Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
I wouldn't, no. But then I'm a reader. I get it. But non-readers don't. They don't know how you feel about reading. They don't understand that you're not just reading to kill time. All they see is that you responded to them in some small way. Maybe they figure readers are capable of doing two things at once--heck I don't know. All I know is they're usually not trying to be annoying. So they deserve one of two things: our attention, or our polite but firm (and unambiguous) explanation why they can't have our attention.
...
|
It's interesting the conclusions/generalities that people make. But why wouldn't that person make a general connection that if someone seems to be intently engaged in an activity, don't interrupt them. I tend to make a general rule, if someone is engaged in an activity, I asume that is what they want or need to do, unless they are giving off some other cues.
Riding a bike, I don't have them stop and try to start up a conversation.
Jogging, I don't try to have them stop and try to start up a conversation.
Driving a car, I don't try to have them stop and try to start up a conversation.
At the movies, I don't try to have them stop watching the movie and try to start up a conversation.
Reading a book, I don't try to have them stop and try to start up a conversation.
At a dance club, I don't try to have them stop and try to start up a conversation.
If a construction worker is doing some jack hammering, I don't try to have them stop and try to start up a conversation.
It is a good general rule.
If I want to have a conversation with someone, I can just look around for someone else who isn't doing anything and is also looking around for someone else to talk to. Or wait for the person to take a break in their activity.