No short-term causalities connected with this event.
I’m up around 10:30 am, I had no walk for weeks; the negative charge was accumulating over the days today was to get expended. Almost the first thing to do is get dressed; my uncle intersected just when I tied my shoes. As I was speaking, Bube stopped me, saying to wait for her; she would come along, feeling unwell, home seek.
The first 100 meters, I was going slowly further to let her catch up, then silence; I was reading on my mobile as I mostly do on my walks.
The first word was hers and I have a rule to avoid talking to her if I can help it. She started about the step tracker watch.
She asked me days before about an ad on her phone to measure blood pressure and blood sugar level I think. I said, how do u suppose u do that? Where is the sensor to deposit blood or to measure pressure? I showed her the watch, pointing at the sensor. The thing you should have.
Mostly answering her questions; "what does that watch do? ". Counting calories, steps, blood pulse, answered shortly.
"Just that, I have something here that can do all that" - another ad I suppose, I wasn’t interested. Why is it so expensive for a simple function, when u can do that on your phone?
By induction, this is clear to me that she again misunderstands the input hardware that the watch has and the phone lacks. You cannot measure steps effectively without a pulse meter; 100 meters on a flat surface and a mountain will have the same calorie count.
Her pretentious psychological stance is a great repulse, in how she investigates her doubts.
So as I was processing whether to answer, she went quickly to make clear that she was in her top witch modes. Starting to compress her face, and change her voice and attitude as if someone made a crime upon her.
"Why did u take the watch? Why the money? For what? ". This was a short, where she unnaturally bound the Bluetooth speakers in the same manner.
Every conflict that comes upon the past is almost all answered elaborately and has always a zero effect on her, at the moment and in the afterglow. So I consider a sane person, will avoid answers that she already has in her head unprocessed; therefore, I confidently and politely say: ok, can u go for the other side, please?
"Just answer me, why did u have to buy them?”
Then I started explaining what was in my head, about the countless negative outcomes of indulging her-made conflicts. I see no positive outcome for either one, these questions are already answered.
As if I said nothing, she invariably continues: ok, tell me why did u do it? Then I reacted like a person running from a thing plagued with the virus of death.
I said, get away from me while starting to walk fast.
She said, ok I won’t say a word.
I repeated the same or said "Get lost" or something while I jumped for the pavement on the other side.
"I came out with you, I’m staying with you" - said in a tone as you imagine what a virus sounds like. She also walked fast. Then a couple of meters I crossed again and went for another path toward where she knew we were headed. Nonetheless, the walking trail was not a circle; for a moment I could hear her behind me (a couple of meters), shouting something in my nickname like a crazy person - as if nothing happened. Ultimately the end of the track, she did not finish her trail, she turned where she met me.
Now the writing quantity should not mislead, this is a record of how quickly a person can cause fire.
The conclusive acquisitions (about the watch) started with no more than 3 or 4 sentences.
To me it’s the clearest ugly picture of a person trying to enforce her mystery upon the other, in the most despicable way; by clearest I mean the most compact and easy to communicate to others to invoke compassion.
In all her talk, even if u don’t know her, on average u can sense when a person is getting ahead of his thoughts. U can hear ripples in the voice, strangling for words, overreaching, jumping in phases, exaggeration; like u want your argument so miserably bad to be recognized as the truth, you want it there and now ( and u act like u have a gun or an ironman suit ).
The question about the watch is easily findable for her. It was a pension gift for Zoran, from my uncle and us, that he chose even to my surprise, out of many choices I compiled; and SHE KNOWS ALL OF IT. That’s why the act is artificial from the start.

