Jump to content

Is there something wrong with me?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1950 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

I don't want to make friends in SL.

Very few participants meet my high standards, and the small numbers who do do not seem to share the same interests..

Why should I drop those standards in SL when I refuse to do so in rl?

I have wasted considerable amounts of time finding out that people who say they would like to be friends with me are lying about their educational prowess, their competence in supposed areas of expertise, their morals and ethics, and worst of all, their ability to communicate.

Do you forumites find that you have to revise your expectations downwards to find people to talk to?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic


ZoeTick wrote:

I don't want to make friends in SL.

Very few participants meet my high standards, and the small numbers who do do not seem to share the same interests..

Why should I drop those standards in SL when I refuse to do so in rl?

I have wasted considerable amounts of time finding out that people who say they would like to be friends with me are lying about their educational prowess, their competence in supposed areas of expertise, their morals and ethics, and worst of all, their ability to communicate.

Do you forumites find that you have to revise your expectations downwards to find people to talk to?

 

Does it bother you that their may be people who won't lower their standards to be your friend?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't find it any more (or less) difficult to make friends in SL than in RL.

However, I do distinguish between friends and acquaintances, which means that, of all the hundreds of people I've accumulated on my SL Friends' list  over the seven or eight years I've been here, and the dozens I chat to more or less regularly, there are only a handful I'd consider my friends in the everyday sense of the term in English (at least as I use it).

Similarly, in RL, I'd distinguish between, on the one hand, friends, and, on the other, people I know well enough to chat to at parties, or join for a coffee now and again if I run into them.   

Be thou familiar, but by no means vulgar.
Those friends thou hast, and their adoption tried,
Grapple them to thy soul with hoops of steel;
But do not dull thy palm with entertainment
Of each new-hatch'd, unfledged comrade.

Sound advice, to my mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing wrong with having standards.  I have them myself.  However very few will meet every one of them so you have to be a bit flexible. 

For example, I like smart people, but that doesn't mean I require that they hold an advanced degree. One of the smartest people I know in SL just graduated from High School, and didn't have the resources needed to continue his education.  However he  has self educated himself through voracious reading and teaching himself.  We talk for hours about everything from art and literature to advanced physics.  If I had written him off when we first met due to his background being very different than mine and not reaching the same level of education as I had, I would have missed a great friend and never discovered how smart he really is.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Perrie Juran wrote:


ZoeTick wrote:

I don't want to make friends in SL.

Very few participants meet my high standards, and the small numbers who do do not seem to share the same interests..

Why should I drop those standards in SL when I refuse to do so in rl?

I have wasted considerable amounts of time finding out that people who say they would like to be friends with me are lying about their educational prowess, their competence in supposed areas of expertise, their morals and ethics, and worst of all, their ability to communicate.

Do you forumites find that you have to revise your expectations downwards to find people to talk to?

 

Does it bother you that
their
may be people who won't lower their standards to be your friend?

It would, if it were likely.

But it's not.

Link to post
Share on other sites


ZoeTick wrote:


Perrie Juran wrote:


ZoeTick wrote:

I don't want to make friends in SL.

Very few participants meet my high standards, and the small numbers who do do not seem to share the same interests..

Why should I drop those standards in SL when I refuse to do so in rl?

I have wasted considerable amounts of time finding out that people who say they would like to be friends with me are lying about their educational prowess, their competence in supposed areas of expertise, their morals and ethics, and worst of all, their ability to communicate.

Do you forumites find that you have to revise your expectations downwards to find people to talk to?

 

Does it bother you that
their
may be people who won't lower their standards to be your friend?

It would, if it were likely.

But it's not.

Then I'd suggest that Second Life is not for you.....unless all you want to do is be alone in it.  And if Second Life is not for you why would you even bother with this Forum.  Oh I know....  Amusement!

You see, the curious thing is this:  I'm not sure if you were to ask if I could lower my standards to be your friend.  It would be a hard choice for me. 

Link to post
Share on other sites


ZoeTick wrote:

 

I have wasted considerable amounts of time finding out that people who say they would like to be friends with me are lying about their educational prowess, their competence in supposed areas of expertise, their morals and ethics, and worst of all, their ability to communicate.

 

Have you considered that there could just be a problem with people interested in being friends with you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is absolutely nothing wrong with you.  I completely understand where you're coming from, and I agree.

Most times it's best to keep most people at arms' length.  Only a very, very select few should ever be allowed to come closer than that, and that's only because they've earned the privilege in one way or another.

Link to post
Share on other sites


ZoeTick wrote:

I don't want to make friends in SL.

Very few participants meet my high standards, and the small numbers who do do not seem to share the same interests..

Why should I drop those standards in SL when I refuse to do so in rl?

I have wasted considerable amounts of time finding out that people who say they would like to be friends with me are lying about their educational prowess, their competence in supposed areas of expertise, their morals and ethics, and worst of all, their ability to communicate.

