Slashdot Mirror
Instant Messaging For Introverts
adamengst tips an article up on TidBITS that explores the persistent reluctance of many nerds to embrace fully new communications media such as IM and Twitter. In this thoughtful article Joe Kissell explores, from the inside, the mind of the introvert and how this personality style often struggles with new "always-on" media. The result is a sometimes exasperated incomprehension on the part of the more extroverted. Well worth a read.
I would be getting frist post, bud saddley I am being too shy.
Will code for new sig.
was about the most boring thing I've ever read. I couldn't bring myself to read the second half; perhaps it was more interesting.
NEWSFLASH! Some people don't like IM! Film at 11. *yawn*. Bring on the pink ponies.
Yeah? Well I think you're overrated too.
If, as wacky futurists like Ray Kurzweil in his The Singularity is Near human beings will increasingly maintain portions of their conscious in computer networks, is there even a place for introversion in the future? Eventually once all of mankind is networked, it'll be harder and hard to tune out.
Building a park, building an app, family, etc. just seems to take time.
Twitter and things like that add useless noise to the Web 2.0. Who's sick of some idiot twittering what they're up to all the time and drowning out all the more thoughtful status updates on Facebook? I don't think even extroverts want to know what everyone is thinking or doing all the time, for fear of realizing how dilute their thoughts really are... it's like those really noiesy couples that talk all the time, but if you ever listen in they're talking about jack all and it deteriorates into whining.
Actually maybe I shouldn't have been so extroverted as to post this. Alright everyone, let's not post at all in protest of extroversion...
Anyone more than me who got a "Why do they have a "Indy" DataType declaration in the headline" feeling?
Anyone who wants or needs to concentrate suffers from the constant barrage of interruptions from this 'always on' technology.
IM, Cellphones, SMS etc. It seems to be expected now that everyone should be instantly contactable, at any time, for the most trivial of communications.
I'm not an introvert, but prefer to be uninterrupted unless it's something really important.
I annoy people by not playing the game, by turning off my cellphone, not running an IM client (unless I want to specifically talk to someone), only checking my email twice a day etc.
The constant jabbering and twittering that surrounds us now really pisses me off. QUIET please!
I just stay invisible on IM most of the time. If someone is on that I want to talk to, I can message them. My close friends and family know that if I am around I'll answer them even if they can't see them.
:)
I also don't feel the need to instantly answer, even on private work related IM. If it's urgent sure, but urgent matters warrant a phone call generally. I place IM somewhere in between email and phone for the sense of urgency factor. Of course the actual content and context of the message matters and everything in life should be taken case by case
People stress themselves out too much with the 'OMG I JUST GOT IM'ED I'D BETTER ANSWER RIGHT AWAY'.
Wait, so you mean the name isn't an explicit metaphor likening its users to mindless birds, sharing every tiny, half-formed thought that crosses their pea-sized brain to everyone within ear-shot?
And because I don't want to hear it, they're trying to frame this as something wrong with me?
I don't believe introverts regard IM the same way as face-to-face communications. I know a lot of people that are socially very shy in public, that practically live in IM or WOW etc.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
I definitely recognise myself in the article's description: I generally write 2 or 3 versions of an email before finally sending it and I really don't get on with IM-style communication.
The problem I find with IM at work is that some people use it instead of doing their own research. I frequently get IM'd work questions that could have been solved with 1 google search or 30 seconds with the source tree and grep. Instead, because it's so easy, they interrupt me.
I just hate that! You try to concentrate on debugging some code while your boss keeps popping up in your IM, bugging you with questions: "Hey, I am in a meeting, I am too lazy to look up and read the status report you spent your day with yesterday, what's the status on X? Oh wait, I am to lazy to type all this, I'll just call you on your mobile and put you on speaker." etc..
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/27/2221228
If they don't listen, that's what the block button is for. Pretty much all of the current generation IM systems have it.
I am trolling
"They're" not trying to frame it any such way. The author bemoans the same misunderstanding of introversion. RTFA.
Just because you are introvert doesn't mean you don't like IM - in fact quite opposite, I personally prefer using IM/SMS over talking over phone exactly because I'm introvert.
I'd certainly consider myself to be an 'introvert', but I think IM is great. Both email and IM have their uses. If I'm in the middle of something and someone IMs me, I just ignore it. When I get to a stopping point, then I'll go check and see what the message was and get back to them.