I’m self-disposed from home, since contrary to natural phenomena, a thunderstorm with no lightning occurred indoors and I have to shelter myself outside.
So similar circumstances as always only the degrees in effect are varied, hopefully, this will make for a more long and drastic change in the other. Since I fell asleep till morning, I got up at 12 and maybe intermittently hit the bathroom, probably because of Bube's insensitive habit of entering my doorway. I went for a coffee, Bube was on the reading desk in the living room. No clouds no wind in sight. I made coffee and cocoa and went upstairs for the blender, when I came down for my coffee, she just said there they are on the kitchen table, with a sort of dubious voice. Seconds after, you are hit with the incoming vibrations of an earthquake about to happen. She started to ramble in her style about some leftovers being cared for by her in one obscure sentence and the rest is just her sadistic way of communicating, how she's not our servant etc.. These are situations with a probabilistic potential of one outcome, either u let her steam or you escalate to a potentially fatal danger, or if you are in luck, u will be left only with long-lasting scars. In this situation, is the irony that strikes you the most, when you think of the converse and is not that ur not doing to her what she is doing, but is creatively more deranged, that is if you just try to point more, starting from the processing silence, she will immediately regret you for that; she will despicably cut you as if it’s a new situation where you are being sentenced guilty.
So even if I felt bad, split in the will of how to start my day I was just praying to steer my cocoa faster or her to exhaust herself. She was exhausted before me and I went to my room with no big expectations. But to my mild surprise the familiar sounds of disaster. The innocent kitchen object came to loud animation with no goal in mind. The train of doubt is always: is it my sensitivity, am I overhearing, is it an accidental exception, until u hear more controlled beyond doubt repetitions. This time they were quick to come and louder (maybe broken something). It was challenging to tolerate cause of my particular state of mind and the time of day it happened. In moments where there were to me a breached limit acquiring a new quality what could only be called ''please come I dare you to hit me''. I had i flash of screaming at her. I find that reality always starts with the opposite with her realizing my imagination is only a class worst. I went with anger and asked in disproportionate to the noise, "moze da prestanes". She cut me with a jungle ensemble; this was the closest to hitting someone with words. It was clear that to say anything is to attach myself to a deranged suicidal drowning person. And of course, that quality will be again proven in the next consequence; for what would a person like that do, except increase the provocation? I saw the only way to deal with explosives was to get far away; I started prepping for Vodno. First, I think I called Zoran which is a precedent because inductively I anticipate that he will make it worse for me logically; because I consider him from a mild coward to a passive evil person. So it can be imagined what a disturbance was this to me. And he did just what I would suspect. I started saying uneasily, that I didn’t understand what happened, what she started doing (conduct he is well familiar with), that she is unstable, that she is not fit even for a zoo or an institution, I was just overwhelmed with fascination in the negative. His answer was not to investigate the cause, but rather to assume that in any conflict my state is the default cause to be blamed. This was implied when he said shortly in my pauses: "da dobro, ona e luda" sarkastichno.
But in transitive relation, when the wrath of the monster is upon him, it’s the contradiction. He knows, that he deals with that by having activities or interests that keep him away from her, and I’m to blame because I don’t have them. No matter how often it happens I am still fascinated when I hear his (this situation) reactions. It’s like using your enemy to fight your enemy, on the exact behavior that u despise. This proves the type of character who is hate overwhelmed which clouds even his common sense. Implied justification of the behavior at least of the (I doubt even) assumed context. This behavior has noooo justification in any imaginable situation. Even if you are wrong, her wrong will hardy get her what she wants. It’s so primitive, you can only understand if u transpose a neandertal in her place; all instinctive, not layered. It’s bad for all.

When I was speaking to him she turned the amplifier loudspeakers with loud music and continued her tradition of wild conduct. I just hoped to avoid the stampede while preparing for a hike. I escaped with no injury and made it alive to tell the tale.

