After writing this post I reflected a bit more on types of conversations, and made a little graphic to illustrate my transportation metaphor for the internet: Some are walking, some jogging, some biking — traveling independently at varying speeds low enough to pay attention and stop to interact. Some are traveling at high speeds loudly polluting; they interact with others by honking, crashing, or running over. It is pointless for a pedestrian to converse with the blare of a car horn.

I’m still learning good communities for me so I clicked for suggestions for myself. Came to talk about different types of posts. When I saw your title I knew I’d want to read the whole discussion. Some posts are like that, and those are the ones I want to spend time on because every response contributes. Some posts are a practical question with a narrow set of answers. If it’s not a question I share, and it it already has several responses, there’s probably no point in me contributing. Some posts are open minded discussions where it’s so interesting to absorb the views that others share, and maybe join in. Some posts are fights. Those aren’t worth participating in.

I’m sure I’m leaving a lot out. And maybe others don’t make these calculations at all. I just happened to notice, as I was scrolling topics, the criteria I use for deciding whether or not to click and read.

Anyone else have these thoughts? Or disagree?

Vivaldi on laptop, Orion on iPhone — but as of last week Orion is crashing multiple times a day (after months of use without issues).

I consider them part of normal human behavior and therefore natural in movies. If anything I might think more intimacy should be portrayed on screen. But this question and many of the replies let me see that I am not necessarily typical in my view that sex, love, and kissing are no big deal in media.