You're viewing a single thread.
I was just thinking the other day how unhealthy it is to think that if someone isn't terminally online they're lame or dumbasses
It's a coping mechanism
If anything it's the reverse. 'Touch grass' has become a thing for a reason.
Get a job that requires you to spend 60+hours of your week offline and you'll quickly realize how mind numbingly boring your coworkers are. That shit incinerates any personality you possess and makes you appreciate how much more interesting those "terminally online" people actually are. You'll not pry anything beyond small talk out of them no matter how hard you try.
You just don't have a good job. That has nothing to do with IRL vs internet. You are around, likely, a bit very large group of people day in and day out and have now decided they represent the world because you haven't stepped outside the world that is your job.
That is the problem, though. There's a certain amount of free time required to be spent conversing if significant ideas are to be conveyed, When I was in university I could talk about wackiest stuff with basically anyone I meet because all of us had enough free time to engage with those ideas. If work snatches that free time away from us, there's not much we can do.
The people you can meet online also exist in the real world and probably in your area. I fail to see any argument here that is an actual rebuttal to the thread. This has nothing to do with free time or otherwise. It has to do with the concept of stereotyping the people you know offline and deciding they don't even exist online and that people who spend all their free time online are somehow advantaged by default.
Stereotyping is foolish. Especially on such a small sample set simply because of outsized exposure.
Get norm-pilled. Touch grass. Grow a garden. Look at the bees! Actually smell the flowers. They're wonderful.