I'm pitiful!

[LlazarusLlong]

Well, actually, in the sense that I am full of pity for the numerous desperate souls posting in various forums - not just "Make Friends" which you might think was the obvious place, but then, you wouldn't expect people who had their head stuck up their nether end to ask how to remove it in General Discussions.

While I feel like responding to these pleas (well, not by offering friendship; who in their right mind would want ME as a friend!) with suggestions such as, fill out your profile with relevant information, particularly indicating the language you speak (as it's not always clear from forum posts) and the times you are usually able to be online, expressed as SLT - it's no good saying "in the afternoon" or 11pm-2am and not specifying what time zone you are!

This, it has occurred to me recently, is treating the symptoms, not the disease. Back in the day, I seem to recall that noobs made an effort, which was appreciated by older hands, and there was a constant influx of new people into social groupings which compensated for those who left, providing a potentially dynamic and vivacious environment even at the dullest of "romantic dance" locations.

Nowadays, encouraged by FacelessBook etc, it seems that noobs tend to scream "Add me" demandingly, without offering any insight regarding the benefit which might be conferred by association with them. Where they run into others of a like persuasion, the lack of any significant dialogue almost inevitably eventually leads to an apparently explanationless "relationship" breakdown, with at least one of the parties bemused and confused, if not distraught and hurt.

Don't misunderstand me. I am not talking about the "deep" one-to-one connections in which some immersionists find themselves involved. That's partially chemistry, partially boredom (with RL) and occasionally grasping at straws. I am referring to the "group-hug" type of relationships, where there is likely to be an asymmetry between the expectations of the weak and the compassion of the strong.

Do you agree with me that there are more lonely people out there in SL because their expectations and behaviour have been modified by other (Anti)Social Networks?

[Darrius Gothly]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

Well, actually, in the sense that I am full of pity for the numerous desperate souls posting in various forums - not just "Make Friends" which you might think was the obvious place, but then, you wouldn't expect people who had their head stuck up their nether end to ask how to remove it in General Discussions.

While I feel like responding to these pleas (well, not by offering friendship; who in their right mind would want ME as a friend!) with suggestions such as, fill out your profile with relevant information, particularly indicating the language you speak (as it's not always clear from forum posts) and the times you are usually able to be online, expressed as SLT - it's no good saying "in the afternoon" or 11pm-2am and not specifying what time zone you are!

This, it has occurred to me recently, is treating the symptoms, not the disease. Back in the day, I seem to recall that noobs made an effort, which was appreciated by older hands, and there was a constant influx of new people into social groupings which compensated for those who left, providing a potentially dynamic and vivacious environment even at the dullest of "romantic dance" locations.

Nowadays, encouraged by FacelessBook etc, it seems that noobs tend to scream "Add me" demandingly, without offering any insight regarding the benefit which might be conferred by association with them. Where they run into others of a like persuasion, the lack of any significant dialogue almost inevitably eventually leads to an apparently explanationless "relationship" breakdown, with at least one of the parties bemused and confused, if not distraught and hurt.

Don't misunderstand me. I am not talking about the "deep" one-to-one connections in which some immersionists find themselves involved. That's partially chemistry, partially boredom (with RL) and occasionally grasping at straws. I am referring to the "group-hug" type of relationships, where there is likely to be an asymmetry between the expectations of the weak and the compassion of the strong.

Do you agree with me that there are more lonely people out there in SL because their expectations and behaviour have been modified by other (Anti)Social Networks?

---

Not only do I agree, but I agree wholeheartedly. And to add to your spot-on observations about the shifting expectations of the customer population, I have noticed that many of the so-called "Social" games popularized (and monetized) by the big names literally force-train people to throw out connection requests as if casting a handful of tiny seeds across a giant open field. They utilize peer pressure and similar but more subtle techniques to reinforce the notion that the only decent response is to blindly hit "Accept".

