2 ms·

Actually I think this is inaccurate. It really depends on the person. You're assuming that he can be charming in person. Some people definitely can, others cann

Actually I think this is inaccurate. It really depends on the person. You're assuming that he can be charming in person. Some people definitely can, others cannot - they might get overly shy or stumble over their words. Some people are very good with written words and can win a person over in poem or prose. For others it may be thoughtful actions or deeds. Yes, there needs to be some attraction to begin with but some people can turn it to much higher levels through indirect interaction. So even though he was somewhat limited in options by distance, even in general, I don't agree with your statement that "You can create far more attraction in person". It is dependant on the individuals involved. When you start approaching romance with an ROI you've already missed the point. "Your life will be happier if you don't follow this fellow's courting model." That's sad. I say be a hopeless romantic. Follow your heart.

philk 17y ago
If you're awkward in person you're going to have a hell of a time overcoming that with indirect interaction, just because at some point you have to physically be around the object of your affection. Also from experience being really relaxed around someone remotely in no way makes you less shy when you're around them in person. (Awkward nerd reporting for duty).
- ryanelkins 17y ago
  I maintain that people communicate differently and some are much better in certain mediums than others. Some people express themselves better through written words, art, music, etc. Saying face to face communication is always the best way everytime for every person is wrong. Even for the awkward nerd in all of us - maybe you talk to someone online and you're totally relaxed and being somewhat smooth and then you blow it in person by being a nervous wreck - you still got further through indirect communication than you would have had you just spent 5 minutes with them initially without talking online first, which is my point. I'm not saying being good at indirect communication is all you need, just that some people can get further with it than they can with direct interaction. The basics still need to be in place (general attraction to each other, ability to speak in the presence of a woman, etc).
  - philk 17y ago
    I agree that some people are better at communicating in different mediums. However, in your example, I don't think that you really got much further. You still blew it at the "talking in person" stage. It's just that you took longer to get there.
    - DougWebb 17y ago
      Speaking from experience, in this example blowing it in person isn't as damaging, because you've already shown the other person what you're capable of. You come off as someone who's shy and nervous rather than someone one's strange and unapproachable. Shy and nervous can trigger the maternal instinct in a woman which will keep her around long enough for you to get past the awkwardness.

philk 17y ago

If you're awkward in person you're going to have a hell of a time overcoming that with indirect interaction, just because at some point you have to physically be around the object of your affection. Also from experience being really relaxed around someone remotely in no way makes you less shy when you're around them in person. (Awkward nerd reporting for duty).

ryanelkins 17y ago
I maintain that people communicate differently and some are much better in certain mediums than others. Some people express themselves better through written words, art, music, etc. Saying face to face communication is always the best way everytime for every person is wrong. Even for the awkward nerd in all of us - maybe you talk to someone online and you're totally relaxed and being somewhat smooth and then you blow it in person by being a nervous wreck - you still got further through indirect communication than you would have had you just spent 5 minutes with them initially without talking online first, which is my point. I'm not saying being good at indirect communication is all you need, just that some people can get further with it than they can with direct interaction. The basics still need to be in place (general attraction to each other, ability to speak in the presence of a woman, etc).
- philk 17y ago
  I agree that some people are better at communicating in different mediums. However, in your example, I don't think that you really got much further. You still blew it at the "talking in person" stage. It's just that you took longer to get there.
  - DougWebb 17y ago
    Speaking from experience, in this example blowing it in person isn't as damaging, because you've already shown the other person what you're capable of. You come off as someone who's shy and nervous rather than someone one's strange and unapproachable. Shy and nervous can trigger the maternal instinct in a woman which will keep her around long enough for you to get past the awkwardness.