3 Kinds of People, One Big Problem
Hey fellow ATS members,
Recently I’ve been mulling around this idea for a thread, regarding the types of people I see today on message board sand in real life. The way
they absorb and then use information interests me greatly. The way that they vocalize their opinions, or wait for somebody else to do it for them has
also been a big part of it.
I figured with the new site up and running, maybe a nice long read would be a good start to a new format.
So, today I’m going to just really talk about my personal opinion of these kinds of people, and how the one you least expect, is probably the most
dangerous of all.
The talker is the guy or gal who knows a little bit about everything, and nothing about anything. They make declarative statements and
generalizations where they do not apply. This kind of person serves the purpose of informing people about very complex issues, in a manner that is
simple, yet incorrect most of the time.
An example of this kind of person is Alex Jones. Shock and awe are a big part of how these people operate and using buzz words and scary rhetoric are
often the two things they use the most. They also use their opponent’s comments regarding this behavior, as proof that their information and or
opinion is correct, because why would anybody argue with them so hard if it wasn’t?
The problem with the talker is they often fall within the “extremist” category when it comes to their politics or general views about things.
They are often entrenched ideologically in one camp or another and any mention of change regarding their beliefs is seen as an attack on the group as
The Talker seeks to convert you to their line of thinking by any means necessary. It doesn’t matter if the subject matter is presented in a manner
that is intellectually dishonest to the other side or the reader themselves, as long as the extremist view point is put forward.
The Talker is often politically active, but in the minority.
The informant is the person who reads religiously. They consume information at a pace that most people simply do not have the time for, or can’t
physically consume in the time they have to do so.
The informant is careful to always try and provide as much information, from both sides in order for you, the reader to make your own decision based
on the facts. Because they do this, the informant often does not play on their own opinions and beliefs on the subject matter at hand, but other
people’s analysis. The use of academic and scientific sources is common for the informant and they always warn, quite obviously when what they are
providing is their own personal opinion, or belief, as to not muddy the waters between those, and the facts being presented.
The Informant is not likely to be active in politics or issues of note in the community or at large. They favor providing information and hoping that
somebody else takes that, and creates change from it.
The observer is the one without an opinion. The observer wants to be told what to think and how to act by those they have chosen to place on
pedestals. The reasoning behind this is often different, but it usually has little to do with that person’s qualifications or good ideas. It’s
usually because somebody told them that this person should be listened to.
This is not to say that they are sheep or stupid, or un-educated. The main reason for somebody becoming an observer is simply time management and
social behavior. They simply do not have the time, or the interest or the circle of social connections that would encourage the discussion and
research of ideas and information.
The Observer however absorbs information at a rate usually more impressive than the Informant. The problem is that they are usually paying attention
to the Talker. And the information received from them is so trivial in most cases without further research, that it causes this very very huge
The problem is that the Observer is the most active kind of person in politics or in other social venues. They don’t vocalize their opinions or
their beliefs, but they sure do vote in droves. The vote and they make decisions in their lives, based on information, which is mostly from sources
that are dubious, over simplified or simply wrong.
They talk amongst themselves in hushed tones and are very careful to do it away from Talkers or Informants. They are the most exclusive and
separatist group of the 3 I am discussing.
Who are we?
Most of us here are Informants. Some of us here are Talkers, but hardly any of us are Observers. Those who lurk the forums, create an account but
never post, these are the people who are making decisions in the world.
That’s why it’s important to remember that what you write here, and say in real life effects other people in ways that you may not understand. A
passing comment to an Observer, can change their entire outlook on any given subject in most cases.
In a way, all of us fall into the 3 categories, depending on the subject matter at hand. We all believe we are experts in certain fields and we’ll
act like Talkers when we do think so. When we are learning about something and wishing to share that information, we will act as Informants.
Yet when we want to just listen and absorb information from other Informants, more often than not, we end up being Observers, but our observations
differ from the norm. We will argue and debate and somebody is going to be proven wrong in the end.
Observers live in the echo chamber and so do Talkers. We, the majority, the moderate, the Informative Observer
as I like to call it, are then
caught in the crossfire. Caught between those who yell alarming things from the rooftops and the people below who don’t bother to realize they just
want attention, who subsequently listen to those people and make life worse for us all.
I guess the lesson here is be mindful of what you absorb, what you say and what you give to others.