Seriously thoughtful Personal Interactions in Internet

[beppe]

I am interested in questions related to personal interactions in Internet.

I have personal experience only on MobileRead, the only site to which I belong as a member and to which I take active part, although that part is very limited in scope. I like to state this right at the beginning so that nobody is surprised by my candor or engrossed by my ignorance of the Internet culture, etiquette and practice.

The aspects that interest me are almost all those that one can imagine - except those related to business, knowledge gathering, advertising or any other form of professional activity. In the following, I will describe what I am interested in knowing. As a second step, I will help a discussion by formulating some questions that might be used as guides for replies or posts. But I will be very happy to receive general posts on the general subject of personal interactions. It will be my pleasure to read all with care and learn what interests me, which I do not yet know well myself.

Just to get things to start rolling, let us imagine that between two internauts develops a somewhat close relation, of whatever nature, ranging from torrid passion to friendship (something deeper than MR friendship), by ways of attraction, attachment, even love. There is no doubt that this could happen. That this has happened, and that it will happen. Let us imagine that is a friendship that we are talking about.

In the virtual dimensions (that I will just call virtual), as opposed to the real, where the two would meet, have drinks together, play tennis or bridge, go out for dinner or to exhibitions or ballet, invite each other for the weekend, share materially what they please, our two internauts might not do all these things.

They will have to exercise functions that are similar or equivalent in the virtual and in the real but which require different acts. As an example let me consider one of the first functions in developing a new relation, that is showing interest. In the virtual, it has to be done in view of everyone, while in the real there is more privacy. At the same time, in the real, body motion and tone of voice will be potentially more revealing, and effective in conveying messages with more accuracy. A different “language” is to be used in the virtual. I have the impression that there might be need for more deliberate actions, to substitute the lack of voice and body motion, and on the other hand, having more time for reacting and observing, even a tiny hint might attain a result.

It might be, especially in very public contexts, that they will choose to resort to avatars and nicknames and protect their privacy more strictly than in the real. This will affect their behaviour, and might also influence the resulting relation.

Our two internauts might interact differently in the virtual, compared with the real, not only because they cannot see, touch, or smell, etc. each other, but also because the set of conventions for interaction might be quite different.
In support of this, I like to imagine that the interactions in the virtual are between avatars and not actual selves. This is my trick to put a screen between my real self and the rest, for instance if I feel that somebody is unpleasant or aggressive toward me on MR. The aggression is toward my avatar: it is there exactly to act as my proxy. For other people the avatar is more of a symbol, a reminder, to self or to other, or to both. Both uses of avatar and many more of the two I mention here are in use. There is a thread that one year ago collected many observations and comments on this particular argument, that is how avatar images influence your impression of personality. This opens up a number of sub questions.

What is the role of avatars in all this? Just out of curiosity, I went to the list of members that were online (144), I checked 59 of them and found that 34 did not have an avatar. And the remaining 25 were evenly split between icons of people, animals and objects. I am pretty confident that no more than 15 percent of the members could be interested in personal interaction in MobileRead. Which is still a very generous and interesting number.

The avatar is a mask. There is always the need for a mask in personal relations. People that do not use the Internet much, often comment that an avatar is like a carnival mask that protects the real identity and allows behavior otherwise not easy to practice, because such behavior can be in contrast with the image of the self that one projects in real life and wishes to protect. People more familiar with personal interaction on the Internet, comment that on the Internet there is less need for a heavy mask as time is not an independent variable and the communication channel is forcibly much narrower: there is time for more controlled and deliberate actions.

A further point on the topic, is that Internet personal interactions can be beneficial to those who are more socially inhibited in real life. This would be confirmed by the recent poll on extroversion-introversion. In the poll it was observed that overall extroverts and introverts have similar percentage, while on MobileRead there were about 88% of the 115 who cared to answer, that declared to be introvert (!)

Some questions to stimulate comments and posting.

Is privacy necessary, important, useful to virtual relations?

Are virtual relations comparable to real ones?

Do you think of your ways on the Internet in light of social relations?

Further questions and subjects that I have not expanded here

If the relation is in the virtual world, how does it affect the real world life of each person. Sentiments and emotions arise around events in the virtual world but sprout in the real one. This might imply meta-meta physics

Can an Internet relation develop and attain high levels of personal involvement and gratification without spilling into real life?

Two addenda that might be useful to the discussion:

E. M. Foster wrote the novellette on virtual worlds “The machine Stops”. Written in 1909, it almost magically anticipates virtuality and the Internet. It has obtained a lively discussion in the Book Club. It is relevant to my argument as “… it develops Forster's recurring humanist concerns about connection--of individuals with themselves, senses plus spirit, or individuals with each other and with the natural world”. (Images of a networked society: E. M. Forster's "The Machine Stops.", ).

