(09-25-2018, 09:15 PM)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:(09-25-2018, 04:33 PM)Kreeper Wrote: Just throwing this out there: you two didn't have to click on this thread or read it. That was your choice. No need to be rude because you made what you deem a bad choice.
The funny part of the article is that she has enough followers to be considered and "influencer" and her "followers" think enough of her to follow her, and be influenced by her, but then think staging a photo for them is too much? Seriously?
This article offers great insight into internet sociology. Our digital culture is being shaped by social media. The future is evolving, and I find this post interesting.
If you check the posts of Below Average G, you can find plenty to criticize.
Posts about forgetting cooking ingredients, saying fuck, ect ect. Absolutely without merit and a waste of time.
And he's triggered about a post highlighting narcissism, because he narcissistic enough not to realize what a bore he is.
Everyone, except him, also realizes 5G signals are not powerful enough to cause ionization. His silly theory is an embarrassment. That could be his obsessive narcissism, as well. He calls himself genius when he's actually a rather dim
I have said for a long time that social media is a societal cancer. There is an epidemic of mental and emotional issues in this country and I blame social media.
I can't remember where I saw it but a recent study took a large group of high school students who were suffering from depression and anxiety. The split them into two groups. The first group went on with their normal lives. The second had all devices taken away and were prohibited from accessing social media. One group showed great improvements. Guess which one...
What politics from both sides wants to teach us is that things are never complex. If you have your little package and something doesn't fit into that package, You don't know what to make of it so you want to dismiss it or then you will have to do the work of reconsidering your assumptions. - Michael Malice