Do you forumites find that you have to revise your expectations downwards to find people to talk to?

 

Is it really wasted time though? At least it has reinforced in your mind what you do and do not want in/from a friend.

Some friendships are for keeps, some are meant to be only transitional. 

Don't expect too much, and you'll not be so disappointed. 

NB: I don't always take my own advice. 

P.S. There is probably something wrong with you - there is something wrong with EVERYONE!

edited for punctuation

Link to post
Share on other sites


Theresa Tennyson wrote:

Have you considered that there could just be a problem with people interested in being friends with
you
?


Of course, but at least you can't fault their excellent taste and foolhardy bravery.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there something wrong with you? of course - something is wrong with everybody.

Friending people who don't match will soon get them into the "ring 3" group on your f-list (those you never talk to). My "ring 1" friends (inner circle) I never searched. It just happened.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we all pick and choose those with whom we wish to associate. No one is entirely promiscuous about friendships, even when they are very sociable and accepting people.

What I find odd is the association of this idea of companionability with "standards," as though your potential friends have to pass a standardized test before they need apply. 

Intelligence, eloquence, knowledge, and so forth, are all things that I find attractive in a person, and I am much more likely to enjoy the company of someone who possesses these. But they are certainly not the only, or even the most important, requisites that guide my choices.

Why would anyone want to be friends with someone who cares more about their ability to write grammatically than about their generosity, kindness, wit, or spirit?

Link to post
Share on other sites


Scylla Rhiadra wrote:

Well, we all pick and choose those with whom we wish to associate. No one is entirely promiscuous about friendships, even when they are very sociable and accepting people.

What I find odd is the association of this idea of companionability with "standards," as though your potential friends have to pass a standardized test before they need apply. 

Intelligence, eloquence, knowledge, and so forth, are all things that I find attractive in a person, and I am much more likely to enjoy the company of someone who possesses these. But they are certainly not the only, or even the most important, requisites that guide my choices.

Why would anyone 
want
to be friends with someone who cares more about their ability to write grammatically than about their generosity, kindness, wit, or spirit?

But Scylla, it's a dog eat dog, every person for themself world we live in and no good deed goes unpunished.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Perrie Juran wrote:


Scylla Rhiadra wrote:

Well, we all pick and choose those with whom we wish to associate. No one is entirely promiscuous about friendships, even when they are very sociable and accepting people.

What I find odd is the association of this idea of companionability with "standards," as though your potential friends have to pass a standardized test before they need apply. 

Intelligence, eloquence, knowledge, and so forth, are all things that I find attractive in a person, and I am much more likely to enjoy the company of someone who possesses these. But they are certainly not the only, or even the most important, requisites that guide my choices.

Why would anyone 
want
to be friends with someone who cares more about their ability to write grammatically than about their generosity, kindness, wit, or spirit?

But Scylla, it's a dog eat dog, every person for themself world we live in and no good deed goes unpunished.

Which, of course, represents exactly the kind of attitude I'd find less than congenial in friend. :-)

 

Although I suppose one could counter with the idea that it is selfishness that attracts me to nice people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

glass on floor.jpg

 


Scylla Rhiadra wrote:


Perrie Juran wrote:


Scylla Rhiadra wrote:

Well, we all pick and choose those with whom we wish to associate. No one is entirely promiscuous about friendships, even when they are very sociable and accepting people.

What I find odd is the association of this idea of companionability with "standards," as though your potential friends have to pass a standardized test before they need apply. 

Intelligence, eloquence, knowledge, and so forth, are all things that I find attractive in a person, and I am much more likely to enjoy the company of someone who possesses these. But they are certainly not the only, or even the most important, requisites that guide my choices.

Why would anyone 
want
to be friends with someone who cares more about their ability to write grammatically than about their generosity, kindness, wit, or spirit?

But Scylla, it's a dog eat dog, every person for themself world we live in and no good deed goes unpunished.

Which, of course, represents exactly the kind of attitude I'd find less than congenial in friend. :-)


Although I suppose one could counter with the idea that it is selfishness that attracts me to nice people.

Oh no, I've done gone and went and ruint Zoe's thread with a cat picture!  That will be fifty lashes with a wet noodle on my back.  ;)

But getting to your reply, we could argue that actually it is a selfless act.  It could make for an interesting discussion.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Richtea57 wrote:

frends rekwest sent

And speaking of selflessness . . . This is the very definition of self-sacrifice.

Greater love hath no person than he who etc . . .

 

 

(Be sure to let us know how that worked for you. :matte-motes-wink-tongue: )

Link to post
Share on other sites


Scylla Rhiadra wrote:


Richtea57 wrote:

frends rekwest sent

And speaking of selflessness . . . This is the very definition of self-sacrifice.

Greater love hath no person than he who etc . . .

 

 

(Be sure to let us know how that worked for you. :matte-motes-wink-tongue: )

It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single, desperate bloke in possession of no friends takes what he can get....I am that bloke.

 

Fingers crossed. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1950 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...