Watched BlackMirror S05E02. We began a discussion about the meaning at the end.
I initiated one possible meaning, Zoran included examples of that, and Bube said something in agreement. A few minutes later, I stated more broader interpretation. Despite my detailed explanation, an anticipated is behavior to pick whatever you understand from it and miss the point; take one maybe main word and talk about it, without the context.
I think I presented a picture of the character as a victim.
South Park freemium gaming episode analogy, South Park centipede episode about Apple click to agree analogy; world war states like censorship of of books, barring edifying sentences in subsidiary paragraph in books; The Tmobile non-notification for phone internet data expanded.
But before explaining with examples this was branched into general talk about a person’s character to stick to a routine of avoiding some addictions like smoking, smartphone use, etc.. I tried making this more hard talk and not just a bumper sticker to quit smoking.
Explaining how this thing happens when life is not that monotone when traumatic or unexpected, unusual events take place that shake your subconscious into anxiety without your will; which sticks with you for a couple of days.
Although expected I didn’t prevent, Zoran from taking the word "trauma" and start enumerating examples of his understanding of the word to the extent of not just becoming lost in what he was talking about, but exposing, a dire need for conversation. He went maybe 3-4 examples in his life, almost always already told, maybe except one. Now my explanation wasn’t vague in the first place. His purpose of existing relative to the point is nowhere but to stand as a thing in itself. So I was conscious, right in the onset of it that this would be a pointless tangent; but I was far from agitated, even if my writing here may suggest. I was neither dead nor alive, you cannot say I provoke nither down or up. I just sipped coffee, and stared at the table or the TV on mute, to be finished. For example toward the end, I went to VC, saying simply, without any message in my voice. Of course, when he finished there was nowhere to go, no point to return to. Next, I asked - if someone remembers what we were talking about?
I asked like I was honestly lost: what was the thing we were talking about? What were you explaining?
I was telling you what happened to me when I…
Yes but why? There was a short silence, I took it as cluelessness and said, it’s ok to release personal experiences, to remember and share, you should do that; your talk indicated to me how much you need to say things since you went so far with examples without remembering the point.
So I returned to the point and explained the things I said previously, also something about Elon Musk’s behavior after buying Twitter, about twitting addiction and boosting his account. This finished with Bube and Zoran, supplementing here and there. All ok, Bube went to the bathroom. With him alone, I felt like I was talking to him through Bube. I tried to finish only to him and the next thing he said, is something unrelating: that we should think about next week because more cold weather will come. This was in his lack of social manner style without saying some curtesy word or something about how he feels, just a sharp turn as if I was talking to an imaginary person. After a second or two, feeling sorry for him and I move on.

My grandad was at our place, in the early hours. I was either in bed awoke or their tone volume woke me; since my granddad has a hearing problem.
I overheard Zoran explaining to him. how am I doing.

Let’s elaborate on what is wrong with this piece.

1. Inconsistent behavior

It was a couple of months ago, probably some short converse and idon’t know the reason for his response, but it was

The statements are contradictory; you cannot favor staying on the job (stat1.2) and not respect it when you are back at it (stat1).
I imply that both states as invariable, meaning there’s no significant change in them to justify the contradiction.

2. Disingenuous conduct

Statement1Expression1: “raboti za bespari”. This is false to facts. I was paid the 1st time I worked with him, the 2nd time, and no reason to be otherwise the 3d time.

• Event

  They introduced me to Vlatko; they had a chitchat alone. I will jump to an event when I was in Rade Koncar, where for some reason me being paid came into question.

  I remember him saying: "jas razbrav deka nie kje mu dademe pari na Vlatko za on da ti gi dade na tebe, za tebe da ti izgleda kako da te plakja".

  I tried digging into this, which hit me like a freak show; i was suspecting he is covering something. The rule is that he wont allow you to clear your doubts. The point is that i told him i was being paid by Vlatko and he backed down suspiciously smoothly.

• Event

  Second time working for him, i was living at my Uncle. I was asking him for the car and telling him that Vlatko will cover the expenses for the trips.
  I’m not sure if he asked how much i’m being paid or me telling him.
  

• Event

  The second time working for him, the first payout; the day me and Zoran went to Budva. Again it’s a maybe; I’m not sure if I told him how much he was paying me or that he paid me off.
  The next day of the return was when I negotiated with Vlatko and we parted ways.
  I remember Zoran being present when me and Bube go about that event.
  I will add here that Bube knows beyond doubt - the last time was, me and her asking in person a friend programmer for advice; whether she would accept that amount of pay. So by average standards, she should have a colossal doubt of him saying wrong but I didn’t observe any correction coming out of her. This will develop an event further down.
  

Draft version

I made this into a two-fold problem; one of hatred and a mechanical conduct.
When a human relationship drives you mad as an individual, you become a sort of mind captured by a poisoned heart.
If in the past you asked to define his terms, now you just ignore what you don't understand; sign it as a neologism, noise, etc., or worse read in your definition.
If you asked for clarification of a set of statements, now you ignore and name it a philosophy or worse, ascribe your own meaning.
If you had a human response when you understood all the words and statements, you go mute indefinitely or deny it with as blunt a statement as "you are crazy".
So you are at the point where you don't do doubts or probabilities; you do suppositions or conjectures, thus you become as mechanical as the talking parrot or the average robot with no machine learning.