Following the logic in the old saw "Nothing of value comes easily" leads one to the inevitable conclusion that we tend to value such "Instant Connections" with all the effort we invested in creating them ... Nada! Of course the Big Names generate their highest income rates when their evil weed seeds are scattered far and wide. But that's only a short-term benefit that (imho) quickly erodes into a rebound dip in real socialization and interaction .. and cash flow.

The scariest part? I think that the rebound dip actually triggers the same sort of "addiction reward" cycle that typifies habitual drug abusers (including drugs made both inside and outside our bodies). When people hit that low point where the lack of the "drug" starts to weigh on their minds, they do the only reasonable thing by getting another fix.

Beware The Invasion of the Digitally Socialized Zombies!!!

ETA: It was auto-correct, I swaer!

[Caitlin Tobias]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

 

Do you agree with me that there are more lonely people out there in SL because their expectations and behaviour have been modified by other (Anti)Social Networks?

---

 

I think it goes beyond SL even, 'social' media is not only causing loneliness inworld but also in real life.

(many studies have been done on this, e.g. this one, although the topic is Facebook, it could apply to SL as well)

 

But sticking to SL, yes, I think too that expectations are set due to the use and pressure of social networks, in which we are led to believe to get friends and an active, fulfilling social life with just one click of the mouse: 'friend' and voilá you have a new friend!

 

In (virtual) reality this is of course not how it works, but perhaps the definitions of the words 'friend' and 'social' need to be re-defined?

Or maybe we, the.. ahem...older ones - who grew up without internet, whatsapp, instagram and whatnot -  need to adapt? Not saying we must, but I doubt we can actually change the way how communication is shifting from just hopping on your bicycle and go to see if your friend is home to nowadays conveniently just 'whatsapp' them with random chat and by doing so maintaining some sort of relationship. Or multiple even.

 

As for SL. Yes, every now and then I get the random friendship  offer from total strangers and upon declining their responses are more often than not are all sorts of offended ('I like your pictures and want to be your friend' or worse 'sheesh, you are not as nice as you pretend to be on your blog! ') instead of apologising for an out of the blue friendship request.

I, by the way, always tell people I do not accept friendship offers before I have actually had some more contact, conversations and so on, it is even in my profile.

 

Obviously I consider a 'friendlist' a list of people I enjoy talking to, or meeting up with, and it is for me not a 'collection of names' to look at and think: omg, I have so many friends, I am popular! (my list has 23 names on it, 3 of them being my alts...).

I try to keep it short and also believe one does not need to be on eachothers 'list' to be friends or have an occasional meeting/dance/chat/party. A matter of typing a name of someone you want to speak for whatever reason in search and "IM" and there you go.

 

It's maybe the pressure people feel, by seeing how happy and overly social and accepted a lot of other people are, compared by themselves, when they look at social networks as facebook, plurk, ASN and Flickr etc.

All the showing off on how wonderful those Second Lives are can make one wonder: 'why am I exploring and dancing all alone?! I need (more) friends! I want what they have!' Hence the: 'Add me!'

While they may not realise it is often a facade or in best case, I hope : play.

 

And last but not least, there is nothing wrong with alone time. As much as we are social beings, we also need solitude to stay healthy..and I think solitude is often wrongly perceived as loneliness, due to said social networks and the pressure coming from it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Caitlin Tobias wrote:

In (virtual) reality this is of course not how it works,

but perhaps the definitions of the words 'friend' and 'social' need to be re-defined?

 

Or maybe we, the.. ahem...older ones - who grew up without internet, whatsapp, instagram and whatnot -  need to adapt? Not saying we must, but I doubt we can actually change the way how communication is shifting from just hopping on your bicycle and go to see if your friend is home to nowadays conveniently just 'whatsapp' them with random chat and by doing so maintaining some sort of relationship. Or multiple even.

 

 

 

---

friend

• n.noun

  1. A person whom one knows, likes, and trusts.

  2. A person whom one knows; an acquaintance.

  3. A person with whom one is allied in a struggle or cause; a comrade.

  4. One who supports, sympathizes with, or patronizes a group, cause, or movement.

     friends of the clean air movement.

