Poll: Compare Amongst Yourselves

[thefourthvine]

makesmewannadie is visiting me, and we got to talking, as we often do. (Okay. Full disclosure: the actual challenge would be making us shut the fuck up.) And one thing we talked about reminded me of a poll I'd considered posting lo these many moons ago, to test a hypothesis that I can't very well tell you beforehand. (Bias is death to informal and statistically skewed LJ polls, my friends.)

So, first, let me just say: hey, it'd be cool if you'd take this poll. I would love you and stuff.

Second - when I say "your friends list," I mean the portion of your friends list that you read regularly - your default reading filter, if you have one, or the whole list if that's how you read. (If you don't read your friends list at all, this poll is not going to be a good fit for you.) My point is, I want you to consider the people you know the best. (Which is not to say you necessarily know them well, of course.) And when I say "the average," I mean your own personally assessed average of this trait over your friends list.

And, seriously, there are no bad answers here. I'm only wondering where you fit into your own mental picture of your friends list for these particular variables. I know you may not have great data for all these questions; just give me your first reaction, and I will of course love you forever.

ETA: Please don't go back to change your answers after you've finished the poll and seen the results! (Unless you think of something you want to add to the text box, or you've decided shoes are more important than almost-cock. Those questions are weighty and take long consideration; I understand that.)



[Poll #931955]

Comments

[cardalia.livejournal.com]

Huh, very interesting, I'll have to come back and see what people think later! I've got my own predictions about the results too, so it'll be interesting to see if they come true. So far a lot of people (including me) are already feeling less creative than anyone else. ;)

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

I have Many Theories that I (of course) don't want to discuss. Yet. But, yeah, I'm bouncing eagerly awaiting these results, and hoping maybe someone will pimp this poll somewhere. (And if you want to comment about your theories, either screened or not, I'd love to hear about them. That would be deeply fascinating, to see what other people are expecting to come of this exercise.)

[odditycollector.livejournal.com]

Re. the last question, have you ever read The Short Happy Life of the Brown Oxford (http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:HV6E89InALwJ:www.dvara.net/HK/IHope.rtf)?

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

I have now. And yay for the shoe! (Normally I'm not a big fan of Dick - wait, that came out wrong. I tend not to enjoy Philip K. Dick's writing, so I haven't read a whole bunch of his stories. But that, I enjoyed. Thank you!)

[ldthomps.livejournal.com]

I haven't looked at other people's answers yet, but my general understanding is that Most folks feel like they're poorer, harder working, more ethical, etc., than Most Everybody Else. On the other hand, friends lists are made of people whom, most probably, we view as Like ourselves, so. Hunh! Interesting! I shall await answers, and the unveiling of your hypothesis and how this all informs it!

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

That's the interesting part of it - sure, Every Person might think he's poorer, smarter, more ethical, etc. than Everybody Else, but our friends list - we actually know something about them, about their lives. And we select them for ourselves. So I'm predicting the results will be - well, different.

*unreasonably fascinated*

[apatheia-jane.livejournal.com]

So, the majority of people feel they are less sexually active & less creative than their flist.

Although, if most fans are lurkers, but most of their flist is made up of BNFs, the "less creative" might actually be statistically possible.

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

I do think it's interesting that nearly everyone so far thinks other people are having more sex. And the lurker factor is another interesting point, but then, if you're answering a poll, are you really a lurker? (If a lurker clicks on a radio button, but no one hears him, is he still a lurker?)

[foreverdirt.livejournal.com]

Heeh, this was fun! I do that thing where I only tend to compare myself to people I perceive to be better than me in that area, so it was kind of calming to compare myself with a whole bunch of disparate people I know and like, rather than just the half dozen who produce epic, hand-illustrated stories in seven languages while studying to be doctors and volunteering in orphanages.

(As a mathematician I know puts it, he is, of course, the worst mathematician in the world -- those other people who are worse than him at maths? Terribly nice people, of course, but not what you'd call mathematicians, exactly.)

