Twitter/Forum/Texting Interaction...

[Cassia]

...renders years of learning non-verbal physical cues completely useless. Not to mention the millions of years worth of development of this skill in our species. The raising of an eyebrow, the sideways glance, the clearing of the throat...are all missing. Video/audio half-duplex interaction also leaves a lot to be desired.

In the past it was all about "the way it was said". Much easier to pick up subtle similarities; to connect with compassion despite varying views. The world seems much more loveless.

[Hydra009]

I was never very good at non-verbal cues and growing up, I desired nothing more than to be penpals with someone living in a foreign country.  Then the internet came along and my cup runneth over.

One of my favorite books features cyborgs who communicate with each other with compressed binary transmission bursts - saying pages worth in less than a second.  They communicate very precisely (no ambiguity) and convey a lot of information in a very short time.  I would genuinely love that. 

Intent/sarcasm can certainly be trickier over text, but it's something that can be figured out fairly quickly.  For example, half-duplex is a very interesting term used in very few fields, so there's some insight right there.  :)

And I would give my left liver to not be cut off while talking to someone and not accidentally cut them off.  I talk to my brother sometimes and it's like the first presidential debate.  I'll finish a little story only to find out that the person on the other end was just impatiently waiting for me to shut my gob and spent that time thinking about their own story.

I'm not so sure about loveless.  Less intimate seems more fitting.

[Cassia]

That is interesting Hydra. My experience has been a lot of navigating around so many smooth talkers. If someone said "nice haircut" there was a 50% chance it meant "silly haircut", dependent on if their smile was twisted or not. At a job interview I could tell if I was gonna get the offer, not by what they said but by how they acted. If I want to avoid unpleasantness; a text message is just so much easier than delivering bad news while looking someone in the eye. The receiver doesn't even get to watch you squirm a bit. And if you don't squirm, that is a useful piece of information right there.

In decades past I recall more civility in discourse. Fairly deep conversations with coworkers instead of that perpetual blank 1000-mile stare into an I-phone. Maybe memory fails but I don't recall so many immediate ad hominem attacks that make Twitter and forums so rough. My YT feed recently presented "USA for Africa" to me. I can not even imagine something like that now, but I am always hopeful. Maybe it was all a façade and we are closer to true human nature. I just don't know.

[drunkenshoe]

... that perpetual blank 1000-mile stare into an I-phone. ...

Lol.

[GSOgymrat]

Paraverbal communication and body language are more important than the words someone says. People communicate volumes with their proximity to you when they talk, stance, eye contact, how they use their hands, the tone, rate and volume of their voice, etc. Active listening is making an effort to not alone to hear the words being said but the complete message being communicated.

I like texts for brief communication but I don't like text conversations. The main reason is every text is like a new interruption. In between texts, my attention is on something else, so to me, a text stream is often like someone saying:

"This"

"And this too"

"Oh, one more thing"

"Oh, this too"

"I forgot to say this"

[Baruch]

That is interesting Hydra. My experience has been a lot of navigating around so many smooth talkers. If someone said "nice haircut" there was a 50% chance it meant "silly haircut", dependent on if their smile was twisted or not. At a job interview I could tell if I was gonna get the offer, not by what they said but by how they acted. If I want to avoid unpleasantness; a text message is just so much easier than delivering bad news while looking someone in the eye. The receiver doesn't even get to watch you squirm a bit. And if you don't squirm, that is a useful piece of information right there.

In decades past I recall more civility in discourse. Fairly deep conversations with coworkers instead of that perpetual blank 1000-mile stare into an I-phone. Maybe memory fails but I don't recall so many immediate ad hominem attacks that make Twitter and forums so rough. My YT feed recently presented "USA for Africa" to me. I can not even imagine something like that now, but I am always hopeful. Maybe it was all a façade and we are closer to true human nature. I just don't know.

Everyone is more autistic now, because we were born under industrial pollution, leaded gasoline pollution, and fluoridated water.

[Baruch]

Paraverbal communication and body language are more important than the words someone says. People communicate volumes with their proximity to you when they talk, stance, eye contact, how they use their hands, the tone, rate and volume of their voice, etc. Active listening is making an effort to not alone to hear the words being said but the complete message being communicated.

I like texts for brief communication but I don't like text conversations. The main reason is every text is like a new interruption. In between texts, my attention is on something else, so to me, a text stream is often like someone saying:

"This"

"And this too"

"Oh, one more thing"

"Oh, this too"

"I forgot to say this"

Anglo - Paraverbal communication
Italian - hold my pasta

[Hydra009]

In decades past I recall more civility in discourse.

Eh, I dunno about that.  It may just be that being online gives people the chance to voice their true feelings unconstrained by normal etiquette.

There's also kind of a polarizing love/hate warring factions dynamic whenever something new comes up - where people feel pushed to one of those two factions and then that initial opinion reinforced over and over again by like-minded people, which produces a more extreme divide than what otherwise would exist.

Fairly deep conversations with coworkers instead of that perpetual blank 1000-mile stare into an I-phone.

Now that is a problem and it's less the technology itself and more a poor ability to integrate technology properly.

Smart phones are literally mini-computers you can also use as phones.  They're supposed to be a convenient all-in-one device to lookup information and stay in touch with people.  They're not supposed to be 24/7 distractions and especially not supposed to interfere with working and that's a failure in work-life-leisure balance.

