FA+
Shop
Cliques
14 years ago
Good or bad?
I'd be interested to hear what people think. I could be surprised, but I have a feeling most people will say that cliques are bad.
As defined, cliques are an exclusive group of people.
I ask only because I have mixed feelings about it. I used to feel that I did not wish to be enclosed in a small group of friends and remain shut off to others. Giving everyone equal opportunity to communicate and interact with me was important (unless they did something to lose my respect), and I wouldn't feel right singling one or more people out as being more important than any other person that I considered a friend. Being respectful is important - and you never know when you might stumble across people who you just strike it off with if you simply shut your doors and huddle and giggle with your little group of in-friends.
I still feel this way to some degree, but I'm starting to understand why people display cliques of friends in their profiles, and the benefits of having that interconnected web of buddies that you mostly stick with.
As my network has grown, I have found myself to be slowly distancing from friends I once knew well, and still respect greatly. Due to recent events, I have had a change of heart and have been making slow attempts at trying to rekindle that spark I had with people in the past as well as trying to be more sincere and kind instead of that guy who is always sarcastic and never commits to anything. Try to communicate with them more and initiate conversation more often rather than simply letting people come to me all the time. As a result, however - I have found myself desiring to clean out my contact lists and close out the people whom I no longer wish to deal with because it feels as if I would be wasting life, which is too short as it is, trying to please people who I don't really care about. It's a little selfish, but sometimes trying to talk to people is like flogging a dead horse. I want to make the people who I care for feel special and loved instead of leaving them to wonder if I'm just too busy with people who just want attention or to fanboy or w/e. Saying "No" is so hard sometimes. I want to be respectful, but how do you communicate "I do not think we get along well enough for me to use time talking to you, sorry" without being offensive? It's almost a personal attack.
I'm sure people reading this and who talk to me are probably going to wonder "does he want to talk to me?". Do not overly be concerned with this (I know some people are always worried if people like them, but never ask). I am hopeful that those I care about know by now that I care about them. If you are unsure and -really- need to know, asking will sate your curiosity. I will give an honest answer if it is requested, regardless of how much I want to avoid hurting people.
Regardless, lemme hear what you think about cliques. I hear so many people say that they hate exclusive groups, but they are often those who have them without really thinking about it, and are simply jealous they can't get in with someone.
I'd be interested to hear what people think. I could be surprised, but I have a feeling most people will say that cliques are bad.
As defined, cliques are an exclusive group of people.
I ask only because I have mixed feelings about it. I used to feel that I did not wish to be enclosed in a small group of friends and remain shut off to others. Giving everyone equal opportunity to communicate and interact with me was important (unless they did something to lose my respect), and I wouldn't feel right singling one or more people out as being more important than any other person that I considered a friend. Being respectful is important - and you never know when you might stumble across people who you just strike it off with if you simply shut your doors and huddle and giggle with your little group of in-friends.
I still feel this way to some degree, but I'm starting to understand why people display cliques of friends in their profiles, and the benefits of having that interconnected web of buddies that you mostly stick with.
As my network has grown, I have found myself to be slowly distancing from friends I once knew well, and still respect greatly. Due to recent events, I have had a change of heart and have been making slow attempts at trying to rekindle that spark I had with people in the past as well as trying to be more sincere and kind instead of that guy who is always sarcastic and never commits to anything. Try to communicate with them more and initiate conversation more often rather than simply letting people come to me all the time. As a result, however - I have found myself desiring to clean out my contact lists and close out the people whom I no longer wish to deal with because it feels as if I would be wasting life, which is too short as it is, trying to please people who I don't really care about. It's a little selfish, but sometimes trying to talk to people is like flogging a dead horse. I want to make the people who I care for feel special and loved instead of leaving them to wonder if I'm just too busy with people who just want attention or to fanboy or w/e. Saying "No" is so hard sometimes. I want to be respectful, but how do you communicate "I do not think we get along well enough for me to use time talking to you, sorry" without being offensive? It's almost a personal attack.
I'm sure people reading this and who talk to me are probably going to wonder "does he want to talk to me?". Do not overly be concerned with this (I know some people are always worried if people like them, but never ask). I am hopeful that those I care about know by now that I care about them. If you are unsure and -really- need to know, asking will sate your curiosity. I will give an honest answer if it is requested, regardless of how much I want to avoid hurting people.