  5. A member of the Society of Friends; a Quaker.

Perhaps you're simply freighting the word "friend" with more significance than others do. As you can see, the word has always been usable for the most casual of relationships. An IFF ("Identity Friend or Foe") transponder in a military aircraft only tells you whether or not any given aircraft is likely to shove an air-to-air missle up your tailpipe or not.

Facebook was originally meant for networks of people who already knew each other or were part of the same group. A "friend" in that sense is only someone who you might be interested in keeping tabs on. It doesn't mean that they've touched your soul; neither does it mean that you think they have simply because they're on your friend list.

[Pamela Galli]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

Well, actually, in the sense that I am full of pity for the numerous desperate souls posting in various forums - not just "Make Friends" which you might think was the obvious place, but then, you wouldn't expect people who had their head stuck up their nether end to ask how to remove it in General Discussions.

While I feel like responding to these pleas (well, not by offering friendship; who in their right mind would want ME as a friend!) with suggestions such as, fill out your profile with relevant information, particularly indicating the language you speak (as it's not always clear from forum posts) and the times you are usually able to be online, expressed as SLT - it's no good saying "in the afternoon" or 11pm-2am and not specifying what time zone you are!

This, it has occurred to me recently, is treating the symptoms, not the disease. Back in the day, I seem to recall that noobs made an effort, which was appreciated by older hands, and there was a constant influx of new people into social groupings which compensated for those who left, providing a potentially dynamic and vivacious environment even at the dullest of "romantic dance" locations.

Nowadays, encouraged by FacelessBook etc, it seems that noobs tend to scream "Add me" demandingly, without offering any insight regarding the benefit which might be conferred by association with them. Where they run into others of a like persuasion, the lack of any significant dialogue almost inevitably eventually leads to an apparently explanationless "relationship" breakdown, with at least one of the parties bemused and confused, if not distraught and hurt.

Don't misunderstand me. I am not talking about the "deep" one-to-one connections in which some immersionists find themselves involved. That's partially chemistry, partially boredom (with RL) and occasionally grasping at straws. I am referring to the "group-hug" type of relationships, where there is likely to be an asymmetry between the expectations of the weak and the compassion of the strong.

Do you agree with me that there are more lonely people out there in SL because their expectations and behaviour have been modified by other (Anti)Social Networks?

---

I think it is yet another symptom of the plague which this era will undoubtedly be known for, as the Enlightment was:  the Entitlement Era.

There is a huge contingent of human beings who consider themselves VERY VERY SPECIAL AND IMPORTANT not just to their mums but to the world. 

* Their time is too important to bother Googling anything to find information for themselves, or figuring out what forum in which to post things.  Easier to have the unspecial people do it for them. Same with all mundane tasks.

* They dont need a well crafted profile, or to give anyone any reason to friend them: everyone should just KNOW.

* They have no skills, but want employment just for being, well, special -- even if they dont show up.

 

 

[LlazarusLlong]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

Perhaps you're simply freighting the word "friend" with more significance than others do.

---

It may be that Europeans imbue the word friend with more intimate connotations than our colonial outcasts, since the great geographical expanses of the USA, and subsequent necessity for mobility, has led to a diminution of the quality of "community" that the population density of Europe has engendered.

In that context, it is the colonials who are the true "others".

[Camus used the word "Etranger", and described exquisitely the sense of dissociation felt by those who had no real friends.]

[LlazarusLlong]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

Well, actually, in the sense that I am full of pity for the numerous desperate souls posting in various forums - not just "Make Friends" which you might think was the obvious place, but then, you wouldn't expect people who had their head stuck up their nether end to ask how to remove it in General Discussions.

While I feel like responding to these pleas (well, not by offering friendship; who in their right mind would want ME as a friend!) with suggestions such as, fill out your profile with relevant information, particularly indicating the language you speak (as it's not always clear from forum posts) and the times you are usually able to be online, expressed as SLT - it's no good saying "in the afternoon" or 11pm-2am and not specifying what time zone you are!