Ideally, people are supposed to manage their own priorities and judge what they're doing to be more important than what's on their phone.  Obviously, things haven't exactly worked out that way.  Eventually, I think rulemakers and social pressure will discourage those sorts of bad habits, especially when people get hurt as a result.

Maybe memory fails but I don't recall so many immediate ad hominem attacks that make Twitter and forums so rough.

I do.  It was a goddamn nightmare.  The internet has been a mixed blessing in letting people call out BS and letting people propagate BS.  I'm not entirely sure if it has been a net positive or negative, but I'm inclined towards a neutral or slight positive.

My YT feed recently presented "USA for Africa" to me. I can not even imagine something like that now, but I am always hopeful.

There was that ALS challenge and the tree-planting campaign, just of the top of my head.

[Hydra009]

Paraverbal communication and body language are more important than the words someone says. People communicate volumes with their proximity to you when they talk, stance, eye contact, how they use their hands, the tone, rate and volume of their voice, etc.

*nervous sweating*

When I smiled to the checkout lady, was it a normal smile or a murderer smile?  Man, my hands are extra sweaty today.  Stupid sweaty hands.  When I was pointing to the street while giving directions, did that guy down the hall think I was pointing at him?  Cause he looked pissed, hopefully not at me.  I'm too loud, I should let someone else speak.  Damn, now it's too quiet, I should break the ice.  Did my voice just crack?  I never know what to do with my hands while talking.  I should put them in my pockets.  Whoops, no pockets on this hoodie.  I'll pretend I was just rubbing my stomach.  Alright, time to say goodbye.  Oh, he's still talking.  Do I just...walk away?  That'd be rude, wouldn't it?  But isn't it also rude to keep someone verbally hostage?  Yeah, I already know all that, just wrap it up.  I'm going to try a second goodbye.  Or maybe push someone into talking to him while I make a break for it.

*makes it home, triple-locks and bars the door behind me*

Internet time: time to type up something obvious and people will think I'm a genius for saying it.  Maybe I can deploy some obscure trivia or hashtag relatable joke to really bump up the karma.  I think I'll go with that other guy's joke I saved up for the past three months.

[Cassia]

When I smiled to the checkout lady, was it a normal smile or a murderer smile?

Murderous, LOL. Context is important. I don't waste much energy on casual non verbal cues. However if the interaction matters to me then I pay attention. Especially valuable for relationships. Once I get to know your normal cues over time I have a basis set of behaviors to compare against. Tell me a lie and I will know in about 3 minutes. Cheat on me and you are a dead man.

[Baruch]

Your avatar looks suspicious, beady eyes, sloping forehead ...

[Cassia]

Of course reading non verbal cues is not infallible like the Pope.

Can't remember the source but I recall a retired football player who said he could tell if certain quarterbacks were about to throw a pass or hand-off the ball just by watching pre-play cues. My old boss was so easy to read. He would fiddle with his glasses (kept needlessly pushing them up by the bridge) when he was upset. I guess there are some people who truly have a 'poker face'. I might be a bit wary of them. I think it is an interesting topic. I bet there is a TED talk...., LOL

[Hydra009]

Once I get to know your normal cues over time I have a basis set of behaviors to compare against. Tell me a lie and I will know in about 3 minutes. Cheat on me and you are a dead man.

LOL same.  I legit don't understand why people cheat.  Either stay or go.  You can't do both.

If rings weren't already invented, I would invent some sort of "love baton" (willing to workshop the name) for people to give their SO and then take it back when they breakup.  That way, there's no ambiguity and everyone knows where they stand with each other.

[Baruch]

Of course reading non verbal cues is not infallible like the Pope.

Can't remember the source but I recall a retired football player who said he could tell if certain quarterbacks were about to throw a pass or hand-off the ball just by watching pre-play cues. My old boss was so easy to read. He would fiddle with his glasses (kept needlessly pushing them up by the bridge) when he was upset. I guess there are some people who truly have a 'poker face'. I might be a bit wary of them. I think it is an interesting topic. I bet there is a TED talk...., LOL

I wouldn't trust the body language of an actor, or a sociopath, or am I repeating myself?

[Mike Cl]

Of course reading non verbal cues is not infallible like the Pope.

Can't remember the source but I recall a retired football player who said he could tell if certain quarterbacks were about to throw a pass or hand-off the ball just by watching pre-play cues. My old boss was so easy to read. He would fiddle with his glasses (kept needlessly pushing them up by the bridge) when he was upset. I guess there are some people who truly have a 'poker face'. I might be a bit wary of them. I think it is an interesting topic. I bet there is a TED talk...., LOL

Have you heard of Neuro-Linguistic Programing (NLP)?  It was big in the 70's.  I was in the Army active reserve in the late 70's and we spent 6 full days (3 weekends) studying NLP.  Apparently, at that time the Army used these techniques to train their competitive 45 cal. pistol team.  The part that pertained to my unit was the 'reading' of body language and eye movements when questioning a person.  (I was in a Counter Intelligence unit; we were not integrators officially, but we did run several types of investigations.)  Anyway, the Army was so impressed with it that they spent 6 full days teaching it to us.  I have since forgot most of it and have long since thrown away all the handouts that we were given.  I do remember that if we asked someone a question and their eyes looked up and to the left, they were accessing their memories; if they looked down and to the left, they were using their imagination (lying).    I don't know if the Army still thinks it a good tool to use or not.  Here is an article dealing with the subject:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming