Showerthoughts

30692 readers

565 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted, clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts: 1

Rules

All posts must be showerthoughts
The entire showerthought must be in the title
No politics
- If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
- A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
- If you feel strongly that you want politics back, please volunteer as a mod.
Posts must be original/unique
Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

vatlark

forkball

Thekingoflorda

Every semi-natural group of considerable size has rotten apples. (sopuli.xyz)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/showerthoughts

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

One way groups can be classified is the naturality of forming the group.

Naturally forming groups of people acting in pure interest in other members just might be able to force out unfavorable members. Such as friend groups.

On another end there is very artificial groups. I would consider astronauts these. Enough options and time to pick out the well- fitting ones.

But on the valley there is the majority of the groups, which are grouped around agenda, be it idea, hobby or profession. Coppers, locksporters, religious groups, Swedes and men named Tom. When the focus is not in the internal nor external selection of members, but gathering around a mutual thing or task, there will be unfit members.

Thus it's not matter of 'if', but rather 'when' and 'how do we react?'

TL;DR: Groups with common interest are susceptible to unfit people.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 months ago (4 children)

My own private theory is that of any larger group of people, approx. 30% are complete and utter twats.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

In my experience it depends. Sometimes the twat to non-twat ratio is closer to 50/50. Sometimes 80% of them are utter twats. At every workplace it's like there are entire political parties of different types of twats all being twats to everyone, sometimes even other twats.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

See, your theory fits within the framework of OP's. OP is suggesting that, in friend and highly-competitive groups, the twat-ratio is much lower, say in the lower tenth percentile. In OP's "valley" of interest and professional groups, the ratio may be closer to your 50:50.

So, we could form a Unified Twat Theory, where the ratio of twats-to-competence is inversely proportional to the severity of the selection criteria.

I leave the proof as an exercise for a grad student.

[–] OneLemmyMan 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I would go the other way around but maybe im the twat and that's why. Man, this made me reevaluate.

[–] agent_flounder 2 points 10 months ago

This guy again?

(Kidding...

wait... maybe I'm the twat. ...crap)

[–] Anticorp 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

That's because 30% of people are complete and utter twats, and two thirds of the remaining people aren't great either.