Creation requires energy.
It takes a certain type of person to make something out of nothing.
For instance.. I’m thinking this post up as I write it. I don’t know right now what I’m about to write. 🙂
I didn’t get this stuff from someone else. It originated in my mind. You’ve never heard this before because I never thought it before.
You’ve heard the general concepts before, but you haven’t read *this* anywhere before, because I hadn’t created it yet. I’m what’s known in social media circles as a “Content Creator”. I make things that other people discuss.
There are other types of people that call themselves bloggers, but they aren’t. What they’re actually doing is regurgitating things they found on the internet, like a picture, or an article they got off the AP (Associated Press) Feeds -> hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/APNewsFeeds.
Nothing they have to say is original. They aren’t creating anything. They are curating. They are finding things that already exist and bringing them to your attention.
There’s nothing wrong with that, and we definitely need curators. I try to curate for my friends/fans/followers, because if there’s something I think is cool, I want them to have the chance to see that as well. That isn’t the issue here.
The ‘problem’ occurs when people who are not natural creators want to feel like they’re creating something… How can they do that?…..
Lack Of Relevance
Let’s say I look at the ground, and I decide that what I’m looking at should be called “grass”.
That means I have to decide that grass is different from something else, I have to decide what grass looks like, what color it is, how to distinguish it from other things, and how to articulate my new idea to the people around me that either don’t have a definition yet for grass or have a different definition than I just came up with.
Now.. After The Kid does all the heavy lifting, all someone else has to do in order to feel like they’re creating something is offer an opinion on what I already created.
You see this all the time on television, with people that are called “pundits”.
A pundit is someone who offers to mass media his or her opinion or commentary on a particular subject area (most typically political analysis, the social sciences or sport) on which they are usually knowledgeable (or can at least appear to be knowledgeable). The term has been increasingly applied to popular media personalities. In certain cases, it may be used in a derogatory manner as well, as the political equivalent of “ideologue.”
So, let’s say I create a song called “Mind Your Business”… Someone can fulfill their Attempted Relevance Quota by saying “‘Mind Your Business’ sucks!!!”
Did they make up any lyrics? Nope. Did they make up any music? Nope. Did they mix anything? Nope. Did they do anything of import at all? Nope. All they did was select something that was already created and talk about it.
Overabundance Of Negativity
The reason these people often express negative opinions instead of positive ones is because a positive comment merely co-signs your original creation, which points you out as the creator and defeats the purpose of them chiming in with their two cents in the first place.
Therefore, The only way they can look original is to come up with something based on what you said, but different.
This is why people can take diametrically opposed stances within the same conversation.. Such as some guy saying “I want that girl” (indicating interest) and then turn around practically immediately and say “She’s fat” (indicating disinterest). They don’t realize that they’re merely reacting to the current stimulus, as opposed to offering original, valid ideas.
Whatever you just said, they feel the need to go against it, in order to make themselves feel good about themselves and imagine getting on your nerves, even if what they’re saying NOW is totally different from what they said before.
This is also why people tend to STFU when you ask them to explain what they just said.
An explanation would require an understanding of the basic concept, which they don’t understand because they didn’t bother to “do the math” about what you said before they chimed in.
However, they don’t realize what they’ve done to themselves until you call them on it.
Which isn’t a problem, because most people attempt to avoid conflict, so they won’t call people on being obviously derivative and unnecessarily negative.
*AND*, when you DO call people on their behavior, they get defensive and attempt to discuss something other than the facts, because they realize they got busted being the trolls they are.
So What? \o/
The reason I wanted to talk about this is that it’s in your best interests to detect people like this as soon as possible, because they’re generally a waste of your time.
Being that YOU made up anything they’re going to utilize to contribute to the conversation, you can already figure out everything they’re going to say before they say it.
If you say “Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough is used to make cookies”, the person in question is going to say “NO! NO!.. You can use it to make CAKES, too!!!”
The time it takes you to respond to these obvious cries for help from this person who lacks their own sense of personal relevance and self-esteem is time that you could have spent creating something new or interacting with POSITIVE people.
Now, if you’re actually wrong about something, people need to tell you. Definitely. Not only for your own education, but for the education of the people witnessing the conversation.
I’m saying that there are too many people trying to be POSITIVE for you to waste your time on people trying to leech off of your props and make negative statements in an attempt to upgrade their self-esteem.
Follow Bill via Email Subscription | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | Google+ | RSS Feed