So, I think my observation is that one set of words, introvert/extrovert doesn't convey a lot of the variation in people's social interaction habits and preferences.
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -- Jefferson
...that I got to like machines largely because I didn't have to put up with them yacking on about stuff the whole time.
I don't use IM and I don't have a cellphone because I really don't care what you need to tell me. If it's important now it'll still be important next week, so use a pen and paper to write to me.
namgge
"Nerds" don't want to be bothered.
"Nerds" are the ones who realize that it is a waste of time
"Nerds" don't need to be in constant communication to feel reassured
"Nerds" don't want to waste their money on these services, unless it comes with really really cool hardware. And even then, the hardware must have cool software, and all of it must be modifiable.
"Nerds" understand that being extroverted isn't the same as being popular, and don't care either way.
"Nerds" understand that twitter, constant IM'ing and such are appealing to control freaks and teenage girls who have to checkup on their boyfriends, constantly. Or want to talk on the phone non stop...
You may not like it, thse IM pop-ps may be annoying, but it beats answering the phone. At least with IM, I can interact with the person when I feel like it and/or have time. With the stupid phone, it's the other way around.
Yes, I believe the telephone is productivity's worst enemy.
I had occasion to leave the cube a while back and spend a few days working around a conference table with a bunch of other folks in a very busy environment, the control room of a very large conference with thousands of people from all around the country.
My tablemates were utterly confounded that I had no IMs, one of my cell phones was often off with an outgoing message of "I don't pick up these messages, so don't bother", that I never sent any text messages, that I used an old-school one-way pager, and that I actually checked incoming email "only" every couple of hours or so. They thought I was a complete neanderthal. Yet I was the IT guy for the conference. In fact, I had been specifically requested by the head of the planning team; he had worked with me before and valued not just my willingness to work long and hard but my ability to communicate face-to-face with the hordes of hyper managers and executives who inevitably showed up with work-stopping computer problem and have to be "handled" properly while they get their problems fixed.
I got the assignment mostly because I was seen as a good communicator. Yet the entire rest of his staff (who I met for the first time at this event) thought I was nuts to be so out of touch.
I've never thought that avoiding distractions and interruptions made for poor communication. Indeed, my attitude is quite the opposite. It also seems to be increasingly rare these days.
Odd. To me, this is really, really odd.
And yes, I am strongly introverted.
I think the decline in my use of instant communications came after a stint of having to single handedly answer 3 phone lines for 2 separate small companies. What a fucking joke that was -- twice the volume of daily sales calls!
The same goes for IM -- some of us have work to do!
I only get on the IM networks when I have lots of time to blow off -- e.g. practically never. But I would do IRC at work in a heartbeat if only I could get most of my co-workers to use it.
I don't know exactly why it works, but somehow IRC (especially with a good GUI client) takes the edge of IM just enough that it becomes a useful communication tool rather than constant interruptions. But you can still DCC someone to get IM-like functionality, even with file transfers.
I know plenty of very sociable people who, like myself, eschew IM, Twitter, texting and their ilk simply because there is no meaningful communication to be had in these media. It's all crap. The very nature of communication via misspelt sentence-fragments practically guarantees that no lucent or cogent transfer of information is possible.
If your message is at all worth reading, it'll be worth reading in two hours when I have time for it. Sod instant messaging, I usually keep my phone turned off and somebody else answers my doorbell.
It's not called being an introvert. It's called being a grownup, with work to do.
I piss off bigots.
It's simple and doesn't need a study. I don't want everyone in the world to be able to interrupt me whenever they want to. That they expect me to drop what I'm doing and cater to them instantly is rude and selfish. Unlike children I have something to accomplish and chattering about nothing isn't the goal and isn't useful. I've found even paid support is slower than google for finding answers to technical issues. Leave a message. I WILL answer it.
-- Programming with boost is like building a house with lego. It's a cool but I wouldn't want to live in it
"What could possibly be more important than a multiplayer online game?"
Nothing, but thats not the point.
Look at it this way. An email is like saying "Hey, I have something I want to tell you, please reply at your convenience".
A phone call is like saying "Hey, I have something to say, and i expect you to drop everything you are doing in order to listen."
