• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Online vs offline socializing

Dadamen

Well-Known Member
Online is better because I can think about what should I write before writing, but still worse because you don't exactly know who is behind the username. Sometimes people cheated me with their fake accounts.
 

Atrapa Almas

70% INTJ + 30% ASPIE = 100% HUMAN
V.I.P Member
I'm curious, why do you think you make people uncomfortable?

I dont know about everyone else, but I've never gotten that feeling from you at all.
Thanks. I cant answer "why", but I can explain "how" do I notice it. It will be a small offtopic, so I will try to keep it short.

You can know by paying attention to variations in user to user interactions. What are interactions? Using support emoticons, quoting to agree/expand/complement info, give credit, participate in a post to help... Also negative interactions like deleting a post, report, to insult/dismiss, to support others who insult/dismiss... In short I call it interactions. We could meassure them numerically (A winner emoticon is +5 interaction points, as an example) and store them in a database.

Those interactions do vary from user to user and by time. So if the average interactions of user "A" is +100 per month and the average interactions of user "B" is -100 per month we could think that A is friendlier than B. This leads to mistakes because B could be very friendly but not use emoticons (like you, as an example). The interesting data comes when we pay attention to user variations vs themselves.

So if user A has 3 times more "friendlier" interactions with B than with C we can see a stronger bond AB than AC.

If user A is usually in a very friendly/suportive level and suddently their interactions levels drop to not being so friendly/supportive with all users we may think that user is having a crissis like depression.

If user A have a discussion with user B over a topic and after that discussion A stops interacting with B but A keeps their levels of interactions the same with the rest of users, we can think that A have been hurted/affected by the discussion and decided to cut their relation with B.

Thats how I know. I dont make the numbers, but I pay attention to patterns in a way that I notice those changes over time.

Facebook and Instagram probably do meassure it in a proffesional way.
 

Rodafina

Hopefully Human
V.I.P Member
Thanks. I cant answer "why", but I can explain "how" do I notice it. It will be a small offtopic, so I will try to keep it short.

You can know by paying attention to variations in user to user interactions. What are interactions? Using support emoticons, quoting to agree/expand/complement info, give credit, participate in a post to help... Also negative interactions like deleting a post, report, to insult/dismiss, to support others who insult/dismiss... In short I call it interactions. We could meassure them numerically (A winner emoticon is +5 interaction points, as an example) and store them in a database.

Those interactions do vary from user to user and by time. So if the average interactions of user "A" is +100 per month and the average interactions of user "B" is -100 per month we could think that A is friendlier than B. This leads to mistakes because B could be very friendly but not use emoticons (like you, as an example). The interesting data comes when we pay attention to user variations vs themselves.

So if user A has 3 times more "friendlier" interactions with B than with C we can see a stronger bond AB than AC.

If user A is usually in a very friendly/suportive level and suddently their interactions levels drop to not being so friendly/supportive with all users we may think that user is having a crissis like depression.

If user A have a discussion with user B over a topic and after that discussion A stops interacting with B but A keeps their levels of interactions the same with the rest of users, we can think that A have been hurted/affected by the discussion and decided to cut their relation with B.

Thats how I know. I dont make the numbers, but I pay attention to patterns in a way that I notice those changes over time.

Facebook and Instagram probably do meassure it in a proffesional way.
Fascinating. Math don’t lie. Could be other factors involved, but your post reminds me that it’s important to show appreciation toward other members when I’m feeling it.
 

Slime_Punk

Contaminating the hive mind
V.I.P Member
Thanks. I cant answer "why", but I can explain "how" do I notice it. It will be a small offtopic, so I will try to keep it short.

You can know by paying attention to variations in user to user interactions. What are interactions? Using support emoticons, quoting to agree/expand/complement info, give credit, participate in a post to help... Also negative interactions like deleting a post, report, to insult/dismiss, to support others who insult/dismiss... In short I call it interactions. We could meassure them numerically (A winner emoticon is +5 interaction points, as an example) and store them in a database.

Those interactions do vary from user to user and by time. So if the average interactions of user "A" is +100 per month and the average interactions of user "B" is -100 per month we could think that A is friendlier than B. This leads to mistakes because B could be very friendly but not use emoticons (like you, as an example). The interesting data comes when we pay attention to user variations vs themselves.

So if user A has 3 times more "friendlier" interactions with B than with C we can see a stronger bond AB than AC.

If user A is usually in a very friendly/suportive level and suddently their interactions levels drop to not being so friendly/supportive with all users we may think that user is having a crissis like depression.