Regardless, lemme hear what you think about cliques. I hear so many people say that they hate exclusive groups, but they are often those who have them without really thinking about it, and are simply jealous they can't get in with someone.
Personally I don't see cliques as a bad thing, so long as they're not totally enclosed and inwards facing; there has to be the idea that someone else COULD join, if enough people already in the group take a liking to someone. I've known some groups of friends who were considered "cliquey" (and been in them myself amazingly) but more often than not they grew over time, slowly, and the people who "wanted in" eventually were considered a part of it. However I've also seen the opposite with cliques getting smaller and forcing people out for whatever reason.
I guess what I'm saying is that they just happen, for good or bad, but it's important to realise when it's a "bad" clique that would only get smaller and more exclusive, or a "good" clique that could possibly grow with the inclusion of more like-minded individuals. After all, cliques exist so that we can be around like-minded people and be certain that we won't have to socialise with people we might be strongly at odds with. As such, there's nothing wrong with -that-.
I don't like the word "clique" though, that has too many snobbish implications, like it is something to hold above someone's head. When I hear that word, it makes me think of a group of cheerleaders who don't wanna get the smart kid hang out with them. I have a core group of friends, but I'm still meeting new people all the time, usually through these other folks. I don't really consider myself part of one group persay, but I have strong connections to at least several. This becomes really obvious to me the more I attend conventions and I have several groups of people that sometimes intermingle, but often go out and do their own things and I have to decide which to spend time with at that particular moment. XD Online is different thanks to multitasking, but there's only one physical me.
The worst part of trying to get along with everyone and be respectful still is when you have someone that doesn't really interest you as what would be your inner circle, but they are pushy and don't know how to take a polite "no thanks" or "I don't think we have enough in common to be good friends really" as an answer. They often get offended at this, or plead you to keep talking to em if they've done something that you're really not cool with. I don't really get people like this who develop instant attachments.
If no, then sure you can join our three-wa.. I mean clique. c:
They mostly have a negative impact on me when I'm A) browsing FA, noticing people's lists of good friends on their pages, and realizing that I don't make anybody's list, and B) at a con and lonely because everyone else has already broken up into their cliques, leaving me to wander alone or with Sepf (which I can do without going to a con).
Awuh. Now fuzz is sad <._.>
I believe that you are not being selfish, but only being human to want a clique of your own. In real life, its a little easier to make a clique of your own, since you are limited to so many people, therefore its easier to be happy with the friends you have. Being online 'and as popular and HOT as you are ;p' makes his more difficult. Since you are the sincere and kind soul you are it is harder to stay happy since you do want to keep others from being hurt. But the truth is you cannot please the masses no matter how hard you try. So i would say go for making a clique, i will have the same respect and awe of your artwork and personality whether i'm in it or not.
after all, we are all only human
Everyone has their close group that they've spent the most time with or have the most in common etc. It takes good judgement to work out who are your 'friends for life' and who are just 'passing through'. This takes experience, unfortunately, the best experience comes from bad judgement.
You'll eventually settle with a consistant group that you spend the most time talking to and get along with, this doesn't mean you have to automatically exclude everyone else though. You can still talk to people and be friendly to those you take a like to, but as you know yourself, you don't get along with everyone and you shouldn't feel guilty about ignoring those you don't particularly like talking to for whatever reason.
At any rate you shouldn't feel bad for making friends and having a good time.
Eventually I'm going to end up alone and friendless, possibly a shotgun-toting hermit in the woods far away from civilization, and it will be no one's fault but my own. But at least I'll still be able to produce some rad art to be discovered by kids who were dared to investigate my hermit hut after I've died or become too old to shoot them. :'D
TL;DR: Cliques are fine, I don't really have any, emotions how do they work, I am going to end up a hermit one day.
An example is my irl friends, it's just us 8, and they are respectful to other people when invited, but no matter what, if one of the members of the clique group wanted to hang out, he'd contact all of us 8 people and no one else.
It's sad, but it's hard to please everyone or to make friends with everyone, or make new friends to try to build that friendship when you are already comfortable with what you have. I would firmly hold my statement that it's pretty much impossible to make everyone happy, to make friends with everyone, and to even say "no" to someone that is innocent. I believe that there is also that one person that's gonna hate you or despise you. Being nice and sincere with people makes yourself more exposed to others that definitely want to meet you for being really nice, and there can be many other reasons as well.