If some fellow humans decide to honor you with their presence during a game, movie, or eating out, you could at least have the courtesy to turn off the phone and give them your undivided attention. On the rare occasion you are expecting an important phone call, just let everyone know...but don't make a habit of it.
I find it hard to believe that a dislike of IM is related to introversion. I'm an introvert, and a computer geek, but I leave have Skype, Adium and IRC open all the time. I don't really find it distracting at all. In fact, I think it's important so people can easily contact me whenever they need me.
By reading this signature, you hereby agree with the content of the above comment.
As soon as my nerdish daughter turned 13, the phone starting ringing off the hook and she was glued to her computer screen IMing with her friends. I have no cell phone, don't IM (tried it), and like it that way. So, how do I turn my daughter into an introvert and restore my sanity? :-)
I didn't read TFA, but I still think I can provide some interesting insights.
First of all, I have my own reasons for not wanting to use certain "new" communication methods.
A particularly strong one is resentment. Many "new" communication methods do the same thing
that existing methods do, only worse. For example, the new method might be technically inferior
because they use the wrong tool for the job, they might be limiting because they only allow
certain types of use, where the existing tools were more flexible, or they might use proprietary
protocols where the existing tools used open protocols.
I don't like it when the new, inferior solution gets hugely popular, and then people think I'm weird
for not wanting to participate. It is they who didn't participate in the existing system when it was
there - and it is _because_ they jumped on the bandwagon of the new, incompatible system that this
is even an issue. If people had stuck with the existing system, or if the new system had been
compatible with the old system, or if the new system had been so much better that users of the old
system all jumpd ship, there wouldn't have been any issue.
For some reason, people don't understand this. They just expect me to sign up with the cool, new thing,
or be left out. Not that they would be willing to try the existing, old thing...why jump through
all the hoops to start using this thing that nobody else uses, when all it will do is give you _two_
accounts that you have to maintain and all that? I understand that point very well, of course,
the more because it is often the exact same situation _I_ am faced with!
Sometimes, I quit bitching and just sign up already. I, too, want to stay in touch with friends,
after all. Sometimes, I moan and rant until people get so annoyed they never bring up the
subject again. And, on rare occassions, I actually manage to convince them that my way is really
better. But, usually, it's a lost cause. Once enough people have started using the new system,
there is no going back, because they are locked in. And me, I just feel like a grumpy, old, bearded
hacker who thinks he knows better than everyone else - but all he's ever accomplished is
alienating himself from many who might otherwise have been his friends.
But hey, it's not all gloom and doom! I have a job that I love, where I get to use Debian and work
with open source all day, and people actually appreciate my insights. Because, in business, you
may stay afloat by doing the same thing as everybody else...but you only _really_ win by being
_better_. And no, I don't have the illusion that my ideas are always the best - but, I try hard
to make them as good as they can be, and sometimes, that leads to new insights that improve things
for everyone. That is something that really makes me a _happy_ bearded hacker.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
It's called talking to yourself.
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
As a pretty strong Intravert (yes, thanks for the MBTI introduction), I have to say that in many cases, the alternative to being IM'd is being *phoned* which is way more intrusive than IM. This does require that you've got your IM to *not* force itself to a foreground window on every new message, nor make an intrusive sound (my work machine has the sound off anyway).
I also find that when I need to talk to someone in an interactive way (but when time is not absolutely pressing), IM has a much lower stress barrier than phoning them, or (worse) going to see them.
I'd therefore posit that the availability of IM is often a positive thing for Intraverts, where it can substitute for the more intrusive phone and face to face media.
The only thing you can accurately describe as "Scotch" is a sticky tape made by 3M. And it's
$ file daily.sh
/home/slashdotreader/www/images/spacer.gif: PNG image data, 1x1, 8-bit/color RGBA, non-interlaced
/home/slashdotreader: ENFP (Extravert iNtuitive Feeler Perceiver) An idealist who's focus is on making other people happy, turns work into fun and includes others, tends to take a lot personally
/home/mybrother /home/mybrother: INTJ (Introvert iNtuitive Thinker Judger) Always gets the big picture, a conceptualizing master-mind personality, quite pensive and also brilliant, focuses less on the feeling of the group at large
/home/my_manager /home/myboss: ISTJ (Introvert Sensing Thinker Judger) The traditionalist who's bound to "do the right thing", has the details down pat before opening their mouth.
daily.sh: Bourne-Again shell script text executable
$ file ~/www/images/spacer.png
_____________________
You know to treat a shell script differently than a PNG, right? Of course! Before I read about MBTI, I didn't know that PEOPLE could be different too -- I just never thought about it!