If user A have a discussion with user B over a topic and after that discussion A stops interacting with B but A keeps their levels of interactions the same with the rest of users, we can think that A have been hurted/affected by the discussion and decided to cut their relation with B.

Thats how I know. I dont make the numbers, but I pay attention to patterns in a way that I notice those changes over time.

Facebook and Instagram probably do meassure it in a proffesional way.

I know I'm alone in this, but this is why I turned off all notifications; because it tries to make something that really doesn't matter into a main focus when you visit the site (this isn't the site's fault or anyone who's involved with it, this is just how social media is nowadays and why I've mostly avoided the bigger sites).

If there's ever a dopamine hit, that's going to ensure the opposite occurs when there's a lack of stimuli. I'd rather just be able to talk about stuff that matters without those video-game-like attributes. I'm also more likely to speak (or type, in this case) from the heart when there's no need to fish for said stimuli.
 

Rodafina

Hopefully Human
V.I.P Member
I know I'm alone in this, but this is why I turned off all notifications; because it tries to make something that really doesn't matter into a main focus when you visit the site (this isn't the site's fault or anyone who's involved with it, this is just how social media is nowadays and why I've mostly avoided the bigger sites).

If there's ever a dopamine hit, that's going to ensure the opposite occurs when there's a lack of stimuli. I'd rather just be able to talk about stuff that matters without those video-game-like attributes. I'm also more likely to speak (or type, in this case) from the heart when there's no need to fish for said stimuli.
“Interesting strategy…” she thought while pressing the “useful” reaction.

I’m in trouble, it’s ingrained in the way I communicate on the forum now. I realize you’re not saying you don’t give out reaction emoji’s, but I think it’s a really good point what you said. Especially for a dope(amine)-head like myself.
 

Judge

Well-Known Member
V.I.P Member
I consider myself a better person online than offline. As simple- and tragic as that. Equally I am better equipped to deal with anyone and everyone online than offline. No surprise to me in discovering my own autism.

Online encounters are a bit more difficult to end than shutting down a web domain or my browser.

Whether this comes across as harsh or not, comes from the heart. Love me or hate me I guess.
 

Darkkin

Lioness of Spoons
V.I.P Member
Has anyone else noticed that written communication allows one to maintain a much greater degree of objectivity (fourth wall) than face to face contact? Nearly 90% of communication is conveyed in nonverbal cues, cues that can often be missed, misunderstood, or manipulated.

(The cynical truth of statistics and psychology augur well in the favour of those with an introverted nature. Certain inherent self preservative shields often filter out potentially negative interactions. Energy is energy whether it is mental or physical. It has a cost to it. Those who can create their own are sought by those who cannot fulfill or sustain their own needs. Those who achieve a certain, consistent level of inner peace are very rare, and having attained that balance, one may actively seek to avoid upsetting the status quo. Such individuals are often viewed as narcissistic or socially deficient by the majority of society because it is a status many struggle to comprehend. To engage because you want to, not because you have to...)
 

Dadamen

Well-Known Member
Has anyone else noticed that written communication allows one to maintain a much greater degree of objectivity (fourth wall) than face to face contact? Nearly 90% of communication is conveyed in nonverbal cues, cues that can often be missed, misunderstood, or manipulated.

(The cynical truth of statistics and psychology augur well in the favour of those with an introverted nature. Certain inherent self preservative shields often filter out potentially negative interactions. Energy is energy whether it is mental or physical. It has a cost to it. Those who can create their own are sought by those who cannot fulfill or sustain their own needs. Those who achieve a certain, consistent level of inner peace are very rare, and having attained that balance, one may actively seek to avoid upsetting the status quo. Such individuals are often viewed as narcissistic or socially deficient by the majority of society because it is a status many struggle to comprehend. To engage because you want to, not because you have to...)

Online is likely better for many of us because 90% of nonverbal communication is for NTs and we have a reduced understanding of that nonverbal clues, so online where there are NO those nonverbal cues we are actually closer to NTs.
 

Moogwizard

My Brain is Only a Receiver
V.I.P Member
I believe there are cues written in word text as well. It’s just not as common on this forum. But I sense they are here on occasion, I can keep scanning the text to find them and with proper time to process I can try to interpret them . Doesn’t mean it will be interpreted correctly.

In real life I record what people say in my mind like an audio picture file . I will pull this out when I don’t understand. Sometimes thinking about a conversation for days or weeks. Sometimes I can’t figure out the cues . Sometimes it all clicks . I have noticed that is also contingent upon the person .