Do you want to build a relation starting from a new friendship? You can use this map.

[kindlekitten]

I didn't read your whole post, but in a nutshell, there is a place called "second life". apparently it totally becomes a second life. relationships are made and broken there that affect relationships IRL. financial transactions occur there which affects life IRL. I have never so much as peeked at it. this is as sucked in as I care to get

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

I didn't read your whole post, but in a nutshell, there is a place called "second life". apparently it totally becomes a second life. relationships are made and broken there that affect relationships IRL. financial transactions occur there which affects life IRL. I have never so much as peeked at it. this is as sucked in as I care to get

You don't even need to go there.

Basically, you are playing with fire if you are trying for "personal interactions on the internet"

Bear in mind, Beppe, you never really know who you are 'interacting' with. That lovely sounding lady, with the sexy posts, and way with words, could be a naked 13 or 78 year old ugly person sitting in their parents basement.

Not to mention, the time you spend online interacting with them should be spent with your partner, and I"m not just singling you out, I"m speaking in general.

[wvcherrybomb]

I hate to have such a short answer for such a long and thoughtful post but only two words come to mind:

PEOPLE LIE

[bjones6416]

The avatar is a mask. There is always the need for a mask in personal relations. People that do not use the Internet much, often comment that an avatar is like a carnival mask that protects the real identity and allows behavior otherwise not easy to practice, because such behavior can be in contrast with the image of the self that one projects in real life and wishes to protect. People more familiar with personal interaction on the Internet, comment that on the Internet there is less need for a heavy mask as time is not an independent variable and the communication channel is forcibly much narrower: there is time for more controlled and deliberate actions.

You've brought up a lot of interesting points, but one of the things I find kind of fascinating is the avatar question. Another forum that I participate in has a lot of people using their own photograph as an avatar, without any regard to privacy issues. I can't do that; that's way out of my comfort zone. On the other hand, I feel this need to be true to the real me in some kind of way, even if in caricature. (Hopefully the real me doesn't come across as male as often as my avatar does, though!) But short silverish hair, glasses, casual clothes -- that's all real. On the other hand, I sometimes use my cat as an avatar on the other forums, so you can take all of this with a grain of salt!

[phenomshel]

I never thought about it. I usually pick avatars that I like, either of my cats, or something pretty, like my roses here, or fantasy artwork. I have used pictures of myself on my Facebook page, though. Right now I'm using a picture of Toryn, there. I do have pictures of Toryn and my daughter in my albums here. I don't think I've ever used an avatar to "be someone else" though, and have it be representative of my personality. With me, pretty much what you see here is what you get IRL, too. Ask Rebarnmom or Deb, LOL.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by beppe

In the virtual dimensions (that I will just call virtual), as opposed to the real, where the two would meet, have drinks together, play tennis or bridge, go out for dinner or to exhibitions or ballet, invite each other for the weekend, share materially what they please, our two internauts might not do all these things.

People who develop serious, long-term relationships online consider them "real." They call the other kind "physical." (Or "meatspace," although that's a bit flippant.)

As an example let me consider one of the first functions in developing a new relation, that is showing interest. In the virtual, it has to be done in view of everyone, while in the real there is more privacy.

Nope. Plenty of interest-showing online happens through private messages, emails, and isolated chat sessions. Initial meetings online are almost all public, but the get-to-know-each-other stage can have as much privacy as the people wish.

A different “language” is to be used in the virtual. I have the impression that there might be need for more deliberate actions, to substitute the lack of voice and body motion, and on the other hand, having more time for reacting and observing, even a tiny hint might attain a result.

This, yes. Aside from emoticons & smileys, and acronyms like LOL and OMGWTFBBQ, there are in-jokes and methods of phrasing that show the textual equivalent of tone of voice, posture, and degree of intimacy being claimed.

In support of this, I like to imagine that the interactions in the virtual are between avatars and not actual selves.

This sometimes works, and sometimes causes a great deal of strife. Many people seem to forget there are other humans behind those avatars, and feel comfortable lashing out or being hateful in ways they'd never do in a physical meeting.

A further point on the topic, is that Internet personal interactions can be beneficial to those who are more socially inhibited in real life. This would be confirmed by the recent poll on extroversion-introversion. In the poll it was observed that overall extroverts and introverts have similar percentage, while on MobileRead there were about 88% of the 115 who cared to answer, that declared to be introvert (!)

The internet, in removing the requirement for immediate response and overt emotional display, is a lot more comfortable for many introverts. I'm an extreme introvert; I'm not sure I've ever willingly introduced myself to a stranger in "real life." Online, I'm comfortable joining new forums on a whim, making intro posts, and jumping into random conversations.