What I liked about this article was the view on Introverts. I'm an extravert, who before learning more about MBTI -- Thought that introversion was too, some anti-social kind of tendency. However, after learning more: Some of the most socially savvy people that I know are introverts. Me and my extravert cohorts are very social -- however, that's mitigated by the fact that we're also great at shooting our mouthes off, and speaking far too early.
Certain things used to really get me riled up: Someone not saying hi when I walked into a room, someone being critical of your actions in a group project, someone choosing the cold hard decision in stead of the warm fuzzy decision. Then, I read up on MBTI and I went, "EUREKA! -That's- why they see it differently".
Also, it really helped me see what ticked me off about some people (which in some cases -- was similarities to my own personality type) and helped me see the -great- parts about them, and to communicate using those parts, and really help them shine, and help my perception of them.
Back to Instant messaging, here's me, and take it at what it's worth:
1. I'm ENFP.
2. I -hate- AIM (sometimes). I feel -so- committed to talking on it, it's like once it's open, I have to talk to 17 people, have a full conversion from "Yo sup" to full convo, to full closure. It's just too... Real.
3. I -love- IRC (all the time). I get lots and lots and lots of communication, I can jump from channel to channel and topic to topic. I meet people I love, people I hate. I can jump on, I can jump off. I can end 15 convos at once by saying "bbiab!" and I can start 30 convos at once by saying "I'm not sure if I want to use VIM or EMacs".
So... With that said, while I liked the article a lot... I don't think that the E/I preference is the only one that comes into play when it comes to online communication. For example, from my perception, IRC has this "Perceiver" quality that I love, lots and lots of communication -- without a lot of commitment.
Also, a couple books to recommend that got me sparked into "type watching":
"Type Talk" by Otto Kroeger and Janet M. Thuesen
"The Art of Speed Reading People: How to Size People Up and Speak Their Language" by Paul D. Tieger,Barbara Barron-Tieger
(note, these are introductory books to the topic)
______________________________________
$ MBTI ~
$ MBTI
$ MBTI
yeah... that stuff only works if you come to an understanding of what, exactly, constitutes an emergency... which is neigh-impossible to do. It's easier to tell them that you will ignore any "call me back" or "text me back" messages that don't have a reason stated, and that you may choose to put off reacting to some messages if the reason allows you to (or you just plain want to).
If that's something the sender gets upset over, that's really their problem, not yours.
( I do presume you'd treat others the same, of course )
Switch from iChat to Adium. It's a much more powerful program, and supports a "custom available" status.
I hate 'always on' technology, especially IM. But twitter is not in this category: your 'followers' don't know whether you online or not and won't expect immediate reply; you can only listen to people you're interested in and be silent all the time; even if you use direct messages, their signal to noise ratio is usually much higher than that of typical IM.
I have irssi running in screen on a home server, so I can remotely attach to it and detach from it at will from my desktop computer, or from anywhere else. Irssi is connected to several IRC networks, and through BitlBee to one IM network. With this configuration I'm online 24/7, and always in "Available" mode on all the networks, including the IM network.
However, I'm never interrupted by this configuration. Through irssi I don't get any popups when someone says something to me, so I check the client when I want to, not when someone else wants me to. If I happen to be actually looking at the client and willing to chat when someone has something to say to me, good for them, but otherwise I'll just get back to them when it's a good time for me.
Following the same philosophy I send messages other people. If I have something to say to someone, I send the message when it's good time for me - completely ignoring the mode they have set themselves in (for example "busy"). If their client somehow interrupts them, it's their own fault. If it annoys them, they should configure their client not to interrupt them, or get a better client. I only expect that eventually - maybe - they will read the message I sent to them, and answer it if necessary. If they happen to be willing to chat right when I send the message, good for me.
I have heard the opinion that people who dominate a conversation, or who find a silence unbearable are often quite insecure and nervous individuals. They mask this by always having to be in control of a conversation - and the way to do that is to always be the one who's talking. Now you can easily make the mistake of assuming someone who talks a lot is an extrovert: frequently you'd be wrong.
