|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 4:41 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:29 pm
I agree, Xumbra. I'd rather have 5 minutes of snuggling than 1 hour of flowery conversation via Interweb.
( Though, I'd prefer more than 5 minutes.)
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:37 pm
[.Cat.in.the.Toaster.] Good job, Neko. You are well on your way to success. Tackle those mountains of text! And don't worry,, you're not the only one with that disorder. If something is too long for me to read, I find that I glance over the text and scan it haphazardly for loose phrases or sentences that catch my eye. Then I read from there, without knowing what's going on or what premises have been accepted. That's bad for me, but honestly, nobody cares about reading what some dead people wrote. As long as it's on the AP test...ugh. Don't worry 'bout it too much, Neko.
Internet relationships, I imagine, would be difficult to maintain. First off, you don't know what exactly your boyfriend or girlfriend is doing. Trust each other for awhile, then doubt each other for awhile. Is she really taking a shower? Is she really going to bed? Can you trust her just because she said so? Yes? No? I don't know. It depends. Secondly, making love isn't the best thing you can do well with a two-dimensional screen. (Okay fine, it may be a bit curved on a cathode ray tube, but you know you can't push me that far.) Aren't physical actions much more appealing and authoritative than with what emotions flowery language can bring? Yes, you can debate me on this point, but personally, I'd prefer to snuggle with someone for 5 minutes than a long passionate and sweet speech conducted via instant messaging client or email. I'm not trying to defame Internet love, no, but I just find it inconvenient for me.
Most of what I look for in a girlfriend is caring. If she cares, then that will suffice alone. But I agree. A real person is and always will be better than a pixelated one, or one whom you only know about through text.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:40 pm
I'd prefer meeting someone through the Internet, then being with them in real life. Not through seedy chatrooms, but rather places like E-Harmony or something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:46 pm
I've never been a fan of internet dating sites. They just seem so, so, so unnatural. I refuse to ever use one myself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:23 pm
Yeah, but for those who are shy outside the Internet, it's a good option.
Besides, it'd be easier to find someone for you that you didn't know existed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:23 pm
But isn't it difficult for people to fill out forms and call themselves compatible with others? There are just so many factors to consider, and only so much can be contained in a form.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 10:31 pm
True.
But isn't the Internet easier than real life sometimes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 12:22 pm
Yup. I don't have to worry about identity so much. And in case I ever screw up somewhere, I can always leave and join another community. 'Tis all good in the wide selection of choices of communities.
I don't need to physically talk to you all on the Internet. That's a good thing sometimes, as I seldomly have trouble hearing other people. Their words seem to be distorted when I listen ("My dad got a letter" translates into "My dad got slaughtered"). I am not limited to being expected to respond instantly to others; instead, I can take my time and do chores, come back, and still respond, as if the conversation were maintained for an hour straight. I have the chance to correct my spelling and say words I can't normally say in real life (certain mispronounciations of words I've never heard of). I have time to think about my word choice, what vocabularies to use, and how to express my feelings in the most artful and efficient way possible.
Heck, speaking is kind of like art. Speaking well means that others will listen to you without becoming bored, become passionate about whatever topic you decide to expound upon, and rally to your cause. Through speaking, one can be persuasive; through persuasion, many, many things can be achieved. Be they good or bad, those things can bring changes upon others' lives. That, alone, is a powerful tool.
And then you have the tl;dr people. Ooh, short attention spans. I don't blame you people. The media has helped cater to you after all. Think of the Orchestra Pit Theory: who would you rather listen to on the news, the man speaking on stage or the guy who falls into the orchestra pit? Exactly. You don't care -- why should you? -- about the talking heads on television. Why listen to the State of the Union when it doesn't directly affect you? Wouldn't you rather listen to September 11 or the Columbia accident? Think of sound bytes and how short they have become. Abraham Lincoln was about to talk for hours on end without having people become bored of his speech. And what would his speech be today? "Read my lips: no slaves." Seven seconds is the average length of a sound byte today. Seven seconds. If you can't focus for any longer than seven seconds, my friend, then you're going to have a hard time tackling what I'm writing. I wonder if you even got this far. Lazy, lazy, lazy kids, you people are. I don't blame you. It's not really your fault, but society's and its pervasive influence on what you hear, see, and do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 1:47 pm
[.Cat.in.the.Toaster.] Yup. I don't have to worry about identity so much. And in case I ever screw up somewhere, I can always leave and join another community. 'Tis all good in the wide selection of choices of communities.