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

(Have I mentioned to you lately that I love that icon? Because I do. <3!)

I do that thing where I only tend to compare myself to people I perceive to be better than me in that area, so it was kind of calming to compare myself with a whole bunch of disparate people I know and like, rather than just the half dozen who produce epic, hand-illustrated stories in seven languages while studying to be doctors and volunteering in orphanages.

I agree. Although I was kind of surprised at some of my own responses. (And, you know, I made the poll - you'd think I'd at least know what to expect from my own answers. But I didn't, not in every case.)

As a mathematician I know puts it, he is, of course, the worst mathematician in the world -- those other people who are worse than him at maths? Terribly nice people, of course, but not what you'd call mathematicians, exactly.

This is a standard feature of mathematicians everywhere. They will also all tell you that they are, at best, mediocre at math. (Because, of course, they know precisely how much they don't know.) And very often the best ones will insist they aren't actually mathematicians at all.

I love numbers, but I love mathematicians more.

[ratcreature]

I'm kind of confused: where is the first part if this is part two?

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

Here (http://thefourthvine.livejournal.com/63953.html). This is part two in a long-planned, long-delayed series of polls. The first was sanity by consensus. This is - well, it was supposed to be normalcy by consensus, but it mutated. Possibly I should change the subject of it entirely.

*ponders*

[alixtii.livejournal.com]

Hmm, this could measure fen's perceptions of themselves as below or above "average"--or it could measure whether fen on your flist are below or above the average of feb on their flist.

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

Well, my hope is that this will be pimped by people, and then maybe I'll get a selection of folks not on my friends list, too. But, yeah - it's surely not a random sample of fandom, and we'll mostly find out what people who read me think about how they compare to their own friends lists.

[lilacsigil.livejournal.com]

This is fascinating - after filling out the poll, I went back and thought about what my answers would be if I happened to compare myself to offline friends or my local community. My answers would be totally different. Except for the Queen Anne Chair.

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

See, yeah, that's it exactly. One of the things MMWD and I were talking about is how different our answers would be if we didn't have LJ. Because LJ is by no means a cross-section of life, but at least for me it does provide a healthier range for some of the categories listed above, if that makes sense. I get to know about the lives of people I'd normally never meet, and that means my perception of what is average has changed enormously since I got here. Which fascinates me.

[miriam-heddy.livejournal.com]

Generally, I think I read my flist for empathy--to see I'm not alone. So I tend to feel about average in most respects. I suspect that this is somewhat gendered.

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

Oh my god, that's such an interesting point, and one I didn't even consider while making this poll: what we use our friends list for, why we read it, what we're hoping for - that's all a big part of this.

Not one I can probably easily poll on, though.

But still, it's a fascinating point. (Like, I know I want, and try, to read people who are different from each other - it's one of the things I'm hoping for from my LJ experience. But I also know that my baseline selection criteria (like, "must not write LJ in l33t") mean I don't do a very good job of making my friends list diverse.)

[gloss]

makesmewannadie is visiting me, and we got to talking, as we often do
OTP, yay!

I'm really intrigued by these results.

[norah.livejournal.com]

OTP WHEEEE!

Am home now, safely. Almost teared up pulling away from the curb, though. Leaving is the worst part of visiting, woe.

[wychwood]

This is hilarious :) 67% of respondents think they're less sexually-active than the average of their flist? What does that say about how much we talk about stuff? *g*

(PS I totally have to confess that I think I'm smarter than most people, but my flist is fiendishly intelligent, so I'm "as smart" or "less smart" than it)

I look forward to seeing your analysis of all this! :)

[wychwood]

PPS On richness: I said "average", but - well, ok, I'm totally broke and I have no income at all, so I'm poor, but I'm living at home funded by my parents, so I'm not worrying about money so much, which makes me relatively well-off. So that's very much an "it depends" question.

[watergal.livejournal.com]

I'd prefer not to admit how long I pondered what it meant to be more or less normal than average. ::clicks on "less smart"::

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

I think that actually means you're smarter than average. Because it's an amusing question, and also a weird one - after all, the key message of stats is that no one is actually normal, right?

[derien.livejournal.com]

There isn't really any way to link the results of each answer to each other, is there? With these polls we don't know if the same people who feel that they are less normal are also the same people who feel they are more successful (choosing two at random).

[cimness.livejournal.com]

The results are visible to thefourthvine, so she could track the statistics about it if she wanted to.

[celli]

I seriously stopped dead at the "success" question and stared at it for several minutes in shame before giving in and clicking "more." I have to call my sister and tell her all her lectures about women not wanting to admit they're either ambitious or happy with their achievements in life may have a point. At least for me. Because that was a really hard question to answer truthfully.

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

*cheers for you*

*also cheers for your sister*

Because that was a really hard question to answer truthfully.

It's interesting - it's that one and the smartness one that are hanging people up, in terms of not wanting to say "yeah, smarter, yeah, more succesful." (I notice no one seems to have a problem with admitting to being less anything, though, and I'm betting if my study group was mostly male that would be different.) And, you know, I should've expected that, but I really didn't.

[misspamela.livejournal.com]

Wow, these are the hard questions first thing in the morning!

I think the "sexually active" question reflects whether or not people are partnered: I am partnered and you are partnered, so I assume we're having similar amounts of sex, whereas I assume that the single people on my flist are having little or no sex. Which is, of course, a pretty poor assumption to make.

The attractive thing is tricky. Veerrrrry tricky.

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

I am here to challenge you! (Well, okay, no, I'm mostly here to pimp porn to you, but "challenge you" sounds better, I think. *considers modifying LJ mission statement*)

I am partnered and you are partnered, so I assume we're having similar amounts of sex, whereas I assume that the single people on my flist are having little or no sex. Which is, of course, a pretty poor assumption to make.

One of the odd things I've learned in the past few years - although mostly through RL as opposed to LJ - is that - well, okay. I also used to assume that that if you were partnered, you were having fairly regular, satisfying sex, unless there was a problem, like one of you had just had a baby or hip surgery or something. But then I found out that, no, actually a lot of my partnered friends (and especially, oddly enough, Best Beloved's partnered friends) are not having sex. I first discovered this because one of BB's friends expressed shock that we are still having sex. And said friend was herself partnered at the time, and had been for six years, and had not had sex for five of them.

BB and I were stunned by this revelation, but the friend didn't think it was really that strange.

But since then, more and more often, we've been getting the, "You're married and still having sex thing?" And part of that is that people expect lesbians not to have sex, but part of it is just - these days, lots of people in long-term relationships, whether gay or straight, seem not to have sex. (There was even a cover story in, I think, the New Yorker several years ago on just this topic.)

So, my long-winded point is: I don't assume that partnered means having sex anymore.

The attractive thing is tricky. Veerrrrry tricky.

I admit, I'm really curious about how that turns out, because I have a definite opinion on this even though I've hardly seen any of my friends list.

Success

[hossgal.livejournal.com]

Veeeeerrryyy interesting.

What went through my mind was a consideration of which of those bothered me - for instance (and speaking only for me) it chafes (in the mild, *really*, don't you have something bigger to worry about besides yourself manner) that I am (imo) less creative than many people on my flist. But being less rich, less sexually active or less kinky is leaving me with a great lack of concern. *shrugs*

What would be v. interesting is if we could see what the average concept of "successful" is - is fangirl A, who posts medeocure fic twice a year in an obscure fandom where no one knows her pen name, much less recs her stuff, yet has a high status (and high-paying) job (that she loves) a spouse and a darling baby that she thinks hung the moon all by his little lonesome -

- is she more or less "successful" than fangirl B, who is at 27 living at home again with parents she hates, in the typing pool at a faceless company, changing sig-o's faster than her lj format (*and* weeping into her beer about it) and yet putting out three or four thousand words of highly popular prose weekly, to such massive response that she can't ever respond to all the feedback?

