Forum :: Lounge :: A Case Study of Human Interaction.

Read closely. You can skim over this if you want, but chances are you'll miss important details and end up re-reading it anyway.

Despite my frivolous, almost sarcastic contributions to conversations and forum threads, over 70% of my mind power spends time developing ideas and theories. In the early hours of this morning, around 3:30 AM, I closed off a Skype call. I won't name the participants, but my last offering to the conversation was "at least i'm not like X", referring to someone's very forward and sometimes disturbing, or "creepy" if you will, methods of speaking to women.

But I digress.

The closing statement of that call caused me to think back to everyone I know, online and offline. Each and every one of them fell into one of three categories, collected in what I call a "Case Study of Human Interaction". I've named these categories in the assumption that you are the target, and the other person is in a position where they have to do something with your involvement.

With. As in, what would this person do with you. They're the socially active types and the team players, the kind of people that would ask you to be an equal part of something. They don't want anything in return other than your company and they're the first people you would go to if you're looking for something to do, for example, nights out or school performances/projects. To you, they're the person you want around.

For. As in, what will this person do for you. These are the people you can depend on when times get difficult, the kind of people you can go to with a problem and know they'll have or try their best for a solution. Sometimes they expect something in return, it depends on the relationship (for example, a customer service rep may be willing to do something for you, but expects payment in return, while a friend will do it out of kindness - a favour as such). They would be the first people you go to with problems, good news, bad news or close secrets, they're the kind you can usually trust. To you, they're the person you need around.

To. As in, what would this person do to you. It's not as disturbing as it sounds, although it can be in the extreme cases (most of #eohax is this type in the extreme). These are the people you know but are only associated with as acquaintances. Your conversations aren't always of any meaning, although you speak to them, you can't really see them being there when you need or want them to be. Perhaps all you would get from them is a wave and a casual hello. To you, they're the person you consider a common acquaintance. You see them every day, they're still a part of your life, you don't mind speaking to them, but they're probably not contributing a whole lot to your life as it stands and they certainly won't involve themselves in your topics or issues.

---
EOSERV.net Academy Of Trolls, Satirists & Sarcastics
5.5 Years Former Site Administrator / Moderation Team / Member (Retired)

I'm on the "with" category

---
~~ When life give you pasta, you eat it ~~

Psh, Pasta, you're on the To.
I'm on the For. o.o

shh that was one time ;/

---
~~ When life give you pasta, you eat it ~~

I treat people the way they treat me, THEREFORE:

I'm part of the "with" category when I'm around people who are as well. 
I'm part of the "for" category when I'm around people who are as well. 
I'm part of the "to" category when .. YOU GET THE POINT! XD

---
"Natalia"