This, it has occurred to me recently, is treating the symptoms, not the disease. Back in the day, I seem to recall that noobs made an effort, which was appreciated by older hands, and there was a constant influx of new people into social groupings which compensated for those who left, providing a potentially dynamic and vivacious environment even at the dullest of "romantic dance" locations.

Nowadays, encouraged by FacelessBook etc, it seems that noobs tend to scream "Add me" demandingly, without offering any insight regarding the benefit which might be conferred by association with them. Where they run into others of a like persuasion, the lack of any significant dialogue almost inevitably eventually leads to an apparently explanationless "relationship" breakdown, with at least one of the parties bemused and confused, if not distraught and hurt.

Don't misunderstand me. I am not talking about the "deep" one-to-one connections in which some immersionists find themselves involved. That's partially chemistry, partially boredom (with RL) and occasionally grasping at straws. I am referring to the "group-hug" type of relationships, where there is likely to be an asymmetry between the expectations of the weak and the compassion of the strong.

Do you agree with me that there are more lonely people out there in SL because their expectations and behaviour have been modified by other (Anti)Social Networks?

---

I think it is yet another symptom of the plague which this era will undoubtedly be known for, as the Enlightment was:  the Entitlement Era.

There is a huge contingent of human beings who consider themselves VERY VERY SPECIAL AND IMPORTANT not just to their mums but to the world. 

* Their time is too important to bother Googling anything to find information for themselves, or figuring out what forum in which to post things.  Easier to have the unspecial people do it for them. Same with all mundane tasks.

* They dont need a well crafted profile, or to give anyone any reason to friend them: everyone should just KNOW.

* They have no skills, but want employment just for being, well, special -- even if they dont show up.

 

---

You're inspiring me to write a screenplay about the New Slackers.

I shall call it "The Ignorant, the Indolent, and the Arrogant".

But they won't understand the title, they will be too lazy to look up what it means, and won't care about looking stupid anyway.

[Caitlin Tobias]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

Perhaps you're simply freighting the word "friend" with more significance than others do.

---

It may be that Europeans imbue the word friend with more intimate connotations than our colonial outcasts, since the great geographical expanses of the USA, and subsequent necessity for mobility, has led to a diminution of the quality of "community" that the population density of Europe has engendered.

In that context, it is the colonials who are the true "others".

[Camus used the word "Etranger", and described exquisitely the sense of dissociation felt by those who had no real friends.]

---

Hah. I was just looking it up in the official Dutch Dictionary, and unlike  the variety of definitions Theresa had for the English word 'friend', our Dutch 'vriend' has only two:

 

1. Someone you trust, like and have a close bond or relationship with.

2. A donor-like term, as in 'friend of the club/charity' etc (hope this one makes sense, it has nothing to do with actual friendships between persons, I think Patron is the right term)

The rest, they are 'people you know', acquantainces.

 

So yes, that is why I am probably freighting the word friend with more significance than others.

 

Of course I try go with the flow, online and with other cultures and try to understand the need for 'friendslist', 'friending' and 'unfriending' (for the latter we do not even have a Dutch word!),  it is nice to see other views/experiences .

 

 

[KarenMichelle Lane]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

Well, actually, [. . .

Lots of great observational facts and analysis

. . .] because their expectations and behaviour have been modified by other (Anti)Social Networks?

---

I think it is yet another symptom of the plague which this era will undoubtedly be known for, as the Enlightenment was:  the Entitlement Era.

There is a huge contingent of human beings who consider themselves VERY VERY SPECIAL AND IMPORTANT not just to their mums but to the world. 

* Their time is too important to bother Googling anything to find information for themselves, or figuring out what forum in which to post things.  Easier to have the unspecial people do it for them. Same with all mundane tasks.

* They don't need a well crafted profile, or to give anyone any reason to friend them: everyone should just KNOW.

* They have no skills, but want employment just for being, well, special -- even if they don't show up.

---

You're inspiring me to write a screenplay about the New Slackers.

I shall call it "The Ignorant, the Indolent, and the Arrogant".

But they won't understand the title, they will be too lazy to look up what it means, and won't care about looking stupid anyway.

