|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 123 responses total. |
oval
|
|
response 50 of 123:
| 
Apr 1 06:44 UTC 2002 |
behave like jp2.
|
morwen
|
|
response 51 of 123:
|
Apr 1 08:17 UTC 2002 |
You are right. Jamie is a turd. Paul is at least nice.
|
brighn
|
|
response 52 of 123:
|
Apr 1 14:29 UTC 2002 |
*blinks at #47*
I'm "at least" nice, but other than that, I'm just like Jamie?
Well, Julie, you just moved down about 50 pegs on my "people I respect" list,
from fairly near the top to approaching the bottom.
|
edina
|
|
response 53 of 123:
|
Apr 1 14:43 UTC 2002 |
Actually Paul - you don't know me - and thinking you might somewhat be like
Jamie (in my eyes), is a good thing. But then, I know Jamie away from
grex/m-net.
|
brighn
|
|
response 54 of 123:
|
Apr 1 14:50 UTC 2002 |
I presume Julie's analysis of Jamie is based on the same dataset that mine
is. I'll get off my drama queen high horse and move Julie back up my list in
a few hours. I suppose.
|
edina
|
|
response 55 of 123:
|
Apr 1 16:19 UTC 2002 |
Or you could think that I am really not so bad and my opinion might count for
something.
|
jazz
|
|
response 56 of 123:
|
Apr 1 16:25 UTC 2002 |
Okay, I'm really struggling here. What possible good qualities can
someone have who chooses to act like Jamie does? I've met people who've acted
like that online, and they're generally just as much of a fucktard offline
as they are on.
|
edina
|
|
response 57 of 123:
|
Apr 1 16:28 UTC 2002 |
Trying to explain why Jamie acts the way he does is like trying to explain
how Stonehenge was built. It's a mystery. But let me assure you. Jamie has
many good qualities - he's a great friend, he has a truly adventurous spirit
and he's incredibly smart. He just likes yanking the grex chain on occasion
- and the best part is, you all know it and you keep allowing it happen.
|
jazz
|
|
response 58 of 123:
|
Apr 1 16:34 UTC 2002 |
I've known otherwise good people who get really shitfaced drunk and
piss in the corners of their house. But I don't try to rationalize it.
|
scott
|
|
response 59 of 123:
|
Apr 1 16:50 UTC 2002 |
Wow, jazz is in rare form today. :)
|
jep
|
|
response 60 of 123:
|
Apr 1 17:00 UTC 2002 |
I generally regard people's behavior on-line the same way I'd regard
their behavior anywhere else. No one becomes a different person on-
line. If you do or say something on-line, it's you who did it and not
some alter ego. On-line, life is as real as it is anywhere else.
|
edina
|
|
response 61 of 123:
|
Apr 1 17:02 UTC 2002 |
I think people tend to be more honest on-line than they would IRL. You tend
not to have to curb your words because you don't see how they affect who is
reading them.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 62 of 123:
|
Apr 1 17:05 UTC 2002 |
I would agree with that. I am not at ALL like this in real life.
|
brighn
|
|
response 63 of 123:
|
Apr 1 17:27 UTC 2002 |
#60> That's your perception, and so that's how you act. But Brooke is correct
in the implication that not everyone thinks the way you do. In addition to
to the issue of "being more honest," people may choose to highlight any of
several "negative" traits on line out of catharsis. People who know me both
online and IRL are fairly universally in agreement that I'm much more of a
prick online. This is in part because I can't see the impact of my words, in
part because the dynamic of online conversation is different (I tend to be
nicer in chatrooms than in email), in part because kinesthetics is lost online
except fo rthe occasional emote (so people can't always tell when I'm just
yanking their chain), and in part because I have a mean streak that I tend
to hide in F2F interactions. No, I wouldn't say that my online persona is a
different *person*, but it's definitely a different experience interacting
with me online than IRL. I don't doubt the same is true of many others here.
