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.
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 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.
Have fun "getting things done" while life passes you by. A virtual life is a fine replacement for a real life, but you have to communicate somewhere or you're living out some phychological damage or something...
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 used to say that about masturbation but most of the slashdotters seem to have emerged unscathed.
"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...
What part of "building an app, family..." is a virtual life?
If "Real life" is my ex-girlfriend wanting to tell me about last night's "American Idol" party or My brother ranting about the Giants'/Yankees' performance... yeah, I have no problem letting those pass me by.
Don't assume that because something involves another ugly bag of mostly water, that it is somehow worthwhile. I find that, short of sex and wii bowling, that is rarely the case.
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 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.
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.
I am not a crackpot.
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.
$ 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
Can't . . . too shy.
I am not a crackpot.
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!
Instant Messaging...
You just described email.
Deleted
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.
This is very bad advice. That's not to deny there's a serious issue involved here, which is balancing the uses you'd like to put your attention to with the uses others want to put it to.
My stance on this is that people deserve FULL attention. Which is why I don't let them demand a piece of my attention any time they please.
The best practice, I think. is to have ground rules and make sure people around you know what they are. These are the times/places/situations in which you can demand my attention, and these are the times/places/situations in which you can't. Reasonable exceptions of course apply: "I am about to commit suicide" or "the house is on fire" or "I'm pregnant" for example.
On the other hand when it's open season on your attention, you have to be ready to let them have it ALL.
The reason your brother is annoying you when he tries to engage you in a discussion about sports is that you are working at cross purposes. If you are prepared to set aside the other purpose for the moment, then the annoyance goes away. If you really listen to him, it won't feel like you are wasting your time. You may also find that people talk about different things if you really listen to them. Your brother may lay off sports because you ask a lot of stupid (ane therefore often difficult to answer) questions. Or you may find yourself learning something new, which is never a waste of time.
People are sloppy about this, because most of the time people just want a little attention. If you have the gift of small talk, it's not hard to satisfy this, and life goes smoothly and you'll make lots of friends. If you don't have the gift of small talk, it's worth cultivating it because it does a real service to other people, some of whom (presumably) you care about.
So separate the blocks of time that belong entirely to you, and the blocks of time you are willing to let others take pieces from. Then when your girlfriend wants to yammer about some television show, set aside whatever you are doing, turn to her, and treat this moment as if there were no conceivable purpose more interesting and important than to spend it talking about what she wants to talk about. Whether you are hot on the trail of a cure for cancer, or a proof that P=NP, or the reason her favorite performer got voted off the TV show, you could not possibly give her a jot more attention, nor what she has to say an iota more serious consideration.
This should be worth trying just for the prank value.
But try setting aside time for yourself and time for other people, just for a few days. Then ask yourself: the problem is really that people bother you with useless information, or that you are blaming others for your own failure to manage your own attention span?
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
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.
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.
What I'm saying, among other things, is that good listening elicits good conversation.
You don't go fishing expecting to hook the largest fish of your life every time you go. There's a saying among fisherman, "It's called fishing not catching."
Getting pissed with somebody because they interrupted some task you were doing with something that doesn't meet your standards of conversation is like dumping your motor oil in the fishing hole because you didn't catch a big one today. Tasks don't do themselves, so you need to set aside time away from interruption. But one good thing about tasks not going away is that they'll still be there after the interruption. That's not true of people. People give up on you.
Even stupid conversation is more tolerable if you aren't constantly telling yourself you'd rather be doing something else. And you're a very poor listener if you can't steer a conversation in more profitable directions with a few well placed questions. It's a skill. "Boring" conversations are practice.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.