We can only do our best to please everyone, and like Nite said perfectly, we are only human, and we all make mistakes and what not. Sometimes it can be good to hold your clique close, while still obtaining friendships with others. Remember, it's okay to say or warn people that are meeting you to let them know that you're a busy person, and sometimes you can't respond to every message or be there every hour or minute. That'd probably be the best mature way of saying it, as I tell people all the time that I'm in college, and that I can't be there all the time to talk and what not.
Sorry for the long reply too!
(Also, I hope to not upset anyone with this comment; it's just what I've learned and what I believe (In other words: my two cents) )
I think you should just talk to whoever you end up talking to, sort of go with the flow! No reason to think you're picking and choosing because this will just lead you to those who suit you most.
Some of my friends I really want to introduce to others because I think they'll get along.
Others, I realize they have wildly different tastes, so I don't bother trying to introduce them to my other friends.
I think the negative people see in cliques is people who hang out together because they belong to some kind of social construction only, and not because they actually get along better or worse than with other people. It suggests that there is some kind of special exclusivity there that can only be achieved once you belong to some kind of "in" crowd. I suppose many people feel that that kind of already existing social group might be unapproachable or unjoinable (like, the "popular kids" or the "football team" for some archetypal examples) and they'd feel more comfortable knowing that the people in these groups are hanging out because they have *real* things in common - like, a group of people who like programming, or chess, or host a recreational basketball league.
Being on the same team or from the same town or state or country isn't really that great of a reason to try to relate to one another, but people often feel insecure in trying to relate to new people they know nothing about, which is one of the reasons cliques form. It's the one thing they can pick up on that they know they have in common, and so they just kind of band together, so now anyone who is not from the said team, town, state or country feels excluded from the group.
Hence, I try to just make friends with whomever I can relate to well and I don't think too much on the idea of cliques.
Perhaps when cliques get to the point where you shut everyone else off and ONLY talk to your close friends, that's when it could turn awry. Like you stated, you should always at least try be open and friendly instead of closed off. I always at *least* try to start a conversation with someone. Sometimes the conversation never kicks off, at which point I usually give up.
I think it's one of those weird emo-online thingies though, to be honest. Cliques are definitely in 'real life' for sure, but online they seem to be more so, at least for me. It's extremely rare for me to open up to someone I don't see or talk to regularly. The only real close friends I have online are Pyx and Aerith, and only the latter whom I've never actually met in person. Typically for a friendship to really happen I have to meet someone in person, otherwise I keep shut-out from other people online, or play a facade. This is one of the main reasons I like cons so much; you get to meet actual people! I probably would have never talked to you, for example, if we didn't meet in person.
I could keep going on about the values of friendship and what I find most important, but I'll probably spare that. Its late, I'm blabby when tired, and need to cut my losses.
I don't have many irl friends, none I can meet on a day to day basis cause most people I do know live 2000km away from me, so my internet friends are an important part of my life as such these days at least until I move closer to them, though I will still consider my online friends some of my best friends regardless of distance.
But cliques can sometimes be interpreted as a bit of a 'popufur' attitude, though I am not trying to make any insults here, you have your own little circle of friends and not wishing to known anyone else besides them, just like in a stereotypical high school fashion of that little circle of friends you always hung around with cause its generally who you tended to identify the most with.
In the end, its always good to have that number of friends you can always count on, though there is the occasion it may be wise to be a little open cause who knows? You may just find another good friend in them.
Reminds me of the many cliques I used to see on Tapestries MUCK while I was hanging out there. Some of the 'members' wouldn't even TALK to someone who wasn't in their circle - that's total bullshit. Those cliques
So yeah, it's a shame almost every single clique I encountered consisted mostly of douchefags. Other than that, I guess they're fine.
It's okay to have friends that are closer to you than others, but the idea of a Clique is just ridicolous.