And yes, I've picked a couple of extreme examples here, but I am wondering what "we" consider "successful" - perhaps it would be interesting to ask "are you more successful than your flist in fannish terms" and "are you more successful than your flist in real life terms" and see if there is a difference in responses.

- hg

Re: Success

[ratcreature]

Huh. It never even occurred to me that "successful" could be applied to fandom rather than RL.

eta

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

I ended up with average way too many times, b/c my flist is wide and varied. The fact that a large number of my flist are not in relationships makes me probably have sex more than they do (if we define it as having another consciousness engaged in the act :) but at the same time being in a 15 year heteronormative relationship makes me probably have much less sex than the more adventurous and sex positive parts of my flist...

And so it goes for pretty much everything. I'm fairly open, I'd argue, share my name etc under flock at least, but looking at the folks who have a play by play of their daily lives, I'm clearly not open like they are...

Few things I can say for certain is: I'm less creative (as in 0 is definitive less than just about anything :) and probably more stable than many (though that's also a function of age, of course!)

And I want the average that ratcreature proposes above...b/c then I think my answers might be slightly different???

Re: eta

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

See, for a lot of things it turned out my friends list pretty much extended along a range, but sometimes I was in the middle and sometimes I wasn't. And sometimes I realized my friends list is range-restricted for a given variable. Which is fascinating - I mean, obviously, I'm selecting for that variable pretty strongly, and I didn't know it until I took this poll myself.

And I want the average that ratcreature proposes above...b/c then I think my answers might be slightly different?

Interesting. Out of curiosity, how do you think they might be different?

[eveningblue.livejournal.com]

1. I love your polls.

2. The only place I answered something other than "average" was in the financial column. People on my f-list are churning out 10-50 stories, vids, icons, whatevers a year, and I do, like, one. I don't ascribe this to lack of creativity, though, I ascribe it to having to work a lot, and not having much time for fun hobby stuff. I know the job/professions of about 5 people on my f-list; the rest never say, so I'm assuming that at least some of them either don't have jobs or have part-time jobs because their families are financially secure enough for them to do so.

This is all an assumption on my part, because honestly I have no idea how so many people have so much time for fannish activities. Oh, and all the cons! Cons are not cheap, yet some people go to two or three a year!

3. This leads me to reaffirm something that most of us probably already know: we're much more willing to talk about sex than to talk about money.

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

I love your polls.

Thank you! (And also, yay, and also thank you so much for saying that, because I always feel like Spam Queen of the Universe when I post them, especially when it's my fourth post in three days.)

This is all an assumption on my part, because honestly I have no idea how so many people have so much time for fannish activities.

I wonder that, too. I mean, I'm so bad at answering comments, keeping up with my friends list - basically, I have time for the community side of fandom, the organized side, or the creative side. But not all three. So I have my fannish priorities set and I use my fannish time in order of priorities and just accept that, hey, I'll never win at fandom the way some folks do. (Although a secret resentful part of me is convinced that those people have access to a Time Turner or a 48-hour day, and they are not sharing, which is obviously wrong and mean of them.)

This leads me to reaffirm something that most of us probably already know: we're much more willing to talk about sex than to talk about money.

Ohhhh, yeah. (Although that's not a bad thing; I mean, sex is just fun, mostly, whereas money, in our world, is a Real Big Deal, and that's if you have enough of it. If you don't have enough, money is a Real Big Deal to the power of 1000.)

[monroe-nell.livejournal.com]

Wow. Hm. I feel like I should explain my answers, except that I know even if the answers aren't factually real, they feel emotionally correct since I'm going through a rough patch.

re: sex - *snickers* It would be hard for the flist to have less sex than me. Unless they are all virgins, in which case it's equal. On the other hand - I was/have been in HP fandom for 7 years, so it's hard to get more kinkier than me. *pets HP fandom*

re: finicially stable - poor college student. Half the flist is also poor college students and than the other half are older folk with jobs. So that one is a bit... flip a coin and am I less or same :-p

and I am the least normal person in EXISTANCE.

