🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <01bc00b3$ce5a4660$5580adcf@casper.cwo.com>, 
tiberius@calweb.com says...
> 
> 
> Bigus <bigus@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
> <MPG.d3f774a142c8ec798978a@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
> <snip>
> > When I was fat, everyone told me to loose weight, then I would have 
> > women. When I was skinny, everyone told me to work out, then I would have
> 
> > women. When I was buff, strangely enough, nothing. I was convinced that 
> > my hight was the one unchanging flaw that made me unatractive. Finally, a
> 
> > friend took me aside and told me the truth, I need to learn some social 
> > skills (not that I was rude or crude), learn to dress better (not that I 
> > was a slob), and learn to carry myself better (not that I was a slouch). 
> > I was not unnatractive, I was just not attractive: a zero. Fortunately 
> > this friend had learned the same lessons and passed them along to me. All
> 
> > the efforts I had put into changing my body amounted to nothing, while a 
> > few tiny changes to my behavior changed everything. I have been in better
> 
> > phisical shape, but I have never been called good looking untill 
> > recently.
> > 
> > John
> >
> Hello, John. I appreciate your insight into the development of one's self
> from ground zero: it sounds as if you had a very good and tactful friend
> who was able to point out what they could in terms of your social skills. I
> have been watching your posts in several NGs, and consider you to be one of
> the more insightful and eloquent of netizens.

Thank you Richard, you are most flattering. I was just remarking to a pen 
pal that I didn't think anyone noticed my posts in particular, then I log 
in and find several personal references. It seems that my posts are often 
the last in a thread, and I thought this was because everyone lost 
interest before I did and I was too dense to realize the subject was 
dead. I want dialoge and get monologe. Is it possible there is another 
interpretation? I guess this is part of changing your assumptions, just 
like so many of these threads are now talking about.

This friend, by the way, was tactfull only in the fact that he realized 
it was time to be blunt. He told me flat out that I was doing everything 
badly. I have always detested being patronized, and I have always had 
this unshakable feeling that people were tolerating me and being polite 
as opposed to actualy liking me. So when he told me I had much to learn 
it fit in with my view of the world perfectly: I thought there was some 
secret that everyone knew but I didn't. I questioned his motives for 
"using" the things he tought me, but it was valuable all the same.

> The point of this response is to focus on interpersonal dynamics. While
> people can equip themselves with any number of social accessories and
> compensatory features, some of which can put you in the forefront of the
> pack, in terms of appearance (such as impeccable taste in fashion and
> courtesy) there will always be one or two who lead by a wide margin. Often
> these may even be percieved as retros in some few respects, yet their
> leadership is hardly affected.

Charisma. Most of us follow, few can lead, and noone can lead in all 
areas. You can compinsate for a weakness by working on other things, or 
you can neglect other things by relying totaly on one strength. Watch and 
learn, there is nothing wrong with that in spite of so much advice to the 
contrary. It seems that with technical skills it is taken for granted 
that you must study and practice, but when it comes to interpersonal 
skills (including much of appearance) it seems the prevailing opinion is 
that you must be born with it: either you have it or you don't, you are a 
have or a have not. Not so. As with technical abilities, some learn 
faster than others, are more gifted, but they still learn the skills. 
Social skills must be studied and practiced just like anything else.

> There is a personal dynamism, an engaging personality, which draws
> attention to them as beings to reckon with. It is a matter of poise and
> social courage, a willingness to put their thoroughly considered positions
> and stances into the social arena. The presence and carriage of a dynamic
> individual outshines all else about him or her socially, tact and
> consideration keep these individuals from becoming a boor, and in
> consequence social power gravitates their way, which is one of the primary
> attributes of attractiveness.

What makes you think that a charismatic person has any more considered 
positions than the dork clinging to his shoelaces? A leader is not the 
one with the best plan, s/he is the one who sells a plan to others.

> Why do so many actors become powerful politicians? An actor can speak
> clearly, eloquently, and with a dynamic rhetorical style at once elegant
> and persuasive. He or she can sway people with cadence and presence,
> drawing the audience to his or her point of view simply by presenting it as
> an accessible position. The performer meters what is revealed, allowing
> strategic and provocative points to be exhibited. Their audience wishes
> more detail, and draws near.

Simply put, actors and poloticians are students of human persuasion, 
emotion, motivation and culture. Hitler was a master, as was RR. I have 
always admired the ability some have to tell a story or execute a joke. I 
can't, but the written word is somehow different. Albert Eienstein is the 
ultimate example of one who can present a complex idea in simple, 
graspable terms without external reference or footnotes. In his 
interpersonal skills he was a total desaster.

> 
> The trick, then, is to have prepared your position sufficiently to provide
> a feast of insight, which it appears you, John, have, when they are drwn in
> by the allure of your stand.

Personaly I have no position on anything until I actualy begin writing a 
post. The ones where I have a clear position I don't bother to respond to 
because I already take it for granted. My motivation for writing a 
response is purely personal. I am trying to figure out all this junk 
myself and writing is my tool for doing it. If I give any insight it is 
not what I have written, it is what you have read into it. My arguments 
are ment to persuade me alone, and if they persuade you it is 
entirely coincidental.

I don't know that my views, reccomendations, insights or feelings have 
any practical use to anyone. I have not escaped the well of being a Nice 
Guy, I am only climbing the walls (pun intended). If you were to meet me 
in person you might think very differently.

One final note, to Steve, I don't have any secrets. The simple changes I 
made were the ones I had heard a million times before, I just wasn't 
ready to hear them. It is said that when the student is ready, the 
teacher will come. This is because we are surrounded by teachers at all 
times, but the student is seldom ready. So the trick is not to find the 
ultimate teacher, the trick is to become the ultimate student.

The insights I have found in the newsgroups have been quite remarkable. 
Often the best teachers are those who seem most lost. The best insights 
come not from the middle, but from the fringes or extremes, both 
positive and negative examples. I see myself as being very much in the 
middle.

John