back to my thinking and my sincerity.

It feels good just to think out loud, even if I hadn't set out to say anything in particular.

I'll just write whatever comes to my mind. First I'll go to brush my teeth.

I'm fed up with negative people and naysayers. I've had one for a father and I can't take any more negativity. He thinks he can just get away by being a big important person so people will let him be however he is, but that's not the case. It doesn't work for me. I don't buy what my aunt tells me about him: "he loves you in his own way". I reply "yes, I do, too, by avoiding him". The price he had to pay with me is that I disliked him. And the price for that for him is feeling bad. He couldn't have his way with me and treat me like **** while being treated like royalty. It worked with everyone else but not with me. I won't admire a person who treats me like ****. I am not going to listen to him preaching if he doesn't even listen to me when I tell him about my interests - or actually puts me down. Now he's finally stopped all that - only with me because he still patronizes my mom - but he still has to apologize for the past. For years during which I had to listen and admire him while he was only putting me down all the time. He created a family and friends so to have everyone around him adoring him. Eventually I won, at a high price, but I won, because, as a son, I had him by the balls.

I knew from the start that no matter how badly he treated me it was all a bluff. So I do admit that he's attached to me, but at the same time I will not accept that someone who's attached to me treats me like **** all the time. Like all these other people around him do. It seems like he's saying to them all the time "you guys suck". And as if they replied "yes, we know, please show us the way".
 
Last edited:
What I've been doing lately...

At the moment I am quiet because I've been studying and I will be studying law, which is not my piece of cake.

In particular, tax law: I am trying to find out exactly what form of payment I can accept for my systems, and how, in order to be law-abiding and not be reported to authorities by my bank receiving wire transfers from abroad. If the systems were to make money (they are already) and if I were to receive wire payments, I need to be ready to explain to my bank why and how everything is legal. I am particularly paranoid about this, since I work at the compliance department of my bank (which is not the bank receiving the wire transfers). Actually I receive the suspicious transaction reports. And I don't want to have my name on them. I've studied all the thousands of reports we received so far and nobody has been reported for anything similar to what is likely to happen on my account in the next six months, but I have to be ready for the future, for when the figures will be much higher than they can be now.

When I do something, I like to do it well. I am not going to hope for the wire transfers to stay small so that I don't have to worry. I cannot put myself in a situation where I have to sabotage myself in order not to worry about getting reported to the authorities.

So far, the laws that apply to me in Italy (since I only have to worry about those), have to do with the topic of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors'_rights

In other words, I will get paid for a creation of mine and/or for the exploitation of it. That way, I don't need to start any kind of company, I don't need to be hired by anyone, and I can even keep my regular job. It's very close to creating and selling software.

The problem - and the good thing - with laws and with me being such a perfectionist is that whenever I find a law making reference to another law, I have to immediately find the other law and read it. And this is necessary for me, so I can understand everything, but it might be overwhelming, and that means quitting, so I have to try to keep my ambitions small in order not to quit.

It would be best if I could start with a cartoon on tax law, then watch a movie on it, then read a small book... but the problem is that there are no cartoons and you have to start right away with a whole set of books... even though wikipedia helps and it could be the equivalent of a cartoon. But even wikipedia has all those links sending you to other places and in the end it could exhaust me.

I am so un-superficial, so unlike most people, that if I have a legal problem I tend to want to become a lawyer (overnight) and if I have a medical problem I tend to try to become a doctor... and so on. I cannot stay superficial. That's why I cannot get along with Vito. Because he's superficial, he's the perfect example of superficiality. I can't stand him, especially because I know he will get away with it.