I don't need to physically talk to you all on the Internet. That's a good thing sometimes, as I seldomly have trouble hearing other people. Their words seem to be distorted when I listen ("My dad got a letter" translates into "My dad got slaughtered"). I am not limited to being expected to respond instantly to others; instead, I can take my time and do chores, come back, and still respond, as if the conversation were maintained for an hour straight. I have the chance to correct my spelling and say words I can't normally say in real life (certain mispronounciations of words I've never heard of). I have time to think about my word choice, what vocabularies to use, and how to express my feelings in the most artful and efficient way possible.
Heck, speaking is kind of like art. Speaking well means that others will listen to you without becoming bored, become passionate about whatever topic you decide to expound upon, and rally to your cause. Through speaking, one can be persuasive; through persuasion, many, many things can be achieved. Be they good or bad, those things can bring changes upon others' lives. That, alone, is a powerful tool.
And then you have the tl;dr people. Ooh, short attention spans. I don't blame you people. The media has helped cater to you after all. Think of the Orchestra Pit Theory: who would you rather listen to on the news, the man speaking on stage or the guy who falls into the orchestra pit? Exactly. You don't care -- why should you? -- about the talking heads on television. Why listen to the State of the Union when it doesn't directly affect you? Wouldn't you rather listen to September 11 or the Columbia accident? Think of sound bytes and how short they have become. Abraham Lincoln was about to talk for hours on end without having people become bored of his speech. And what would his speech be today? "Read my lips: no slaves." Seven seconds is the average length of a sound byte today. Seven seconds. If you can't focus for any longer than seven seconds, my friend, then you're going to have a hard time tackling what I'm writing. I wonder if you even got this far. Lazy, lazy, lazy kids, you people are. I don't blame you. It's not really your fault, but society's and its pervasive influence on what you hear, see, and do. I don't have a short attention span, I prefer to read long things, I just simply can't on the computer. If I can have it in my hands I can read for as long as I see fit. And Neko listens to the state of the union when it's on the radio, she's not much of a big tv watcher sooo... And about the first portion, that's also why I prefer the internet over the real world sometimes. In the re al world if you say something stupid or offensive, it's there and there's nothing you can do about it. But here you can delete it, change whatever. And it gives me a chance to think about wh at I'm saying before I say it. [well, typing, but you know what I mean.] I also often reread through my posts and I can easily fix my typos, reword something here and there, and it's all good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:24 pm
Neko_girl7992 [.Cat.in.the.Toaster.] Good job, Neko. You are well on your way to success. Tackle those mountains of text! And don't worry,, you're not the only one with that disorder. If something is too long for me to read, I find that I glance over the text and scan it haphazardly for loose phrases or sentences that catch my eye. Then I read from there, without knowing what's going on or what premises have been accepted. That's bad for me, but honestly, nobody cares about reading what some dead people wrote. As long as it's on the AP test...ugh. Don't worry 'bout it too much, Neko.
Internet relationships, I imagine, would be difficult to maintain. First off, you don't know what exactly your boyfriend or girlfriend is doing. Trust each other for awhile, then doubt each other for awhile. Is she really taking a shower? Is she really going to bed? Can you trust her just because she said so? Yes? No? I don't know. It depends. Secondly, making love isn't the best thing you can do well with a two-dimensional screen. (Okay fine, it may be a bit curved on a cathode ray tube, but you know you can't push me that far.) Aren't physical actions much more appealing and authoritative than with what emotions flowery language can bring? Yes, you can debate me on this point, but personally, I'd prefer to snuggle with someone for 5 minutes than a long passionate and sweet speech conducted via instant messaging client or email. I'm not trying to defame Internet love, no, but I just find it inconvenient for me.
Most of what I look for in a girlfriend is caring. If she cares, then that will suffice alone. But I agree. A real person is and always will be better than a pixelated one, or one whom you only know about through text. I totaly agree with that. I WAS in an online/long distance relationship for ages..about 2 years.. You have to put so much trust in that person, it's really quite stressful. Flowery language can be copied and pasted so easily, its very hard to tell what a person is doing over a screen. ...Those cathode ray tubes aren't really attractive either.. Perhaps if you drew a smiley .. I, also, would MUCH rather p refer 5 (MORE MORE!!! D': ) than an hour talking online. You get to poke them in real life!! xp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2007 6:11 pm
Are you calling us lazy? ( From "Lazy, lazy kids you people are.")
[/paranoid]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:32 am
Perhaps. But then I call everyone lazy by default.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 8:45 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 10:29 am
You don't procrastinate on homework?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
![[.Cat.in.the.Toaster.]'s avatar](https://a1cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/27/25/940d083592527_flip.png?t=1214964056_6.00_00)