Likewise with twitter. Most of the tweets I have seen on the system are so utterly banal that it beggars belief that anyone would either take the time to send them, or even worse: take the time to read them. It seems to be the 2007/8 version of being incapable of shutting up. Fortunately in this case, all it takes is a click to rid yourself of these tiresome individuals.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
What effect does age have on IM? After all I grew up on EMail, late 1980s, long before IM was popular. So I prefer email out of habit. But then again, I also have a visceral reaction against using IM that I could never explain. Being the introvert clearly explains it. Now get off my lawn. :)
that perhaps different people have different ideas of what is "better"? Just because you think using telnet and netcat to send raw streams of bytes to people is best because it's most efficient doesn't mean that Joe User agrees. All he wants to do is send some text to another person and maybe include a pretty picture every now and then.
(random deity) give us the wealth to be able to adopt those new technologies that enhance our life, the courage to ignore those that do not, and the wisdom to distinguish the one from the other.
The extroverts are either calling the people they want to talk to or just walking over to their desk to communicate via wireless F2F (Face-to-Face) protocol.
The official psychological counterpart to "introversion" is "extraversion" (with an "a") because both are derived from the Latin "intro" and "extra", respectively. ;-)
;-)
If you're interested in a psychological perspective on media choice and personality, there is a paper available here:
http://www.abo.psychologie.uni-wuerzburg.de/virtualcollaboration/publications.php?action=view&id=22
Disclaimer: I am one of the authors.
My friends: "What do you mean, you don't want to go out for drinks?"
Me: "I mean, I had a rough week, and I'm entirely wiped out."
Friends: "Exactly, that's why you should come out to a noisy social environment where you can be surrounded by random strangers who want your attention."
Me: *shudder* Alright, but only if you can get me drunk enough to deal within 5 minutes of arrival.
Friends: Deal!
IM and Web 2.0 doesn't suit the introvert well, because the introvert does not have preexisting scads of friends to use it with. Me, I've got an account on all IM networks, Twitter, MySpace, Livejournal, a blog, etc., but I hardly use any of these. Why? Because no one reads them or participates in them. Because I'm an introvert, and don't have a lot of friends.
Extrovert geeks have always pissed me off. They get to play the geek card, but they get to do it with gobs of other geeks (and non-geeks). To me, that's a whole different geek experience. Nerds and geeks don't have gobs of friends, they have some acquaintances, and if they find someone they reliably click with, maybe a small set of people they consider friends.
Yeah yeah, butthurt, etc. Whatever, it is how it is.
Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
I agree 100% with the article and what you are saying. I think a more positive word than introvert though would be reflective or thinker. I'd far rather read the 1500 page Rise and Fall of the Third Reich or finish a web site I am working on than hear about what you had for lunch or your latest interpersonal drama. To me that shows I am reflective and a thinker which is a good thing. After all it's is thinkers who have given humanity it's greatest insights and tools, right? Or less pretentiously at least thinkers can focus and get their work done on time.
Tired of all the isms, don't exploit people as an employer, or a government, mmmmK?
534920 1221884
(this holds true even for very small values of 1221884)
Instant Messaging...
You just described email.
Deleted
No. I think those of us that don't embrace IM and being always-available means we're taking some control over our lives. (I'm in agreement with much of the article's points.)
I use IM at work when I want to see if someone's PC is IM-able; it means I might have a good chance to either walk over to their desk and have a very productive conversation or at least call them. If they're not at their desk at the moment, I at least know they're in the office and will get back to me. (And if I can remember the name of their PC, I won't even have to use IM for this; plain 'ol ping lets me know of they're booted up and likely in the office.)
For folks whose job involves the least little bit of concentration, IM is a huge distraction. Not wanting to be reachable via IM 24 freakin' hours a day doesn't make someone an introvert. Perhaps, more importantly being an IM fanboi doesn't necessarily mean you're extroverted either. It might, though, be a very good predictor of whether you're a boor who doesn't mind interrupting someone with a text message. (Probably the same type who doesn't mind walking into your cubicle/office and interrupting you with some inane questions that could have easily been handled in a less disruptive fashion.)
