--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <wayback71@> wrote: > > > > > > Lately, I skip about 99 percent of the posts on FFL. I get > > > that a few people are delighted to have an audience, anyone > > > who will engage. I avoid them entirely. But for me the even > > > bigger question is: why does anyone want to be that audience? > > > Maybe I missed something along the way since I don't read > > > these attention-seekers at all - not since reading their first > > > few posts. Don't they and all the people who keep replying > > > to them and stirring the pot have work to do, books to read, > > > walks to take, dogs to walk, movies to see, friends and/or > > > family to spend time with, dishes to wash, food to cook, meals > > > to eat, even meditation and yoga to practice? You can analyze > > > it well, but I mean, seriously, who cares for these people, and > > > their audience? Who does the daily living stuff for them? How > > > do they earn a living, live and then spend all this time posting > > > about, about mind-jumbling uninteresting concepts. > > You mean "mind-jumbling and uninteresting *to me*," > right, Susan? I mean, in my observation, folks don't > tend to post about concepts they themselves find > uninteresting. > > On the other hand, having one's mind jumbled can > itself be an interesting experience. And then in the > process of getting one's mind unjumbled, one often > finds that one's mental horizons have been enlarged.
Your point is heard. I think the discussions of the past few weeks have not been of interest to me, I have not read most of the posts (and can't really keep up with the pace of the posting anyway), and so don't really get what is going on when I do tune in. In particular I find the writing and thinking style of some to be annoying at best. Others might enjoy the banter, but I have found it irritating lately - as if people are egging on other people so as to be entertained. I know you would not do that - so perhaps I am missing something here. As you say, it can appeal to others and expand horizons, I guess. Not for me at this time. > > Also, sometimes the personality dynamics among the > people on a forum can be as interesting as, or even > more interesting than, the topics themselves. If > one finds *people* interesting, that is. I guess not > everybody does. > > > > Just saying I > > > noticed the same things as you did here and it is interesting to > > > hear that FFL is not the only place seeing the same Wonder what > > > the next stage will be........ > > > > It's definitely not just FFL. My little rant was occasioned > > by an attention slut outbreak on two other forums, > > Hmmm, "so many forums I'm a part of" (see below) > would amount to two forums, then, right? > > Me, I learned years ago to stick to one forum at a > time. Participation in multiple forums *does* tend > to take time away from making a living and all the > other activities Susan lists. > > For sure, if I were a part of multiple forums *and* > also spent lots of time sitting watching movies and > TV shows, it really *would* be hard to find time > for everything else. ;-) > > not by > > anything in particular here, although we've certainly seen > > the same trend here. On those other two forums for the last > > week 80% of the posts have been made by 2 to 4 people, all > > of them fitting into the attention slut description I posted > > earlier. And to make things worse, there are no posting > > limits on these forums, so it's like FFL in the Bad Old Days > > before Rick wisely implemented the weekly limit of 50 posts. > > Try to imagine what FFL would be like if those who tend to > > make 20 to 30 posts in one day were able to continue doing > > so all week -- that's what these other forums have become. :-( > > > > I completely agree with your approach, and tend to base mine > > these days on time. It's the one thing I can't get back, and > > I tend not to want to waste it on reading or participating > > in conversations that in retrospect are going to turn out to > > be a waste of time for all concerned. > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > I've been wondering about this lately, because so many forums I'm a part > > > > of have been invaded by hordes of what I tend to call ( for want of the > > > > proper Sanskrit term :-) attention sluts. You know the type of person > > > > I'm talking about. Insecure, not many real-life friends, and seriously > > > > in need of attention. Any kind of attention will seemingly do. So the > > > > attention sluts tend to post a LOT, eating up bandwidth and > > > > automatically rendering themselves uninteresting to those who don't > > > > gravitate to Chatty Cathy types. > <snip> >