For example: I've see at conventions, a ring of artists standing around and chatting. They are talking about art stuff. They're giving each other advice on painting techniques, tablets to use, how to go about doing commissions in a professional matter, etc etc. Then some random furry walks up and says hello. They politely say hello back. Random furry starts blabbering on about some plushie he got from the dealer's den. None of the artists had been discussing that nor had they any interest in it. So they look at each other awkwardly and shrug. Random furry tries to talk about the Bad Dragon table. Again, nobody else wants to talk about that. After Mr Random furry tries a few more random conversation topics that do not relate to the ring of artists, each topic more awkward than the last, he storms away calling them elitist pricks.
I've seen it happen more than once, and more than just artists. While cliques certainly exist, and some people can be elitist, I do have a tendency to believe that 99% of furries calling out artists for being either are really just covering up for the fact that they can't relate to their favorite artist in any sort of social fashion so they instead try to force the artist down to their level. Maybe if people did have something valuable to add to the conversation this wouldn't be a problem. Or, god forbid, if they have no social skills they should just politely say hello to their favorite artist or fursuiter then just walk along. Everything would be a lot better like that.
As others have certainly touched on (as I've been skimming through other's replies), there is a distinct divide between the artistically capable (producers) and the artistically incapable (consumers). While the consumers are largely on the same level (we believe we can't do art to save our lives etc), the producers all vary and settle into particular styles or genres that appeal to a particular group of consumers. This gives rise to various "popular artist" types, the more popular being the ones that draw in a particular style or draw particular genres and the associated celebrity status as ardent fans vie for that artists consistant attention and 'friendship'.
Now some furs will have been that artists friend for a long time for the usual reasons and as expected will form part of that artist's close circle of friends and it's not uncommon to see that artist draw them gifts for their birthdays or conbadges at conventions etc.
With that kind of popularity, you will always get both the type of person that wants to be friends with them for their own personal (social or otherwise) gain and the type of person that genuinely wants to be their friend, both types are inevitably excluded from the closeness that these people have with their long-term friends and either feel resentment over it (former) or they stay the course and might just make another friend they can relate to if they accept the fact that they're not going to be instant friends overnight.
I think those that call artists elitist are those that are simply jealous because they can't relate to that artist personally (of course there certainly are elitist artists that snub others, I feel those are in a minority). Take that same popular artist, who was taking comissions but then decides to stop for a while for whatever reason. Lets suppose this artist still draws the occasional piece for a friend because they felt inspired to do so, there are plenty out there that will think nothing of it but there are some that will be filled with resentment or jealousy because said artist won't draw their character or won't take comissions and resent not only the artist but also the recipient of the picture.
Of course where it really must get difficult for someone in a popular position as an artist, is deciding who among those vieing for friendship and attention are doing so for genuine reasons and who are simply trying to score some free art (especially if they can't simply comission the artist). I've often seen the latter happen and it is unfortunate.
More of that De Dacto Segregation.
Cliques to me are good and bad. Theyre natural, they happen when people find like-minded people to call friends. Friends are normally quite good, they can make you happy and give you a shoulder to lean on or an ear to vent into. True friends are the ones that dont mind if you have your problems and support you when you need it, but tell you when you're being a dick. Cliques, to me, are groups of friends.
However, the connotations behind the word 'clique' are almost all negative. Negative in the way of being elitist and exclusive, which is rarely something you want to be seen as. HOWEVER, when you get popular amongst such a laaarrrge group of people, it has to happen, or else you simply wont have time for any of your real friends. You'll be spending all your time sorting through the hangers on and the clingy people just trying to get a share of your spotlight, so they can say 'Hey hey, I know MORCA! THats so cooool!' You need your own friends, everyone does, the close and real friends that arent just there for the moment. You HAVE to be a bit elitist and exclusive, and when you are, people start to think youre a jerk... before they realize that even popularity can be a burden.
CLiques can make people feel rejected, they can make people think 'why them and not me?! What am I, chopped liver?!' and... thats just the way it goes. It happens IRL and online, and there's no way to fully avoid that since you just cant get along with everyone. People do need to find their own friends, but when the members of a clique do refuse to grow or let anyone else in.... can you say 'No Homer's Club?' It hurts the rejected people, particularly if that rejected person was a previous friend of someone within the clique, but then feels like they were left for something or someone better.