Some questions to stimulate comments and posting.
Is privacy necessary, important, useful to virtual relations?

It can be; it functions differently in internet relationships, because it's *entirely invisible* to others. In physical life, people who spend a lot of time being private together are noticed; others can recognize that they have some kind of connection. Privacy online makes it possible to have deep relationships that other people know nothing about.

Are virtual relations comparable to real ones?

Comparable in what way?
Meaningful? Sure. If I listed my 10 closest friends at the moment, two of them are people I've never physically met.
Romantic? Sometimes. (Not my thing. Tried it; doesn't work right for me.)
Spiritual? I've had terrific luck with spiritual connections online.

Do you think of your ways on the Internet in light of social relations?

I have a lot more social connections on the internet than I do in meatspace.

Can an Internet relation develop and attain high levels of personal involvement and gratification without spilling into real life?

Define "spilling into"--the two close friends I mentioned, I've had hours-long phonecalls with.

I do have other friends that I care for deeply, that I've never spoken to, nor am likely to; there's language barriers. (I have no idea how good their spoken English is, and my spoken Hebrew is nonexistent.)

[beppe]

I put this post here just in case I need some place where to put a sort of switchboard. it is a trick that I learned from dreams.

[beppe]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

I didn't read your whole post, but in a nutshell, there is a place called "second life". apparently it totally becomes a second life. relationships are made and broken there that affect relationships IRL. financial transactions occur there which affects life IRL. I have never so much as peeked at it. this is as sucked in as I care to get

Thank you KK. I heard about that place. I have hard time imagining something that sucks you in more that what you decide to let yourself be sucked in.

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

Basically, you are playing with fire if you are trying for "personal interactions on the internet"
Bear in mind, Beppe, you never really know who you are 'interacting' with. That lovely sounding lady, with the sexy posts, and way with words, could be a naked 13 or 78 year old ugly person sitting in their parents basement.

Not to mention, the time you spend online interacting with them should be spent with your partner, and I"m not just singling you out, I"m speaking in general.

Wise words, thank you DG. I am convinced that here on MR there is plenty of nice people, and not many camouflaged uglies. Also the way the personal page is organized one can see the posting record of a possible interacting internaut, and get a better "tomography".

Time is indeed the currency in use on Internet. And the most precious commodity I can think of. This I have been slowly learning myself. E.M: Foster pointed that out repeatedly and clearly. The lectures that the main character delivers to her friends last 10 minutes.

It is also a general fact that the new generations have difficulties in staying on a topic for more than few keywords. I use that expression on purpose.

It is also very true that free time spent on Internet is subtracted to other interests, often in a deceiving manner, and sometimes even with deceiving purposes. Self deceiving being the worst I think.

Thank you for the wise replies. I hope that you will find more occasions to contribute to this thread.

Originally Posted by wvcherrybomb

I hate to have such a short answer for such a long and thoughtful post but only two words come to mind:

PEOPLE LIE

Yes wvcherrybomb. We move through shadows and blinding flashes of light.

Originally Posted by phenomshel

I never thought about it. I usually pick avatars that I like, either of my cats, or something pretty, like my roses here, or fantasy artwork. I have used pictures of myself on my Facebook page, though. Right now I'm using a picture of Toryn, there. I do have pictures of Toryn and my daughter in my albums here. I don't think I've ever used an avatar to "be someone else" though, and have it be representative of my personality. With me, pretty much what you see here is what you get IRL, too. Ask Rebarnmom or Deb, LOL.

Thank you shel. I like to play with you.

[beppe]

Originally Posted by bjones6416

You've brought up a lot of interesting points, but one of the things I find kind of fascinating is the avatar question. Another forum that I participate in has a lot of people using their own photograph as an avatar, without any regard to privacy issues. I can't do that; that's way out of my comfort zone. On the other hand, I feel this need to be true to the real me in some kind of way, even if in caricature. (Hopefully the real me doesn't come across as male as often as my avatar does, though!) But short silverish hair, glasses, casual clothes -- that's all real. On the other hand, I sometimes use my cat as an avatar on the other forums, so you can take all of this with a grain of salt!

Bold is mine. Do believe me, I really thought so.

I am learning a lot from your post. I think I will comment it further in a while, if you do not mind. Thanks a lot.

PS. Yeah, I noticed that somebody took you for a male. It did surprise me. Take care of that line in your hand.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by phenomshel

I never thought about it. I usually pick avatars that I like, either of my cats, or something pretty, like my roses here, or fantasy artwork. I have used pictures of myself on my Facebook page, though. Right now I'm using a picture of Toryn, there. I do have pictures of Toryn and my daughter in my albums here. I don't think I've ever used an avatar to "be someone else" though, and have it be representative of my personality. With me, pretty much what you see here is what you get IRL, too. Ask Rebarnmom or Deb, LOL.