There’s a surreal scene (44:50) in Arizona Dream 1993, that depicts this. Gallo’s character has this proclivity to recite movies by heart. The scene starts with a dinner of four - Depp and Gallo invited by strangers/Byers, Faye and Taylor. Things get from uncomfortable to out of control. Taylor threatens suicide, Faye in disarray, Depp “sitting on the fence”, Gallo in denial. He is asked by Depp to get involved. He stands up and gets accidentally hit on the head by the ceiling fan and almost like a trigger he switches into a mechanical state, like mentally unplugged from that context. He starts regurgitating (probably a movie) like a transplant into an audition.
Think this kind of state is partially involved in Zoran’s behavior; sadly this won’t be lying; but I think you cannot reach this level of negative development without unjustifiably laying to yourself on the higher levels.

I will now restate in other terms:
If we are providing at least, that he has no data to make that conclusion, the question arises: “what guides his choice”;
He could just as easily make the point that I’m being paid something.

In these terms it seems like the thing called “pure hate”, just like you make a pure choice in the Monty Hall problem.
If you are faced with the choice of left and right and you don’t have “intel” or data on either of those and you have the choice to gather more data, you decide (let’s say) left because you hate right.
Following this it will be a hate-guided decision to hold your opposition firm (in a status quo), by painting an inferior image of the opponent.

• Therefore I think it's a combination of both.
  His responses are borderline mechanical, almost. Almost meaning, humans are fundamentally different than machines.

  They don't have an instruction set (CPU) for computing, they make neural (column) nets by auto association in a decentralized way (neuron being both the processor and memory). They don't compute answers, they retrieve them from memory. So they don't have full control over their memory association. A quote:

  The machine will never notice even the most obvious facts about what it is doing, but it is inherent in human consciousness to notice some facts about the things one is doing. It is possible for a machine to act unobservant; it is impossible for a human to act unobservant.

  An episode called Crocodile from Black Mirror series (S04E03) shows this. It features an advanced brain imaging technology, which can show, your current recall, but with content, not neural image. It is described as, accessing engrams that are subjective, may not be accurate, and often emotional. So the insurance investigator puts them through a procedure similar to Hypnosis.
  She starts working on a “van-pedestrian accident”, bounces a couple of corroborators, and stumbles on a person with hidden crimes in their past. This person has only seen the accident from a window, but seconds earlier, has committed a crime. So that person tries hard to take the mind’s auto association under her control. She fails; the mind makes the connection against her will and she gets exposed.
  

Therefore in that difference between the mechanical and the human, that is in that small window of what still might be called a “free will”, i see a tiny auto-associated feedback or doubt that at least says to him “ambiguity”.
The “tiny” has the potential to disturb him, similar to how a pebble thrown in a waterfall can disrupt it.
This “tiny”, might have been once bigger, might be just this small to a specific pattern, but it got to be this tiny over countless encounters with me, where it devolved through many cognitive biases including the
Conservatism bias, the Confirmation bias, Semmelweis reflex, etc.
In other words, he learned to ignore or repress his doubts.
So the tiny is a potential truth holder similar to why the bum-like apparition in Mullholand Drive holds the blue box at the end which is a metaphor for the pandora's box; the apparition is the truth holder and to get there you have to peel the “dirt” layers.
The “tell” if he is lying would have been bigger if the “tiny” was not that deprived. He would make greater pauses, distort his voice, etc.
This is why it’s hard to distinguish as a lie, he looks just as if he would know that.
I don’t have an Intentionality bias, that is I don't have a preference nor I don't think I proclive on any side. As long as a “lie” and a “mistake” are definition distinguished, you just have to prove either of them. Not to be naive, that bias probably exists because it's so hard to find proof.
In that case, my “ideal” would be to say I don't know.
I can't remember when I’ve applied that term to someone; This is the rarest of times when I can see myself going in that direction.
I’m feeling satisfied with the work I’ve done, that is a think I earned to use that word, as much as I think its value is diminished because people overuse it in a visceral way.

not finished, this section will be moved in theory.

Then again there is the “Dr. Strangelove syndrome” to be entertained (no adults allowed 😃).

Then again, again, what he might answer, if I ask him, was always in my peripheral vision; that he could just confront: “You call that a salary” (rounding down), rendering this as just a difference in terminology.
More than average I expect that kind of answer, but I know better than to ask him, after all these years; it would be like asking the habitual drunk person what he was thinking/doing; he will shower you with unrelated excuses, rationalizations, ad hoc, and retroactive answers, everything except pilling the onion.

Invariably, I find gross misuse of wording about a sensitive matter and he is not producing poetry any day now.

Plenty of subsequent events are written, I decided not to include them prematurely.