Ive had plenty of ranting, angry journals myself along the lines of these things, as you likely know. You've read em, I think, after all. But I cant bring myself to truly, logically, be angry with cliques. Its natural in life that friendships grow into wider ranges, which turn into cliques. People grow, people change, people meet other people they get along with and have more in common with. Ive met people, youve met people, everyone meets people! But its always that thought of 'the grass is greener on the other side,' and everyone having things better than yourself. Jealousy, envy, a desire to be included, a worry that things are said behind your back. Theres a looot of stuff going on when it comes to relationships and its hard to balance everything out perfectly. VERY hard.
Different understandings, I suppose. I wouldn't say cliques are the problem, I'd say people being assholes is the problem.
And I agree wholeheartedly with Onyx... when a person becomes extremely popular, they'll have a ton of admirers who all want to get to know them better. Celebrity or not, you're entitled to you own close friends, the ones you truly enjoy being around, your support group. BUT, the one good thing about having a lot of attention is that it gives you an opportunity to perhaps make NEW friends out of the mass of watchers. Not all of us watch well-know people just for the sake of watching!
Unfortunately, even on the internet, it is impossible to keep constant, personal contact with too many people at the same time. I have many friends that I have recently come to realize I have drifted away from as well, and have been trying to let them know I still adore them, and they all understand that I have real life struggle to contend with as well that pulls me from their company. You can't give yourself to everyone all the time without making it a full time job!! Any true friend will understand this. As long as you send little messages to them to let you know you still think of them, I think you'll be just fine. ;P
I'm going to lay the middle ground, as lackluster as that is. They can be good or bad, depending on the people involved. More than anything, they simply just exist. A group of friends just naturally becomes a close-knit, and thus cliquey group. Nothing wrong with that. However, a group that just forms for the sake of being a group without really any actually friendship...I've never considered all that good.
Taking the scientific standpoint on things, there's Dunbar's Number in all of this. Between cognitive ability, time, etc...there may very well be a physical limit on just how many relationships can be sustained by a human. Thus, it is no surprise that folks group up and are picky in relationships.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number
I know you've mentioned critical mass in knowing people before, and hint on it here as well. This is something I've encountered as well the longer I've lived. It gets very difficult to be open and meeting new folks (despite really wanting too), when you've got so many people you already know, enjoy the company of, and want to know better. Seriously, if you ever find a good solution to that, let me know! I'll totally do the same, cause it's a huge pain!
Then again, I've never had a problem where I have more people trying to interact with me than I have time to deal with all of them. Not like I'm some awesome sexy dragon artist.
Years ago, I thought I could be friend with everyone on the Internet, or at least, not having any ennemies. Over the years, I think I had clique over the Internet, but it seems I'm slowly distancing from it involuntarirly (ugh, orthograph kills me here). Bah, videogames, computer geekery and other things are sucking my soul and time. It's like I'm losing interest in most things and I'm starting to feel like a drone.
These days, the Internet makes it seem easy to make friend. When a newcomer comes around some community he might tries to make friends, but quickly gets its nose bumped on cliques, especially the ones highlighted on the profiles pages.
My opinion on the cliques is probably pretty vague and almost unexistent surely because I've got the feeling that friendship doesn't really matter much to me anymore. As egocentric as it may seems, just like many of my comments anyway, I'm becoming pretty much independant and empty emotionnaly. :E
If it boils down to showing off a harem or such, why not - one's approach to filling their frontpage likely speaks of them. With ambiguous cases it's up to one's own judgment to call whether people are brought up openly in appreciation, or just shown off as tokens or autograph collections of sorts.
I'm sometimes miffed at the lack of time for keeping up contacts with people. It's easy to do online, but I prefer to keep appearances online while sitting on computer and idling for some reason, instead of dedicating time for it in particular. Boils down to what comes naturally, I suppose.
On cliques, I am intrigued by kartonis' response with Dunbar's number. It seems quite logical that such subconscious limitations exist, though I certainly seem to have a low 'number' compared to the examples they give. The interesting thing about my group of friends is that they are all individually connected to completely different social circles most of the time, though I am unsure if I can call them cliques. This does not bother me, because I value a person's friendship over who they know. Overall, Clique seems like a vague term that attracts more negative connotations than positive. Still, I am glad to see some intelligent comments here by individuals proclaiming that cliques are a natural progression of friendship. That is, loosely, what they are.
I have always seen cliques as some combination of lazy, selfish or paranoid measure used by people who are too insecure to handle normal interaction or too clingy to want to bother looking outward. (Or too clingy to want one's friends ever looking outward).