---

We could relaunch the movie title "The Magnificent 7" with a new twist on the story. That title is at least marketable.

~~~~ The poor minions of secondlife are invaded by the needy and demanding hordes wanting to steal their hard works rather than learn and fend for themselves......The call for gunmen to defend [and ultimately teach the minions how to stand tall for themselves] goes out goes out....

 

[LlazarusLlong]

---

KarenMichelle Lane wrote:

 

We could relaunch the movie title "

The Magnificent 7

" with a new twist on the story. That title is at least marketable.

~~~~ The poor minions of secondlife are invaded by the needy and demanding hordes wanting to steal their hard works rather than learn and fend for themselves......The call for gunmen to defend [and ultimately teach the minions how to stand tall for themselves] goes out goes out....

 

---

Oh dear, now everybody's going to be posting demanding to be Steve McQueen - and NOT Yul Brynner.

[i'll be Robert Vaughn; I shared a plane with him once.]

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

---

KarenMichelle Lane wrote:

 

We could relaunch the movie title "

The Magnificent 7

" with a new twist on the story. That title is at least marketable.

~~~~ The poor minions of secondlife are invaded by the needy and demanding hordes wanting to steal their hard works rather than learn and fend for themselves......The call for gunmen to defend [and ultimately teach the minions how to stand tall for themselves] goes out goes out....

 

---

Oh dear, now everybody's going to be posting demanding to be Steve McQueen - and NOT Yul Brynner.

[i'll be Robert Vaughn; I shared a plane with him once.]

---

Interesting choice...

Oh yeah, you still think of him as an actor in the UK, don't you? Here in the Colonies we mostly think of him as the guy who does the personal-injury lawyer commercials on television these days.

[Perrie Juran]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

---

KarenMichelle Lane wrote:

 

We could relaunch the movie title "

The Magnificent 7

" with a new twist on the story. That title is at least marketable.

~~~~ The poor minions of secondlife are invaded by the needy and demanding hordes wanting to steal their hard works rather than learn and fend for themselves......The call for gunmen to defend [and ultimately teach the minions how to stand tall for themselves] goes out goes out....

 

---

Oh dear, now everybody's going to be posting demanding to be Steve McQueen - and NOT Yul Brynner.

[i'll be Robert Vaughn; I shared a plane with him once.]

---

Who would you have to be your Ilya?

ETA, I shared a plane once with Soupy Sales but it did nothing to help with my comedy.

[LlazarusLlong]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 

Who would you have to be your Ilya?

 

---

My nephew, of course!

[LlazarusLlong]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

 

Interesting choice...

Oh yeah, you still think of him as an actor in the UK, don't you? Here in the Colonies we mostly think of him as the guy who does the personal-injury lawyer commercials on television these days.

---

Actually, if anybody thinks of him at all (probably the only ones who would remember him have senile dementia by now) it would be as the father of the guy who directed Layer Cake, inter alia.

Except his mother lied to him, and Matthew's father was really a twobit English aristocrat.

[Perrie Juran]

It's not a good thing when people ask us to think for them.  Though I am not convinced it is a uniquely American problem (I'm assuming those are the Colonial Outcasts you are referring to).

But the question I would ask is whether the problem is as widespread or ubiquitous as you seem to indicate?  Can we really judge that by what occurs in this Forum?  Or in World for that matter?  Personally I get maybe one random so called "friend request" maybe once a month with no prior conversation. 

Mind you, I'm not saying there is not a problem.  I'm just questioning how wide spread or where geographically it is limited too.  I do meet and have good conversations with new people all the time.  And having gone through a learning curve myself in SL I do not assume that anyone should automatically know anything, even using Google to search for answers.  Still, there are times when I wonder, as I like to phrase it, how some people manage to get out of bed without hurting themselves every morning.

Sadly, the word "friend," like the word "love," has been badly watered down.  On occasion I succumb to this also, using words such as these too loosely.  But I'd maintain that is a challenge everyone faces, to not succumb to that watering down.