My problem is my mind can go elsewhere very fast in person . My mind seems to going so fast at times , and I can’t focus on the conversation unless it is topics and someone I am really interested in talking with .
 
Last edited:

Suzanne

Well-Known Member
V.I.P Member
And the reason why I never can befriend or chat on whatsapp with ones that I know in person, as it has been said of me that I am more garagerous online than off and it feels too weird to me, to see the very same person off line and not be able to chat, when online, have no issue with it.

On the other hand, when it comes to zoom. I feel much better off line than on there.
 

Progster

Grown sideways to the sun
V.I.P Member
I have a tendency to assume, when there is a misunderstanding, or miscommunication, that I'm the one that is at fault. I think that is generally true for people on the spectrum. But that's not true. Communication is a two way thing and some people, including non-autistics, are bad communicators. We shouldn't automatically assume that we are the ones at fault.
 

Dadamen

Well-Known Member
I have a tendency to assume, when there is a misunderstanding, or miscommunication, that I'm the one that is at fault. I think that is generally true for people on the spectrum. But that's not true. Communication is a two way thing and some people, including non-autistics, are bad communicators. We shouldn't automatically assume that we are the ones at fault.
ASD 1 would in fact be being a bad communicator that sticks to routines or has narrow interests.
I believe there are cues written in word text as well.
There are cues like humour, sarcasm, metaphors and figurative speech. But, no cues like facial expressions, body language and tone of voice.
 

Progster

Grown sideways to the sun
V.I.P Member
ASD 1 would in fact be being a bad communicator that sticks to routines or has narrow interests.
It's possible to not be autistic and yet miscommunicate, misunderstand or misread people and get it wrong. Some people are bad at explaining. I had a conversation with my NT sister about this, who has a job where an ability to read people is quite useful and important, but even she gets it wrong sometimes. People have different communication styles, or don't pick up on things, or assume that you know something, or lack 'theory of mind'. Not just autistic people, people in general. Anyway, the point I'm making is that miscommunications between autistic people and NTs are not always the autistic person's fault. Sometimes it's not anybody's fault.
 

Darkkin

Lioness of Spoons
V.I.P Member
You don't have to be divergent to suck at communication. I work frontside retail and a majority of the people I encounter on a daily basis have issues stringing a coherent request together.

e.g. Do you have Book Q?

(A side note shout out to parents who work with their kids on asking a straightforward question because often these kids known precisely what they're looking for. The adults...eh, maybe one in ten will have the title and author.)

Most people can't even figure out the difference between the desk clearly marked Information and those marked Checkout...many of these individuals also struggle to understand how a standard line functions.

People want to pin all the poor communication skills on the other person, yet when hyperspecific expectations are not met based on the vague assumptions of another, the vague assumer will fault the listener, when the assumer never concisely delineated what they want. The congruency of the assumption does not mirror the expectation. The listener does not have the assumer's context.

At least in written communication one can articulate exactly what expectations are and bombproof communications on their end. The comprehension part...well that is unique to the individual and it doesn't always have to do with a divergence, there are a lot of people who just don't want to take the time to think or listen.

As Bob Parr's boss in the Incredibles once said: 'Be specific, Bob.'

Many of us have tools we can utilize with ease, but until we know how those tools fit the context, we are stymied both online and IRL. It is the responsibility of both sides to define and understand the context of any situation.
 
Last edited:

Gift2humanity

Well-Known Member
V.I.P Member
Something that I’m beginning to think and realize about is that socializing online is a lot easier to approach than offline. I mean, obviously, that it would be easier. I find that I usually get lost in the thoughts of what to say next, am I saying the right things, can I go back and pause? Can I edit what I’ve said?

Being online, is kinda like being in costume but without the mask. I dont have to mask when interacting with people (all of you on here for example). Sometimes I may say the wrong things and sometimes I can take the pause to figure out what I need to say (plus also having a translator helps at times if I need to use it =D). I express myself much better in text than I will ever do in any other way. I never used to feel like this but the more I realize that I have spent the majority of my social life online in some form and have used it to have a better reaching out with others than I do offline. Its freeing.

Obviously, have to try extra hard offline, and sometimes I will avoid interactions offline compared to online. Which I have to stop doing that.
I like the "non real-time" interactions you get online.
Offline, despite my age, I am still very much learning, and am growing tired of people who don't understand, who exclude, ignore, and general arsehole behaviour.
Having said that, I have some good offline friends, some on the spectrum.
 

Misery

Photo-Negative
V.I.P Member
Thanks. I cant answer "why", but I can explain "how" do I notice it. It will be a small offtopic, so I will try to keep it short.