At work, I spend 95%-plus of my time working on a 'nix workstation through a KVM that also connects to a Windows-based system that I use primarily for email but for a few other things that aren't yet browser-enabled. If I do log into the IM on the Windows system, I set it up to let people know that I'm not working on Windows and they should call me. (Heck I even include my phone number to make it easy.) Then I turn the sound down -- as do most of my co-workers -- so that the damned IM popups don't distract me or anyone else. When I switch to Windows 2-3 times a day to check on email, I typically find several IM windows containing messages that read "U there?", "Hey! Gotta sec?", etc., from a variety of people who were to busy, I guess, to bother to even read the message that I wasn't available.
I have no problem at all with "always-on" media. I have a 'net connection at home that's always on. My PC is nearly always on and the email client polls our mail server and plays a humorous sound clip so I can make a mental note to check the email in a little while. It's just me that's not always on. Someone that isn't always available isn't necessarily introverted; maybe they're just trying to get stuff accomplished without pointless distractions.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
My company has people all over the world, and the company policy is that everyone should run an IM client and keep logged in with an appropriate status. So I tried it.
First complaint was that most people use it to broadcast messages and not to hold a conversation. Someone will write with a question, and while I'm composing an answer, they start asking other questions about other topics. A conversation is when you ask a question or make a statement, then wait for a response, and then compose your next message based an the response you get. If you are going to just blast a bunch of questions and statements, just send email.
Second complaint is that our IM clients block URLs in messages. Since we develop distributed software systems which use web interfaces, all conversations about system setup and configuration include URLs. And all the documentation I write are published on an internal web site, so that the first time I answer a difficult question I can write up the answer in HTML and send the asker a link to it. So over half my responses include a URL, which means email, not IM.
Last straw is the 100 character limit, which prevents writing an intelligent, detailed response. The first time my client stopped taking more characters (after the limit was reached) I just uninstalled my client. If someone wants to reach me they can call me or email me. If they expect an immediate response they better call, because I believe that 24 hour response time on emails is fast enough. (When I started using email we were taught to expect a response in 7 days, as that's how long email routers would keep trying before sending a "cannot deliver" message)
And of course IM doesn't allow searching through previous messages, so it's not even like writing it down. It's like having a conversation in the break room. Better not be too important.
IM may be better or worse for extroverts or introverts. I don't know. I just know that it's a toy, and not appropriate for serious work.
Otherwise all of this instant communication stuff is just another way for people to bother you at work.
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
Can we stop calling Instant Messaging "new", please? Since the concept has been around pretty much as long as there have been multi-user computer systems?
I first used AIM when it was rolled out more than a decade ago. I thought it was cool the first week. Then I had to turn it off to get any work done. It's like an internet doorbell that anyone can push. It is only now that I am starting to get back into them slightly, with Jabber and Skype. But at least there you can set them to "do not disturb".
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
It seems, to me, that the problem is still, fundamentally, one of technology not mirroring reality. For the last several hundred thousand years we humans have been developing technology for the sole purpose of modify our environment to suite us. As communications tech advances, however, we find that we need to modify us to suite our enivironment, making us more and more animals and less and less higher intelligences. The solution, logically, is simple though. When I'm reading (or otherwise engaged in concentration requiring activities), and someone wants to start a conversation, I'll hold up one finger (nicely, sheesh) to indicate that I'll break my attention in just one moment (moment being a variable length measure of time from a few seconds to approximately a minute and a half. Sometimes I'll need longer to finish up, but there's always an opportunity to say so within a minute or so. I'm needs to replicate this real world behavior. On the I'm pop up we need a "Just a moment button" so we can indicate that we see the message, and will deal with it shortly. Then, if you're in the middle of something, let the other party know. "Hey, I'm in the middle of something, can we chat later (schedule the chat). Unless it's critical, most people, even extroverts, will understand. If it's critical, they'll usually say so.
Second, IM is similar in convenience to the telephone, but lacks in one MAJOR feature. There's no voicemail equivelent for IM (at least, not out of the box). If you can't have an IM conversation, your IM client needs to send you an e-mail letting you know you missed a call. Hell, if you're away, instead of saying so, the IM client should automatically respond to an incoming IM with a message stating so, and asking the other user(s) to leave a message. "Sorry, I can't chat at the moment, please leave me a message and I'll get back to you. Thanks."
