Alt Text
Show parent replies
Also I’ve been thinking about how my social interaction comfortability varies on how many are there. Like one on one can be pretty weird for me, like there’s too much pressure on me to talk. But if I’m really engaging like philosophically w someone and I’m comfortable with
Them (very rare person + dependent on my mood) then it’s one of fav configurations. 2 has some unique dynamics but is mostly similar to 3,4,5,6 in that often I can rely on others to carry if I’m not feeling and can jump in when feeling it. Smaller numbers most requires
More engagement, but if mutual engagement is there it’s more fulfilling and less pressure when speaking, but also less diversity of opinion. Usually though that’s a good thing, as long as it’s self curated people. Otherwise if you get stuck with someone without interesting
Things to say it’s brutal. I’m not exactly sure at what point it’s too many people, and probably there’s some variability, but I think it’s prob around when a facilitator is necessary/expedient. Too much pressure when speaking, enough people so that people with nothing to say
But great willingness to speak are in attendance. Curiously I think this carries over to online as well, although online has extra dynamic where you can’t have small side convos/whispers. I’m sure there’s been plenty of anthro research on this stuff lol. 1on1s I talked about
Earlier today, 2+ others if strangers I’ll usually let others talk to each other first and wait for invitation? Unless someone else shy too or it feels like I’ll have to say first thing. Sometimes I’ll jump in if I feel very confident or if they’re totally missing the point
(Usually in schooling context). Big groups mostly always silent unless prompted, exceptions are weird idk. Also these are all modified if I know 1 person and I’ll just cling lmao