Just a few hours ago he got me to go on a coffee break with him - he had to keep it short because he takes 5 coffee breaks every day. I wanted to talk much longer. We were talking about how we are. And he said I am "extreme", I don't have "half measures", which in Italian means I don't have moderation. And I said "yes, and you're "balanced". I would like to see you do my work with your "balanced" approach: I'd like to see how much you can get done". Then I told him "I do everything in-depth and you do everything superficially - that's how I see it". What he perceives as balance, I perceive as being superficial. What he perceives as obsession I perceive as commitment and effort. The bottom line is that I get 100 things accomplished and well, and he gets 10 things accomplished and unreliably. But the bank is made of social interactions, and since, as he told me today, two days ago he went to play soccer with his boss, he'll probably be successful at the bank. He'll just have to worry about staying on top of people who are obsessive, like me, and who'll do his work. Throughout his career, he'll just need to focus on making and staying friends with the heads of the bank, while the few obsessive people do the hard and meticulous work. He feels ok with bull****ting his way to the top. I don't. So don't ask me to get along with someone I despise and who gets in the way of me doing my duty, every day.

But the problem with obsessive people, is that they're nervous, and nervous people don't sleep well. So screw them for today, since I didn't sleep well and I won't join them at the office. I am staying home and reading about these tax laws. If they call me, I could say that I am taking all the coffee breaks I didn't take during the week, all in one day.
 
Last edited:
gambling, done it again

Wired money because my account had been inactive for too long, and resumed my gambling almost immediately. I am down a thousand dollars already. Pretty depressing. I don't know if the account will be blown in a few hours or if I'll get lucky this time and postpone the disaster until a few days from now. Top-picking trade as usual. This time on the CHF.
 
Re: gambling, done it again

Wired money because my account had been inactive for too long, and resumed my gambling almost immediately. I am down a thousand dollars already. Pretty depressing. I don't know if the account will be blown in a few hours or if I'll get lucky this time and postpone the disaster until a few days from now. Top-picking trade as usual. This time on the CHF.


Hey Travis,

Why don't you just pick and indicator such as a modified stochastic and use that for entries and exits? It won't make money every trade, but over the long run it should be profitable.

Take care,
Dave
 
Re: gambling, done it again

Wired money because my account had been inactive for too long, and resumed my gambling almost immediately. I am down a thousand dollars already. Pretty depressing. I don't know if the account will be blown in a few hours or if I'll get lucky this time and postpone the disaster until a few days from now. Top-picking trade as usual. This time on the CHF.

Good work on the tax front. That's something that I need to look into but I know I'll put it off until the last minute. Hopefully the British tax laws are simpler than the Italian ones. They'll probably think you're laundering Mafia money.

But then re: putting money in your account and falling back into your gambling habits - this is insane. You really need to psycho-analyse yourself and work out why you do it. It's undoubtedly something from your childhood - most psychoses are. And then when you have worked out what it is, you can combat it. You keep saying you're a perfectionist - but obviously your perfectionism never applies to your trading, or perhaps being successful (e.g. at your job - witness your last description of how your chimp colleague looks like he'll be more successful than you). It's self-sabotage to fulfil your subconcious needs.
 
Thank you both for your concern. There's going to be no direct answers because here everything has been said before, in the past 3000 posts. Not much to say that hasn't been already said.

There's been progress, despite my continued gambling. A year ago I was a compulsive gambler with a given amount and a given quality of automated systems. Now I am the same compulsive gambler but with 4 months of positive track record, a lot more knowledge of my systems, a lot more systems, better systems... everything is better, even though I am just the same gambler and I have just the same capital, which is zero.

As long as the systems will keep on producing money regularly, I should be able to keep these investors, and as long as I keep these investors, there's hope for me. There's hope for profit and hope for improving my systems, because I'm being constantly asked for information about the systems, which in turn causes me to learn new things.