You can know by paying attention to variations in user to user interactions. What are interactions? Using support emoticons, quoting to agree/expand/complement info, give credit, participate in a post to help... Also negative interactions like deleting a post, report, to insult/dismiss, to support others who insult/dismiss... In short I call it interactions. We could meassure them numerically (A winner emoticon is +5 interaction points, as an example) and store them in a database.

Those interactions do vary from user to user and by time. So if the average interactions of user "A" is +100 per month and the average interactions of user "B" is -100 per month we could think that A is friendlier than B. This leads to mistakes because B could be very friendly but not use emoticons (like you, as an example). The interesting data comes when we pay attention to user variations vs themselves.

So if user A has 3 times more "friendlier" interactions with B than with C we can see a stronger bond AB than AC.

If user A is usually in a very friendly/suportive level and suddently their interactions levels drop to not being so friendly/supportive with all users we may think that user is having a crissis like depression.

If user A have a discussion with user B over a topic and after that discussion A stops interacting with B but A keeps their levels of interactions the same with the rest of users, we can think that A have been hurted/affected by the discussion and decided to cut their relation with B.

Thats how I know. I dont make the numbers, but I pay attention to patterns in a way that I notice those changes over time.

Facebook and Instagram probably do meassure it in a proffesional way.

I didnt spot this (or any of the following posts) until just now, because I'm a space cadet, but all I can really say is... that sounds like math.

Though I'll admit I also dont understand the whole emoticon thing. You'd think I would, I've been on the net since the start and it's not like smileys werent ever a thing back then, because they were, but regardless I just dont get it. Like, I think I poked the button on this site exactly one time and I've no idea why I did that. I'm not even 100% sure that I did it at all, I just have this really vague memory of having done so.

The fact that anyone is even paying enough attention to the things to track anything at all is kinda baffling to me. One of those things that's just gonna always go over my head, I think.
 

Owliet

The Hidden One.
V.I.P Member
For what it’s worth, I enjoy the company of everyone on here a lot more than I enjoy the company of anyone irl. I don’t feel like my irl friends “get” me the same way, and they rarely want to hear about my interests, or have intelligent/insightful conversations. They don’t even really talk about their interests, and I’m not sure they even have many. My irl friendships are often one sided and I don’t get a lot of support.
Considering I dont have offline friendships, I would probably argue that any friendships I could consider is from this forum. I often dont have to worry (too much) that people on here dont get me, that we can talk about interests and have intelligent, insightful conversations and debates. Any form of miscommunication can quickly be “fixed” also. Any support needed, is always reassuring and helpful. Yeah, really glad that I’m on here.
I definitely prefer socializing IRL more than online, but sometimes you've got to take what you can get. For example, a really cool forum where you can talk to people with ASD doesn't really exist like that IRL.

I don't really make strong connections to people over the internet, and I definitely can't feed off of their energy unless I'm hanging out with them in person. Maybe video chatting would solve this but I've never really tried.
It’s interesting that you prefer socializing offline and that you get something out of the interactions. What type of energy do you feed off? Does it not burn you out or have you found ways to adapt to it?
I pretty much agree. The anonymity afforded by an avatar and screen name helps tremendously \. I can be myself here. I could never say say some of the things I say here or participate if this forum were a physical face-to-face meeting. If it were, I would likely flee in panic at the number of people. In fact, the closest thing to friends I have is right here. The thing is, I don't believe I am actually socializing. Commenting and discussing, yes. Socializing, no, unless I have a serious misunderstanding of what socializing actually is. I'm not sure if I can actually truly socialize anywhere under any circumstances. It requires an ability to connect with other people which I seem to be totally lacking. Not complaining as such, I realized and accepted this long before my autism diagnosis, I just didn't have a name for it. I just wish it were different.

That being said, however, I DO enjoy participating in these discussions, and appreciate the feedback and reactions I get.
I enjoy reading any insights you have Shamar.=)

I’d argue that theres a form of socializing online. Commenting, discussing, taking part in the games (I dont really do that), responding. Its minimal but its still a form.
Offline interactions require you to be with a person. That demands that people coordinate time and location. Even if you had complementary personalities, facetime is simply inconvenient. Even a phone call requires the other person to be free at the time you call.

I can drop a post on a forum at any time and check later for responses. I can think through what I want to say, while in-person conversation requires a quick response. No reason to dress appropriately or to dress at all. My hair can be a mess. Stop in mid-sentence to do something else and pick up where I left off an hour later. If I have a question, or if I am uncertain about something, pull up another tab and Google it.