Twitter is more of the same issue. With a proper interface, you could post generic status updates easily. Preferably, 1 button, but hey, cell phones in the US suck. So, 1 button to open your twitter app, then press 0-9 to select your standard post, and be done. It doesn't have to been constant. Say, 0=Sleeping, 1=Eating, 2=Working,3={insert your TV addiction here},4={insert hobby},5=Party, etc, and maybe 9=Enter custom message. Then, at least, you're participating without the extra effort.
In the end we'd all prefer that the computer just take care of this stuff for us, but they're not ready for that task yet. So let's make the new tech work at least as well as the old.
If you don't leave a voicemail, we won't call back. If you know its information that is not that important to an introvert, leave them alone. We live in a BUSY age, I think we should make conscious decisions to filter out 90% of our communication
So it seems along with the massive uptake of IM, facebook, myspace et al. mostly by all the teens and twentysomethings that we coming to the point where if anyone of any age choses not to be connected to everyone else ALL the time, then they are now labelled as introverts, the implication being that they are somehow deviant or have a psychological problem.
I thought introverts were the kind of geeks who spent all day in front of a computer inventing this stuff while extroverts were outside playing football and having no idea what the heck IM stands for. My, how times have changed.
McCain/Palin '08. Now THAT's hope and change!
The article title is bit misleading. The author has done a great job of explaining how the introvert mind works...
This also is one of the reasons why some practices of Extreme Programming, I just could not handle. I need quiet time to think, and 5 people sitting in a meeting room near each other and constantly communicating is simply too distracting.
This used to leave me exhausted by the end of the day... something I'd entirely avoid unless I won't be able to find any other job.
I was waiting for a story about delayed messaging for procrastinators.
Can we have a third choice?
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -- Jefferson
because it was so long ago, but historians say that when telephones were first installed in houses, they were considered an incredible invasion of privacy. People hated it when they rang. I kind of feel the same way about cell phones, except that caller ID tells me whether I should answer or not. Text messaging seems less invasive, but I haven't used it because my fingers are too big to even properly dial in those prescription numbers to Walgreens.
The idea that introverts direct their thoughts inwardly is invalid.
/. participants share this excitement about how technology is changing the world. This discussion is a prime example. Many of us are introverts, but we are not selfish at all.
Many I know, including myself, focus entirely outward, embracing the world around them. They may do it reading books, watching TV, surfing the net, writing, or even interacting with others.
I believe that many
For my part, I have to become really sick before I begin to notice my body. I neglect myself because there simply isn't time to fuss about my body, my feelings, my appearance to others.
I am introverted in that I can tolerate long periods of silence, of solitude, of Erik Satie music. I can think through long and complex processes and I can invite creative inspiration via mental discipline that IM seems to preclude.
Yet I seem to need daily quality face-to-face interaction as well. IM and similar chatter are a poor substitute for me. I've used my sig, below, for years now and it fits right in this thread.
...omphaloskepsis often...
Introversion is not being socially nervous or being shy. It's not caring enough about people to listen to the meaningless inanities they constantly come up with just because they can't stand silence.
Deleted
While the first two paragraphs leave something to be desired I thought how he used the rest of it to explain things fulfilled the desire.
Like him, as an introvert, it takes me some tyme to compose a message or reply. As a Traumatic Brain Injury, TBI, survivor I used to blame my slowness on the injury. However now I'm thinking my slowness is a combination of both.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Just leave it always on with your status set as Available.
The problem is though is that you'll be getting notifications constantly which disturbs some of us, it interrupts my train of thought for instance. And when it says "Available" the sender expects a response quickly.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I can relate to Joe Kissell's pain. My worst job ever was a programming job where I was the only introvert in a group of extroverts. My supervisor, a massive extrovert, wanted everyone to use IM. The problem was that for the group, IM meant March Madness, pro football, baseball, golf, but rarely work. I could not concentrate on a problem for more that 5 minutes before the IM client would chime. When I turned it off to get work done, I was 'not a team player' and 'not friendly'. Soon I was cut out of all conversation, and then it was get rid of the guy who won't play along. I left, and found a better job where they understand my work style.
IM allows us to calmly discuss the most sensitive topics. Writing down your response forces a moments reflection and the medium strips any unwanted or imagined inflection.