Here's in random order some of the things I've learned in the last 4 months... no wait, here's a list of some of the things I've learned in the past year, because I want to compare myself of a year ago with now. I am still a compulsive gambler but with these improvements:

1) 15 months of forward testing.
2) systems went from 24 to 61.
3) investors to invest in my systems
4) learned to use sharpe ratio
5) learned to use profit factor
6) learned to use Return On Account
7) rented server in the US
8) learned differences arising from executing same systems on two different servers
9) debugged systems from practically all bugs
10) simplified systems a lot
11) matched back vs forward testing and fixed bugs
12) bought more data
13) learned how to solve tax problems and keep my job
14) created a registry of actual trades (not just a registry of forward testing but a registry of executed trades from IB reports)
15) improved my knowledge of excel, vba, easylanguage, tradestation
16) improved my knowledge of margin and margin variations
17) better appraisal of systems' performance
18) learned from investors what it means to stick to systems without tampering
19) improved my infrastructure: more computers, UPS.

The bad things instead are:
1) I am one year older
2) I have not made much improvement in terms of job (except it's good that I have a part-time schedule).
3) I now have a debt of a few thousands euros to pay
4) I am even more tired than before
5) My sleeping habits got much worse
6) I am more intolerant than ever
7) I am more antisocial than ever

I wish I had been at this point (good list) a few years ago, and with a shorter bad list. But in order to have a long good list maybe I had to develop a long bad list. Because you don't work on your systems unless you're antisocial, and you can't do everything at once. If you have a "balanced life" as Vito would prescribe, you also have to accept being superficial in every area of your life, like he is. You're not going to excel at anything. And here I am really looking to excel at something. I am not just trying to be sneaky and work my way up the ladder of my bank, like most of my colleagues are doing. I am trying to find a way to support myself from a one-megabyte excel workbook, which will be like my own company. And it's a very complex thing to achieve, no matter how much you focus on it. It takes focus and it takes depth and it takes commitment. Nothing Vito could ever achieve. But he may achieve more than me by kissing up to people. Kissing up may be a more profitable strategy. Yet I don't want to have to resort to that strategy. I just want to always focus on quality and substance, rather than bull**** and appearance like most people around me.
 
Last edited:
do not show a sense of humour - do not make jokes - be as normal/boring as possible

Vito tires me because he forces me to talk and to joke all the time. Like other people I know, who tire me as well. He cannot be serious. He doesn't have any "serious mode". He has to talk ironically all the time. These people tire me. I've never had one of these people as a roommate before and it is a terrible experience.

I'll try to pretend I am more stupid than I am and that I don't get half of his jokes. I'll try to be liked less by him. He forces me to smile and laugh all day long - distracting me from work - and when I come I feel abused and very tired. It's a violent behaviour in many ways. A small violence but relentless. It's what I said from the start: the abuse of being around a hyperactive child. It's almost like being the parent of one of those attention-deficit children. I hope I won't have to stay much longer in the same room as this guy.

I really need to find a way to cut down on the jokes. I must act totally normal and agreeable. Everything I say must be dull and boring and predictable. No originality, no reaction to his jokes, and especially no jokes from me. No sense of humour, and maybe that way he will stop and go elsewhere to look for playmates.

New strategy:
do not show a sense of humour - do not make jokes - be as normal/boring as possible
 
Re: do not show a sense of humour - do not make jokes - be as normal/boring as possib

This one is easy. Because kids are easy. Just treat him like the child he is. You will just have to tolerate having to tell him 10 times a day that you have work to do. e.g. Very funny Vito but I'm busy at the moment / Great but let's do some work, OK? / Vito shut the **** up before smash my chair over your brainless head.

See? Easy.
 
Yes, that's what I am doing but it's not easy. You're underestimating the power of hyperactive people. They will drive you crazy, before they stop going, like the energizer. They'll still keep busting your balls even if you start a physical fight with them. Actually you better not do that, because most of them enjoy and yearn for physical exercise, and they will try to cause a physical interaction. This guy in fact is always hugging me or at least trying to hug me. This is Italy - it's considered "ok" to touch people and grab their arm when you're talking to them. All people from the South do it and this guy is from the South.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top