Sociopath Community

Turncoat said: 

Good said: 

there are just things that are a waste of time and not worth the effort.

When I used to run this road, eventually everything felt not worth the effort and, with it, came understimulation at a deeper level with resentment towards things that didn't effectively do it for me extending towards "Life". 

Following that, there was the moment of "Well, I have to do something with my time", which lent to me doing things without judging it quite as much over how "All of it in a big picture sense is a waste of my time, and as no one important my time means nothing". 

Following a willingness to go into "pointless" things, I began to find the means of enjoying it more from the investment as it gradually felt less pointless to me. 

With every piece of seemingly useless information I've picked up from these 'pointless' things, I've seen room to network and reference it as experience in other conversations, showing a sort of bleed and blend of ideas and concepts more like a spectrum rather than a table of words. 

A lot of things run together if you bother to learn a wide variety of things, and with people that can get a bit existential. 



I don't believe in "Useless Knowledge", there is always room to cross-reference it, it denotes experience that will shape your future choices, and what you may not have a use for now may end up being surprisingly helpful as a reference at a later date during unrelated events, such as how my talks with Turquie have randomly given me prompts for conversations with other people on matters like Spirituality. 

I've found more benefits in being open minded from having started off more closed off and see it fail. 

And after many tests and trials I have become confident to 90% to sniff them out from a pattern before I even read them.

You won't ever know if the pattern is valid if you're simply presuming it as reinforcement of your own idea there. 

I read the people I don't enjoy, and find novelty when they break the pattern. If I opted for your method I'd not notice some of the weirder shit that goes on here out of mere impatience, nor would I have the room to appreciate more nuanced things about what makes them distinctive. 

>spends years wading through novels written by boring cunts

>but i noticed a slight pattern one time so it's ok

I think they're talking at cross-purposes. I agree with Turncoat that there are things you can discover by having a different mindset, like thinking everyone is equal or making conscious effort to understand someone that your basic instinct tells to avoid. I've done that in the past with great success. However, I think what Good is saying is that he's already done that, and for some people it's just not worth whatever small benefit you might get out of it.

Like, for example, for me, LiYang is just too far away from me in every area. Chatting with him frustrates me, and I don't want to spend my weekend, morning, or evening talking with someone who's just going to ignore everything I say in the end, even if I make the best effort.

We, too, Natasha. We have nothing in common. But that's fine. I still read your posts, astonishingly, I just don't find most of them interesting because there's not much novel about them to me, and so instead I spend time imagining you naked. That cute boob girl is the main reason I reply to you, because I think it's you. But I recognize it's a preference. Good loves your posts. But I think he ranks every girl high, so I think he just wants to get into your pants or something. I discipline my sexual urges much more and have moved past such base instincts. I'd say I enjoy art, but whose posts I read depend on both the content and my imagination.

AppleGenius said: 

Turncoat said: 

"I don't even read their posts" always sounds like willful ignorance to me. 

Like I get being like "I don't wanna", but I am not usually blaming them for my own impatience, let alone blame them for it when my focus is what's truly culprit. 

It really tells me something when the ones who seem to have the biggest 'tude over it are the ones who don't read about them. Speaking as someone who for the most part reads everybody I'd say there is a lot there to work with. 

TC, you have to admit that you too prioritize some posts. I know you would like a world where you don't, everyone would love a world like that, but that's just not realistic.

The question is not over prioritizing, it is over reading it at all. Obviously some are more fun than others, like duh. 

Turncoat said: 

The question is not over prioritizing, it is over reading it at all. Obviously some are more fun than others, like duh.

Alright. I guess my point is that the two are related. What if you prioritized things to the point of not reading?

AppleGenius said: 

I think they're talking at cross-purposes. I agree with Turncoat that there are things you can discover by having a different mindset, like thinking everyone is equal or making conscious effort to understand someone that your basic instinct tells to avoid. I've done that in the past with great success. However, I think what Good is saying is that he's already done that, and for some people it's just not worth whatever small benefit you might get out of it.

Like, for example, for me, LiYang is just too far away from me in every area. Chatting with him frustrates me, and I don't want to spend my weekend, morning, or evening talking with someone who's just going to ignore everything I say in the end, even if I make the best effort.

We, too, Natasha. We have nothing in common. But that's fine. I still read your posts, astonishingly, I just don't find them at all interesting because there's nothing novel about them to me, and instead spend time imagining you naked. That cute boob girl is the only reason I ever reply to you, because I think it's you. But I recognize it's a preference. Good loves your posts. But I think he ranks every girl high, so I think he just wants to get into your pants or something. I discipline my sexual urges much more and have moved past such base instincts. I'd say I enjoy art, but whose posts I read depend on both the content and my imagination.

The problem I largely see with it is that it lends to people sounding snooty while going on about how they are above reading another person. 

Like, no, they chose not to read it any more for problems of their own. 

Turncoat said: 

The problem I largely see with it is that it lends to people sounding snooty while going on about how they are above reading another person. 

Like, no, they chose not to read it any more for problems of their own.

Would it be fine to stop ignoring the posts if you instead did it silently, without a superiority complex, or due to purely logistical reasons like time management?

AppleGenius said: 

Turncoat said: 

The question is not over prioritizing, it is over reading it at all. Obviously some are more fun than others, like duh.

Alright. I guess my point is that the two are related. What if you prioritized things to the point of not reading?

If I didn't read it, I'd at least admit to that when it comes up and not blame the thing I didn't read for not having held my attention as if it were their fault for my lack of attention span. I feel like my not reading it is on me, rather than being on the author, unless somehow this author proved to be some sort of exception (they do exist). 

Even a shit author has something to teach me by relative example. 

I see people act like they're somehow above the others' content, then go on about how they know everything about them while remaining off base. At least if they're wrong and still communicating or at least still reading it somewhat they could find room to be corrected, or if they remain wrong it will at least come from a less ignorant place. 

I understand believing themselves above another person, but then there's having a presumptive attitude about people they clearly know nothing about. As someone who did read it, it irks me a bit to see the presumption come from a place of no research. 

Oh, ok. Sure. That's fine. Yeah, I agree.

AppleGenius said: 

Turncoat said: 

The problem I largely see with it is that it lends to people sounding snooty while going on about how they are above reading another person. 

Like, no, they chose not to read it any more for problems of their own.

Would it be fine to stop ignoring the posts if you instead did it silently, without a superiority complex, or due to purely logistical reasons like time management?

The problem would still be there, just potentially less obviously. 

Edit: Wait I misunderstood the question I think. If they don't respond but otherwise still read it their peanut gallery referential tends to reflect it, which makes it better than no knowledge at all. 

Turncoat said: 

AppleGenius said: 

Turncoat said: 

The question is not over prioritizing, it is over reading it at all. Obviously some are more fun than others, like duh.

Alright. I guess my point is that the two are related. What if you prioritized things to the point of not reading?

If I didn't read it, I'd at least admit to that when it comes up and not blame the thing I didn't read for not having held my attention as if it were their fault for my lack of attention span. I feel like my not reading it is on me, rather than being on the author, unless somehow this author proved to be some sort of exception (they do exist). 

Even a shit author has something to teach me by relative example. 

I see people act like they're somehow above the others' content, then go on about how they know everything about them while remaining off base. At least if they're wrong and still communicating or at least still reading it somewhat they could find room to be corrected, or if they remain wrong it will at least come from a less ignorant place. 

I understand believing themselves above another person, but then there's having a presumptive attitude about people they clearly know nothing about. As someone who did read it, it irks me a bit to see the presumption come from a place of no research. 

 'you're liketh noth even understhanding why he sthitposts, gohh'