I definitely prefer to communicate ideas or tell stories online but I do still think personal contact is important. I am particular about how and when and with whom I make that contact and I don't believe in forcing it "because its good for you." I don't need the stress.
I do agree with you That personal contact is also important. I have noticed that the longer i go without practice with people out in the wild, the more i revert back and really makes it difficult to gain confidence in any interactions. That said, I do prefer online but I do know the importance of interacting offline. Just wish that it was much easier. =(
I don't really socialize online anymore, but when I used to it definitely made me feel like fake and hesitant to do meetups with some online friends who were convinced, based on my posts, that I was a quick-thinking and fun person to have beers with (which I wasn't).
Why would it make you feel fake?

I had a bad experience once when I was a teenager and had ended up with an online stalker who also took my personal contact details like my haus number and my dad’s work email. He also found the plans for my apartment layout. I was so happy when he was arrested for another instance with another girl but it really made me aware of the dangers too. I definitely would never meet up with a person unless i had been talking with them for a while and if i met in a public place — people do internet dating and this seems like the safest way.
I find text form communication much easier.
I can reply and have a conversation at my pace, I can read something many times before a response. I can scan for cues . I can break apart the information easier . I can try to respond properly.
Yes, fully agree. I read over many times before response. I take my time. Cant really do that in an active conversation.
Most people I meet offline seem to have exactly three interests:
1, arguing about politics
2. alcohol
3. TV/movies, usually the "low quality / max profit" sort of things (I'm sure you can figure out what I mean by that)
I think it’s where You go to meet people but similar specific points here.
My work colleagues always talked about:
4. Family.
5.next holiday

Compared to them I felt immature. I dont really like going on holiday and I dont have children. So talking about any of the other subjects was difficult.

At cons:

1. the fandom
2. Complimenting cosplays/photographs

Bit easier since they’re specific things but it is often on a surface level. It’s really rare to have depth in any of the conversations here. 2. Especially seems to be “oh thank you, buy my print”. =(


I hate banal conversation (small talk) and face to face interactions. The amount of effort it takes is horrendous.
It’s really interesting how there is a need for making small talk and how there are people who dont seem to understand how trivial and surface level it actually is. It’s not formal. It’s not polite. It’s just pointless. Like you have to fill in a gap in conversation because there is nothing really to say When there could be other deeper, meaningful conversational topics to discuss.
A bit like a cat, I engage on my own terms and tend to be incredibly wary of strangers.
I pretty much feel like I am a cat. I do have stronger links with my cats than anything else. And when strangers come, we all hide in my room. =)
 

Owliet

The Hidden One.
V.I.P Member
You can't edit a face to face conversation.
If only it was possible!
Yes, I preffer the delay of forums BUT I miss my mother language. Yes, there are spanish forums BUT I miss the variety of cultures and viewpoints... and knowledge.

Yes, I can be more myself here BUT I still make many people feel unconfortable with myself so they decide not to interact with me anymore.
I do understand BUT you miss out on the variety and practicing language.=)

I dont think you make people feel uncomfortable. If they don’t interact with you, that’s their problem. I appreciate your posts and your insightful comments that are often very helpful. I hope that you know that you are appreciated and valued.
Definitely online for any type of interactions.

I only have conversations, if you can call them that, with the person I live with.
Much of my conversations are with the people I live also. I do need to change that but I do find maintaining interactions to be challenging.
but your post reminds me that it’s important to show appreciation toward other members when I’m feeling it.
I agree. We should always show appreciation. I’d suggest an appreciation thread but I dont know if that would appear too cliquey.
“Interesting strategy…” she thought while pressing the “useful” reaction.

I’m in trouble, it’s ingrained in the way I communicate on the forum now. I realize you’re not saying you don’t give out reaction emoji’s, but I think it’s a really good point what you said. Especially for a dope(amine)-head like myself.
=) I find the emoticon reactions to convey more support that I think I ever do in text anyway. Sometimes, there isn’t really anything i can say or add, so the emoticon reactions are very helpful.=)
I have a tendency to assume, when there is a misunderstanding, or miscommunication, that I'm the one that is at fault. I think that is generally true for people on the spectrum. But that's not true. Communication is a two way thing and some people, including non-autistics, are bad communicators. We shouldn't automatically assume that we are the ones at fault.
I do this a lot. It is always feeling that it is my fault when something happens that turns out to be a misunderstanding. It’s quite possible that I am used to being blamed for it and so I will often believe that it is always my fault. I will apologize when there is a miscommunication and that will often make a situation worse because I apologized and so it seems weird.
 

New Threads

Top Bottom