popularity of the smartest members
- Thread starter Axcess
- Start date
The biggest problem is that what is a measure of intelligence? It is how many random facts one can spew out? Is it ability to speak in foreign languages? Maybe being able to solve complex calculus equations? Whatever you decide to use, a message board is not usually the place where those traits come out. A message board is devoted to the reason of creation (such as this site being about large penii), so any off topic postings are usually deleted or moved.
The other problem is that, like in real life, the minute intelligence is showed, people start labeling. At parties, people want to be talked to (although I have no idea why) so they regulate their intelligence to the intelligence of the crowd. They might go a little higher if it will impress people, but too high and they stop talking to you. They might be embarrassed or jealous (the way some are with men with large penii) and this could cause them to not want to be around them, lest they be compared.
But like a large penis, a high intelligence is usually something people never think there could be problems with, but there can be. As for the friend issue, what if the "dumber" people just accept every friend to show their popularity to compensate (the way some guys buy expensive cars) for their perceived lack of intelligence? While the "smarter" people just do research and only friend people they know.
I would say it doesn't matter. I myself would never want a lot of friends (I could never remember their names, anyway). I would rather keep a close circle that I can rely on than a wide circle of mere acquaintances. Any sort of comparing is like comparing penii, it might be satisfying at first, but in the long run you proved nothing.
The other problem is that, like in real life, the minute intelligence is showed, people start labeling. At parties, people want to be talked to (although I have no idea why) so they regulate their intelligence to the intelligence of the crowd. They might go a little higher if it will impress people, but too high and they stop talking to you. They might be embarrassed or jealous (the way some are with men with large penii) and this could cause them to not want to be around them, lest they be compared.
But like a large penis, a high intelligence is usually something people never think there could be problems with, but there can be. As for the friend issue, what if the "dumber" people just accept every friend to show their popularity to compensate (the way some guys buy expensive cars) for their perceived lack of intelligence? While the "smarter" people just do research and only friend people they know.
I would say it doesn't matter. I myself would never want a lot of friends (I could never remember their names, anyway). I would rather keep a close circle that I can rely on than a wide circle of mere acquaintances. Any sort of comparing is like comparing penii, it might be satisfying at first, but in the long run you proved nothing.
I love Phil Ayesho style of pisssing off the boards . Is awesome.You gotta be kidding me!Starinvestor is two steps from being a troll. The only thing he has in common with Phil Ayesho is being prolific in his posts and pissing off half the board when he does.
Drifterwood
Superior Member
Could try harder - I rekkoned that wasn't just on your report cards :wink:
Drifterwood
Superior Member
You gotta be kidding me!
I don't know NJ I liked starinvestor after I got to talk to him.
His beliefs certainly aren't mine but they don't have to be.
I found him to be charming and interesting! I believe the same might be true about Phil Ayesho too but as yet we haven't spoke personally as I did in chat with Starinvestor.
Who knew!?!
cigarbabe:saevil:
yngjock20
Legendary Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2006
- Posts
- 4,097
- Media
- 5
- Likes
- 1,018
- Points
- 333
- Location
- The Other Valley
- Sexuality
- 100% Gay, 0% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Now that I think about it . This site has something in common with the real life . The smartest members are the least popular ones . Like in real life . Phil Ayesho and Just Asking have few members friends compared with many members that have a lot of friends .
I partially agree with you, except alot of the most popular members on this site are intelligent.
I'm not sure at what level of intelligence you're basing your analyses on, but Not Punny, NJQT, Drifterwood, Cigarbabe, Jeff Black, Marleyisalegend, 1BIGG1, nudeyorker, DJG, Hazelgod...they're all pretty intelligent regardless of how annoying or boisterous some of them may be.
I, on the other hand, am extremely intelligent and yet am one of the least visible people on this site. L.O.L.
I'm sorry to be a bit late in discovering this interesting thread.
About the "friend" business, the first thing to be said is that the number of friends you have has very little to do with whether people appreciate your posts. It is primarily a reflection of how many people see and like your photos. If you have no gallery, as JustAsking and Phil Ayesho have not, you will not attract many "friend" requests. If you have a gallery that a lot of people see and like, you will get a lot of requests, many if not most of them from people who have not even taken the trouble to read your profile much less read your posts. I say this from my own experience.
The introduction of the "friends" function is in my opinion the worst change to be made to this site during the time that I have been a member. I have tried to confine my "friends" list to people with whom I have at least had a modicum of friendly communication, but despite the explicit warning in my signature, I still get requests from total strangers. I suppose I might consider that flattering, but if people just want me to know that they like my pics, they should comment on my photo pages or send me a PM. To call someone a "friend" when you have no communication with that person is ridiculous (and that is why I always enclose the word "friend" in quotation marks when I am speaking of the function on this Web site).
Anyway, to get back to the main point, I would never take the fact that someone has a comparatively small number of "friends" to be any reflection on the degree of that person's popularity as a participant in discussions. A further reason for not doing that is that some people send a lot of "friend" requests while others do not: obviously, the former will amass more "friends" on their lists than the latter, without that being any reflection of their popularity.
About the "friend" business, the first thing to be said is that the number of friends you have has very little to do with whether people appreciate your posts. It is primarily a reflection of how many people see and like your photos. If you have no gallery, as JustAsking and Phil Ayesho have not, you will not attract many "friend" requests. If you have a gallery that a lot of people see and like, you will get a lot of requests, many if not most of them from people who have not even taken the trouble to read your profile much less read your posts. I say this from my own experience.
The introduction of the "friends" function is in my opinion the worst change to be made to this site during the time that I have been a member. I have tried to confine my "friends" list to people with whom I have at least had a modicum of friendly communication, but despite the explicit warning in my signature, I still get requests from total strangers. I suppose I might consider that flattering, but if people just want me to know that they like my pics, they should comment on my photo pages or send me a PM. To call someone a "friend" when you have no communication with that person is ridiculous (and that is why I always enclose the word "friend" in quotation marks when I am speaking of the function on this Web site).
Anyway, to get back to the main point, I would never take the fact that someone has a comparatively small number of "friends" to be any reflection on the degree of that person's popularity as a participant in discussions. A further reason for not doing that is that some people send a lot of "friend" requests while others do not: obviously, the former will amass more "friends" on their lists than the latter, without that being any reflection of their popularity.
Really? I have never seen anyone show such forbearance as you have shown toward blowhards, charlatans, and fools on this site. Probably what you count as being "aggressive" and "sharp" is what I would call "showing great restraint."
I find this remark perplexing. You can't possibly have been referring to JustAsking, so I assume that you had Phil Ayesho in mind. Even then, I think that the remark is unfair. Phil just loves controversy and polemic. He dumps on ideas far more than he dumps on people, and even at his most abrasive, I have never known him to do anything that I would call talking down to people.
surferboy
Expert Member
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2005
- Posts
- 2,976
- Media
- 17
- Likes
- 108
- Points
- 193
- Location
- Sunrise, Florida
- Sexuality
- 90% Straight, 10% Gay
- Gender
- Male
i meant on this site. and talked down to was not the correct phrase. but there are certain members of this site, who i'm not going to name, that think they're better than anyone and everyone who do not share their opinions. funny, though, how it's these peoples that are the first to resort to personal attacks when being debated
Similar threads