It may work for you but many don't put much if any thought into IMing. For many it's an impulsive communications.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I guess it would matter if I worked, but I don't.
... Windows which jump around all the fucking time, smileys, color codes, animations, all kind of bullcrap, do I really need to go on?
Anyhow I run adium and have ICQ, MSN and Jabber running and occacionally Skype. Most people I know only have MSN. So I run more protocols than they do.
But it took years before I got an ICQ account because IRC did what it did for me and was better at it. And MSN was just crap, from Microsoft, alternativ over the old one, couldn't handle offline messages, peoples nicknames look like shit, quite limited amount of text/message, universal plug&pray makes network configuration impossible and file transfers slow as fuck,
MSN didn't had up until a year ago or something like that either.
...
... And it seems most stuff around jabber are dead nowadays so yes, it's open and all but noone gives a rats ass and use it so pretty useless anyway ...
But I was always on IRC so not much of a problem, and there are always e-mail
I have a jabber user, but noone else uses jabber, so I'm not much helped with that
Skype are useless aswell, I've used SIP for my telephone for like 5 years or something, why can't people use a SIP compatible client instead of that closed down omg no reverse engineering crap called Skype?
SIP can't travel thru all kinds of networks thought so that protocol Asterix has for VoIP may be a better choice, I'd still much rather see that than Skype.
To bad marketing and brand knowledge triumphs good products.
If I'm marked as "busy", it usually means I might be willing to talk to the right person but not to expect a replay. On the whole, my friends know this.
They're all still talking to me so I clearly haven't committed a major social faux pas.
The issue I would take with the article is to do with the term introvert. I think the author has decided they are an introvert
I ran into this problem as a full time student. Back then though I already knew I was an introvert I took the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, MBTI he linked to, and after getting the results I brought it up with my adviser that I was introverted. She told me that as I was outgoing so much I couldn't be introverted. So I copied a case study of my personality type for her to read and once she read it she admitted I must be introverted because I was exactly like the person in the study.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I am certainly no technophobe, but a cell phone is one piece of technology which I do not carry (and don't want to). I suppose that it has a safety advantage, but to me that just isn't worth the hassle and annoyance of constant interruptions
Between having either a landline phone or a cellphone, I'll take a cellphone, which I have. With the cellphone I can take it with me and when I don't want to receive any calls I can either turn it off or set to vibrate only. And it's cheaper for me, I pay less for service than I did for landline phone service.
Do I really need to hear a dozen teenagers talking to their boyfriends/girlfriends about fucking every time I go to the store?
That's all a matter of curtsy. Too many are too rude today.
DO I really need drivers not paying attention to the road because their wife can't wait until they get home to discuss where they're going to eat that night?
Now this is one thing that really pisses me off, people talking on their cellphones while driving. I've narrowly avoided a bunch of accidents because of it, and I used to ride my bike a lot. What I do if I get a call while driving is I will pull over to answer it. If it's important I'll talk then but if not I'll tell them I will call back later.
FalconShould there be a Law?
No offense. Hate chatting.
I like the self-deprecating GICQ slogan:
"Combining the intrusiveness of a phone call with the hassle of writing e-mail"
-- John.
I find it quite effective to simply walk away from a person if they take a call when I'm talking to them. And I try to give them the same courtesy by not picking up the damn phone and essentially saying 'hold on, there's something more important than you that I'd rather pay attention to.'
Late to the party as usual.. but I have to share this..
A while back when I managed a talented group of programmers, one of them handed me a book called The Introvert Advantage and added, "Read it. It is my user's manual." The book, I find out now, was actually reviewed here.
The author Marti Olsen Laney asserts that introversion is not a psychological condition: it is genetically decided. Moreover, 1 in 5 of us is introverted. She goes on to argue that this statistic does not suggest some type of genetic disease of the species; rather, societies that don't produce the right mix of introverts are at a disadvantage to those that do.
Laney speculates prehistoric social groups needed introverts in a variety of roles: tool makers, sages, thinkers.
Finally, introverts *can* be leaders. They just lead differently than your typical extrovert. The book cites many successful introvert leaders both dead and living.
-- I didn't become an introvert; I was born as one.This works, but the problem is that you still have to check the voice mail or read the SMS in order to find out whether the "SOS bit" is set. Thus you are interrupted anyway.
The saddest poem