My personal opinion is that you should be brave, remain open and never discourage potential friends with so illogical and unfair a reason as already having friends. All of the introverts in this world would appreciate that.
Also, on the topic of friends...
Friends never care how often or how little you talk to them. They'll often be able to pick up in conversation upon randomly meeting up with you, as if you'd never been apart. =)
I can say with confidence that friends indeed come and go. If you stop making new friends all together, you'll eventually have none. But that doesn't mean you have to go out of your way to make new friends.
What really bugs me about cliques, though, is when two or more people are really good friends, and then one of the two (or more) practically stops speaking or being friends with the other friend altogether, only because this person got into a new, more popular clique. It's as if this person is dumped because they aren't "good enough" anymore, and inevitably what happens is either this rejected (formerly loved) friend goes to great length trying to please this new clique and improve to "their level" but it never happens. Or they just stop caring and leave with anger. Either way, the friendship is broken completely usually simple because one of the friends suddenly started thinking they were better than the other. It's an incredibly ugly thing and not really the clique's fault at all, though it is sadly a "result" of cliques. The real problem seems to be people not honoring older, closer friendships they already had, as opposed to simply not meeting new people.
Note I'm not talking about friendships growing a little stale or distant. I'm talking about -active rejection- or a person; complete loss of respect for that person, going out of one's way to avoid that person, even badmouthing that person.
So yeah, in summary, it's one thing to have Random McFurry come up to an already existing clique/group at a con or something, and have things be a little (or a lot) awkward. It's entirely another for a person that was already part of a clique to be cast aside because the others moved on to "bigger and better". Clique or not, old true friendships should be honored and cherished, even if perhaps some of that spark has been lost. Cliques may let a person focus more on the people they really care about, rather than a million people, but they should never be an excuse to dump people because of moving up a social ladder.
Going outside your group of friends and ultimately your comfort zone is very beneficial. Branching out and meeting new people, hearing their experiences and stories can be fascinating and it's a good confidence booster.
Regardless of your social circumstances, always try to be inclusive, remember that you can't please everyone, don't be scared to say no or that you're busy and most importantly don't forget time for yourself.
CLiques to me are as bad you make em. You can have a good clique if you don't act like your all better than anyone outside of it. Keeping the weirdos out is a good thing, but shunning everyone can lead to a shunning of anyone in your clique. I think it's all a matter of how you carry yourself.
It's natural for humans to form groups. We have been a tribal people, always supporting our social unit, competing with those not in our tribe, for they could threaten our very survival - they could take our game, spoil our water, cut off our access to materials, limit our ability to travel to hunting grounds. Much like what happened to Native American people come the arrival of Columbus and the settlers to the North American continent thereafter. 500 separate nations spanning from Canada to Mexico, now almost a memory.
But their habits weren't unique, just ancient - something the European settlers long since forgot, but their genes haven't. The pilgrims simply wanted to be with their own kind, live with those who thought similarly, own and develop land, and not be marginalized by society. (Well, there's more, but bear with me.) In a sense, this Plymouth Rock thing was just another clique.
"a small group of people, with shared interests or other features in common, who spend time together and do not readily allow others to join them." Sure, this applies to people we'd like to befriend, and rich and famous people, but it also applies to violent gangs, child pornographers who trade illegal pictures in clandestine chatrooms, and drug traffickers. Religious orders can be exclusive this way, as are some cults. Many that engage in questionable or outright illegal activities can be technically classified as cliquish.
But there can be real, necessary needs for cliques - organizing activities like Occupy Wall Street, or other protests, where only a certain number of people know they can trust each other, for example. It is an effective and necessary unit, that unfortunately still gets its mole incursions and leaks.
We have had and used cliques because it's an outgrowth of our need to feel trusted by one another, and to protect ourselves from the dangers of being too open with too many people, some of whom masquerade as friends but have hidden agendas. It's a pity we can't be open and trusting of everybody else, but because of human nature, it is mandatory that we do not, and take measures to be careful.
It may hurt people who do not get included in cliques who seem to be arbitrarily excluded, who are as sincere and worthy of inclusion as others, but it has to be realized that connections often are a function of who you know and being in the right place at the right time. This is part of how incursions get easily done, and the downfall of various cliques. It has to not be taken too seriously; it's human nature to err on the side of caution, as well as allow yourself to be deceived by a practiced, silver-tongued liar.