I've always found that people's avatars add substantial information - conciously or not - to my perception of them. So be mindful of what you say with your avatar

[Exer]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

You don't even need to go there.

Basically, you are playing with fire if you are trying for "personal interactions on the internet"

There seems to be a lot of stigma about "virtual" worlds, and online relationships, but I'll just say that me and my lady met online. Our friendship grew online, and -- years later -- when we realized it had turned into love, that blossomed online as well. We were well and truly in love before we ever stood face to face, and everything that we experienced with each other online was just as emotionally real and heartfelt as what we've felt since then, being physically together.

I can honestly say that we would have never met without the internet. We lived 4,000 miles apart, with absolutely no sign that any paths in our "physical" lives would have led us to each other.

We've been together 8 years now (we include the nearly 3 "virtual" years in that count), and it has been the best times of our lives. The funny thing is; the internet STILL plays a part in our relationship. Perhaps it is due to our roots being "virtual", but we have an amazingly fun time adventuring together online. We explore new worlds together. Build and create together. Go to concerts and plays together. In fact we recently went to an online presentation of Alice In Wonderland, and that same night we went out on a "real" date to dinner and a movie -- and we both agreed that Alice had been more entertaining than the crappy movie we picked.

It just adds another dimension to what we already have.

Some couples read books together. Some go hiking, or biking together. Some couples work in the same career field, or enjoy traveling around the world together. Me and my lady just happen to enjoy virtual exploration as an addition to our day to day life together.

I don't think some people give credit to the possibilities that the virtual realm can bring to the real world. Just because you can't grasp it in your hand doesn't make it any less real. When MobileRead recently lost a well-loved member to illness, did their friends here just shrug and say, "Oh well, I only knew 'em online"? I doubt it.

The love, loss, joy and heartbreak are -- sometimes painfully -- real. Anyone who has felt them, here in these virtual spaces, can attest to it.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

You don't even need to go there.

Basically, you are playing with fire if you are trying for "personal interactions on the internet"

Bear in mind, Beppe, you never really know who you are 'interacting' with. That lovely sounding lady, with the sexy posts, and way with words, could be a naked 13 or 78 year old ugly person sitting in their parents' basement.
<...>

Great advice
.
.
.
for a 10 year old

Except of course if your definition of 'personal interactions' is cybersex with strangers...

[Billi]

Thank you, Beppe, for creating this wonderful and helpful threat. It covers a lot of subjects I've been thinking about thoroughly in the last time.

And Exer: what a nice love story!

[dsvick]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

... there is a place called "second life". apparently it totally becomes a second life. relationships are made and broken there that affect relationships IRL. financial transactions occur there which affects life IRL. I have never so much as peeked at it. this is as sucked in as I care to get

I've heard of it too and have no interest. While relationships online can be fulfilling, meaningful, intimate, fun, or whatever else you want, I've always had the impression that second life was essentially a place where people are not themselves. In which case, why would I want to go somewhere where people are deliberately false? I could be completely wrong on that, and I'm not saying that people elsewhere on the internet are paragons of truth, but there is not the presumption of falsity like with second life.

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

Basically, you are playing with fire if you are trying for "personal interactions on the internet"

Bear in mind, Beppe, you never really know who you are 'interacting' with. That lovely sounding lady, with the sexy posts, and way with words, could be a naked 13 or 78 year old ugly person sitting in their parents basement.

Too true, I'd venture to say that some of them are fat, balding middle aged guys too

Originally Posted by Ea

Great advice
.
.
.
for a 10 year old

Except of course if your definition of 'personal interactions' is cybersex with strangers...

Not neccesarily true. Sure you should not get too wrapped up over the 18yr old with the sexy pictures thinking that they are what they say they are. But that goes for any relationship whether online or IRL. Online is a bit more complex as you really have only what they say to go on, but IRL people can be just as deceptive and false, just not so much with appearances.

Online it does not just apply to cybersex either, in fact I'd say that that is what it should apply the least to. Those types of relationships, if that is all that they are for are so superficial that you should just assume they are not who they say they are or that what they say is not entirely true. The only exception would be if you knew them prior to that stage in the relationship.

On the other hand, for a relationship that is not about sex and has the chance of becoming a real friendship, you need to be more cautious so that you don't invest too much time, effort, and emotional energy into something that turns out to be based on lies.

In the interest of full disclosure ...

None of the avatars I've used on MR, and certainly not the current one, are really me. The current one is there as eye candy for all those that are interested, and as a thank you for the rest of the eye candy out there (KK, badgood, etc.) .