3 ms·
I agree. A group of actual (traditional) friends is not the same thing as a bunch of online people that have something in common. For a group of real life frien
by fleddr 4y ago
I agree. A group of actual (traditional) friends is not the same thing as a bunch of online people that have something in common. For a group of real life friends, online conversations are often/best handled in a chat-like experience. Here in Europe it's mostly WhatsApp.
There's also differences in what you expect from content. When one of my real friends share that they took their family to a zoo and had a great day, that's mildly interesting. I know these people.
When an online stranger (or digital only "friend") shares this same thing, I couldn't care less. I'm happy for them, and it's part of normal conversation, but it's not a very interesting type of information to read in large quantities every single day. There has to be some higher shared purpose, the more specific the better.
- shanebellone 4y ago" There has to be some higher shared purpose, the more specific the better." I have no idea if this is true but it's an interesting point that sounds right. I suppose the answer might come down to the individual purpose of group interaction. I'll definitely give this some thought. Thanks for the input.
- fleddr 4y agoTo me that has always been the promise of the internet: to connect with people on topics I'm passionate about as such a thing is highly constrained in the real world. It's a brand new capability, a super power. The opposite is true for generic chitchat online. Instead of more powerful, it is less powerful compared to the real world equivalent. You don't gain anything.