Maybe it was the way I was raised or perhaps also my life's experiences, but in general I do not consider any relationship as being "throw away."  I know that there are people who do and who even do so intentionally, but I think they are a minority.  It's only the aftermath of their actions that creates the facade that it is a majority.  But it could be that I'm simply too hopeful. 

[Darrius Gothly]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

Perhaps you're simply freighting the word "friend" with more significance than others do.

---

It may be that Europeans imbue the word friend with more intimate connotations than our colonial outcasts, since the great geographical expanses of the USA, and subsequent necessity for mobility, has led to a diminution of the quality of "community" that the population density of Europe has engendered.

In that context, it is the colonials who are the true "others".

[Camus used the word "Etranger", and described exquisitely the sense of dissociation felt by those who had no real friends.]

---

I think the geolocation has less to do with the weight of the freight, whereas the AGE has more. I find the younger beings infesting ... errr .. still living in my house have a much less weighty definition for "friends" but nevertheless they also maintain a pretty small core of Real Friends; they just happen to use methods of passing notes in class using modern appliances. From what I can tell, younger infesters on both sides of the Pond have reimagined their friendly communications based on those appliances .. in roughly equal numbers no matter where they live.

I will grant that the sheer size of the landscape here in the USA does commit one to travelling further sometimes, but very much like our European progenitors, we tend to clump up in big encampments. (It makes sharing the Roast Beast much easier as the cooking fires ebb into the silent night cold.)

[Venus Petrov]

You may be a pitiful curmudgeon, but you're a cute one.

[LlazarusLlong]

---

Venus Petrov wrote:

You may be a pitiful curmudgeon, but you're a cute one.

---

Awwww, Venus...

...you sure know how to hurt a guy!

[Kelli May]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

 

Interesting choice...

Oh yeah, you still think of him as an actor in the UK, don't you? Here in the Colonies we mostly think of him as the guy who does the personal-injury lawyer commercials on television these days.

---

Actually, if anybody thinks of him at all (probably the only ones who would remember him have senile dementia by now) it would be as the father of the guy who directed Layer Cake, inter alia.

Except his mother lied to him, and Matthew's father was really a twobit English aristocrat.

---

A thing I learned today... I'd never made the link between Robert and Matthew Vaughn.

Hardly anyone remembers Brad Dexter.

[DejaHo]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

Perhaps you're simply freighting the word "friend" with more significance than others do.

---

It may be that Europeans imbue the word friend with more intimate connotations than our colonial outcasts, since the great geographical expanses of the USA, and subsequent necessity for mobility, has led to a diminution of the quality of "community" that the population density of Europe has engendered.

In that context, it is the colonials who are the true "others".

[Camus used the word "Etranger", and described exquisitely the sense of dissociation felt by those who had no real friends.]

---

Friendship is a universal thing and an individual thing.  Either you got friends or you don't.  Either you want friends or you don't.  The definition of friend is also universal and individual.  My preference is to have intimate friends (to make, earn, and keep.)

 

 

[KarenMichelle Lane]

OK, I've held off long enough,,,,my 1st thought when I first read the post title is below:

Enjoy!

[Derek Torvalar]

Yes.

[Aislin Ceawlin]

Pamela, in a recent comp class we were tasked with writing a paper on this "Self Entitlement Generation". The interesting part was hearing the differing thoughts and opinions of the multi-generational students.

[Aislin Ceawlin]

Being one of the Colonial Outcasts (Actually my great grandfather x 10 left firstly on the Sea Venture, then the Mayflower. NOT for religious reasons, but because he loved money and saw a fabulous opportunity to make some, lol) ANYWAY, I agree with you. I think Europeans DO put more intimate connotations the word friend. Here, if someone meets you one time, and you exchange pleasantries, the next thing you know....you're considered a friend, a buddy, a pal...ughhh. I have a very small circle of people I truly consider friends, everyone else I consider an acquaintance, or a nuisance.

Edited because on and one do not have the same meaning no matter how hard you try!

[Pamela Galli]

Maybe in the past, entitled-feeling ppl just did not have a soapbox to stand on, as they do forums now. Or maybe it is more visible in SL.