2. Communicating with disparate people can be educational.
What much do you learn from talking with friends? Do your friends (by and large) have a lot of different tastes and opinions than you do? If you choose friends like most people do, I'd expect not. Most everybody's friends are (for the most part) yes-men, or yes-people if you prefer. You like this art, they do to. You like (or want to see) that movie, chances are they like, or have been wanting to see it too. You like this music, etc.
How much do you really learn from someone who keeps saying, "Yeah, me too" (basically) to most anything you talk about with enthusiasm? Sure, you might get someone saying, "Oh and I also liked the bit where-" and "did you check out when-" and "have you heard-?" type questions to which you reply basically, "Yeah dude (or gal), that was cool/awesome/whatever."
These conversations are essentially zero information transfer. They're just agreement. Checking that you're still comfortable with each other. Making sure you're not starting to drift apart, heaven forbid you two don't see eye-to-eye on something! Have an argument, my word, the horror!
This is my point: Talking with disparate people who will like things you don't, have opinions contrary or at least not 100% in synch with yours, MAKE YOU THINK. You have an opportunity to have a logical argument. Most miss this and get into flame wars, trolling and what-not. But if you say, "well I felt this was well executed, and they have a good perspective when imagining the anatomy of a dragon, its musculature, skeletal structure, skin gathering and bunching at the joints, very accurately depicted I thought, as well as extreme attention to scaly detail," there you have a very calm and thorough sharing of your points of view on what you appreciated on a given artwork (eg) and the other person if they take the challenge of argument could counter with "well they failed the sense of proportion and lighting. Shadows are not falling across the image from the apparent light source at all logically - rather as if from the side on the forearm and from above on the neck and from behind on the tail. It just spoiled the rendering completely for me."
So here without trolling or personal feelings coming into it, a non-friend person with differing appreciation on a work can share a different point of view, and you can learn from them - not necessarily accepting or caving into their point, but SEEING it. You can acknowledge someone without saying you're wrong. And therefore broaden your understanding of how people see and appreciate art, music, whatever. It takes a willingness on the part of both people to communicate respectfully and actually share with each other why one likes and doesn't like the things they don't have in common. Both can learn from this, if egos don't get bruised and flame wars don't ensue. And just sometimes, a change in point of view happens, and "then somebody bends. unexpectedly."
3. The Internet is for Porn
You have to consider your expectations when fishing in a cesspool just how many swordfish you're gonna catch vs. sewer catfish. In other terms, consider the source. Those 3 words are the best balm for when insulted by someone over the forums or IM or even email. What mind, attitude, personality are they coming from? Chances are it's angry, belligerent, and hurtful - probably in that order. When looking or being solicited for friendships, consider them like bites from this same fishing scenario.
4. Who Are You? (Who, who?)
You're not your art, any more than I'm my character. You have a style and a character, so your art is at least some expression that is uniquely yours as well as an invention of a persona again borne out of your expressiveness. So these things are more personally attached to you. Mine is more of a contracted expression of a physique and sexuality that I wanted to express, so it's sometimes well said and sometimes just expressed in a very different style to give contrast to his masculinity. Contrast gives the viewer a greater appreciation of the subjectively best of the works.
I took on a facade about polar opposite of me, which gets me in a bit of trouble with how people expect me to react on IM - always horny, show-offish, perhaps the nasty, domineering top type. I reckon people have expectations of you being in dragon character a lot, and expectations of him. I can further assume this is tedious and bothersome. Maybe nice with the right people, but not with random contacts.
This is the danger of having a very public fantasy image set and fursona and not being ready and willing to RP that with random contacts. Who really would want to, honestly? I wonder where people get that idea constant RP is of interest to people indefinitely? There must come a point where anyone burns out - be it a year or a dozen…
That said, who are we behind the facade? There may be certain fetish and character interests you might deduce, but aside from that, all one can guess is that we're human. So our actual age, gender, station in life, where we live, our actual native language, this and much more is really hard to discern. So can any of us simply find it appropriate to want to IM another? Aside from doing business, I can't particularly see why.
Yet it happens a lot. We put our contact info out there. We're hoping for a real friend, I guess.
But are we fishing in the right pond?