Jazz, in contrast, strikes me online as not that different from the few times
I've met him IRL, but then, I've only met him a few times and that was years
ago, when I was hitting on his then-GF. ;}
#55> I wasn't questioning your opinion. Julie expressed HER opinion before
you expressed yours, so I presumed that her original comparison of me to Jamie
was based on the same body of data I'd been exposed to, roughly.
|
edina
|
|
response 64 of 123:
|
Apr 1 18:08 UTC 2002 |
Well - you seem alright to me.
|
bhelliom
|
|
response 65 of 123:
|
Apr 1 18:25 UTC 2002 |
I have personally started re-evaulating who I call "friend"
versus "acquaintance" and "someone I see every once and a
while." "Friend" is definitely a word that gets too freely used these
days by most people.
|
tpryan
|
|
response 66 of 123:
|
Apr 1 18:27 UTC 2002 |
They got real bored in the winter with nothing better to
do than slide big slabs of rock across the ice.
|
edina
|
|
response 67 of 123:
|
Apr 1 18:44 UTC 2002 |
Re 65 I dont' think we overuse the word friend - I think it's a subjective
thing - everyone has their own definition of what a friend is.
|
jep
|
|
response 68 of 123:
|
Apr 1 20:58 UTC 2002 |
re #63: I agree; that *is* my perception. It's the basis of how I
react to people here.
Grex is not a separate entity from "real life". Your actions come from
you, on-line or off-line. It's all real life. It's a different type
of interaction, sure, but every type of communication or action is
different from every other one. You're not a different person in a
car, while drunk, talking on the phone, in a crowd, face to face with
one other person, etc. You're you, and what you do is because of who
you are.
|
bhelliom
|
|
response 69 of 123:
|
Apr 1 21:11 UTC 2002 |
Re 67- I wasn't necessarily speaking of anyone here. I do agree that
everyone has their own definition of what "friend" is. My perception
is that people just tend to use the word so freely that often everone
is labeled friend when they really aren't. It's seems these days that
most people are referring to acquaintances when they use the
word "friend." And often people aren't honest about who their friends
are, or think that others perceive them as friends, but they in reality
do not. Perhaps that is in truth a communication issue.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 70 of 123:
|
Apr 1 22:05 UTC 2002 |
I agree that most people use the term "friend" to apply to a much wider
class of people than I would. There are lots of people whose company I
enjoy and who I think are fine people who I wouldn't count as friends.
It's not that I don't like those people or don't want their friendship,
it's more that I reserve the term for someone I have a very strong and
very familiar relationship with.
|
slynne
|
|
response 71 of 123:
|
Apr 1 22:13 UTC 2002 |
I have never met anyone whom I liked online and then found I disliked
them offline but I have known people whom I either disliked online and
then found that they werent really so bad IRL or whom I just liked
better when I got to know them IRL. I think this is because people are
often more polite in person and also because sometimes people say harsh
things but soften them with their tone.
Generally I found found that sometimes the online jerk really isnt that
much of a jerk at all but just *seems* like a jerk but the offline
asshole is pretty much an asshole online too.
OOoooOoo I take it back. I just remembered one person who I liked worse
when I met him offline but that was because he had a problem with
personal space and always was either standing way too close to me or
was touching me when I didnt want that.
|
mary
|
|
response 72 of 123:
|
Apr 1 22:32 UTC 2002 |
Two things I look for in friends. One, they can't be emotionally needy
requiring lots of TLC. Two, they have to be interesting people with a
keen sense of humor.
So I don't have a lot of friends, more like a few that feel like
great fitting jeans - comfortable.
|
morwen
|
|
response 73 of 123:
|
Apr 1 23:52 UTC 2002 |
<grovelling humbly>
I'm sorry, Paul. There is so much difference between you and Jamie.
You sometimes manage to make many of us look stupid without really
meaning to. That is not so bad a thing because you are basically a
nice guy.
Jamie, on the other hand, tries to make us all look stupid on purpose
and is, therefore, a turd. This is why Sindi has him on ignore and
nearly everyone else find him highly annoying.
It is this similiarity, however distant, that I was attempting to point
to. I don't find you annoying because you don't mean to make people
look stupid. Jamie, I object to on the strongest possible terms
because he tries hard to make everyone look like dorks. He is, by
definition, a turd.
That is the single longest apology I have ever written. That'll teach
me to be careful of what I say and to explain what I mean.
|
morwen
|
|
response 74 of 123:
|
Apr 1 23:53 UTC 2002 |
By the way, Jamie, if you happen to read this and are offended, Idon't
really care. Have fun.
|