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

I feel like I should explain my answers, except that I know even if the answers aren't factually real, they feel emotionally correct since I'm going through a rough patch.

*hugs* on the rough patch. And no need to justify your answers, although you're encouraged to talk about them if you want to.

It would be hard for the flist to have less sex than me. Unless they are all virgins, in which case it's equal.

Somewhere in these comments, there's a virgin age battle going on - people are reporting in that they are virgins at 24, 26, 27, whatever. (I assume the winner will get a prize, and I must admit I'm curious about what it will be.) So, yeah, lots of virgins in these parts.

and I am the least normal person in EXISTANCE.

*formally challenges you for that title*

[dzurlady.livejournal.com]

This is weird. Lots of them I didn't have much trouble with, some I had to think, and the two about happiness and stability were really hard. I have some unhappy and unstable people on my flist, and normally I feel quite happy and stable, but lately not so much, and I'm trying to work out just how unhappy/unstable I am, and if I am at all, when I shouldn't be, really, and... blah blah blah. Anyway, I can't really answer because I don't know the answer myself at the moment. :(
I compared myself more to the flisters I know better, to make it easier.

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

(Hey. You two promised to use only your default icons when commenting with me! Although the cow is so damn cute that I don't have the heart to complain, especially since I'm getting so much better at telling you apart.)

This is weird.

I, too, found it a very weird exercise.

normally I feel quite happy and stable, but lately not so much,

Honey, with what's going on in your life - um, well, I've been in similar territory, and so I feel like I can say with authority that it's proof that your normal state is happy and stable if you're managing to deal at all right now.

I'm trying to work out just how unhappy/unstable I am, and if I am at all, when I shouldn't be, really

It's important to figure that out, yeah, especially when it's a change for you, from how you normally feel. But - wait, did you say you shouldn't feel unhappy or unstable right now? I read your LJ, you know. No way am I going to buy that statement from you, even if I bought into the "should" thing at all when it comes to feelings. (My belief: it doesn't matter how you should feel, only how you do feel, and getting hung up on how you should feel only makes it harder to deal with how you do feel.)

*sigh* I went into lecture mode, didn't I? Sorry.

*vows to leave hugs, not lectures, in the future*

[fictionbya.livejournal.com]

Almost all average. Less stable and less open. I am not sure in what sense you meant stable and open, but I took it as having stability in your life (settled, career, kid, that sort of thing) and open as in willing to share Real Life stuff with your flist. I think I make RL posts less frequently than the flist and rarely go into deep personal stuff.

That's about it.

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

(Your icon made me giggle, by the way.)

I am not sure in what sense you meant stable and open, but I took it as having stability in your life (settled, career, kid, that sort of thing) and open as in willing to share Real Life stuff with your flist.

I meant whatever you mean by stable. Like, for myself, I used a much more internal defintion - yeah, partly to do with being settled in life, but also in terms of emotional/mental stability.

I think I make RL posts less frequently than the flist and rarely go into deep personal stuff.

Probably true, although I'm always happy when you do make one - it's nice to hear how you're doing! But then, I am in no position to talk about RL posts. (I scored myself as "less open," and the sad part is, I'm so, so much more open than I was when I started on LJ.)

[sdwolfpup.livejournal.com]

I feel like I have to clarify two of my answers. :)

For the more/less/average sexually active question, I did a mental median of my friendslist who actually talks about this, because I seem to have mostly the extreme - people who are having a lot of sex and people who are having none, so I lumped myself in with the people who are in a committed relationship and probably having average amounts.

And for the 'more/less/average normal' question, I took that to mean normal among livejournalers rather than normal by American society standards. I think, given my job and husband and plan to have kids, I'm likely on the more normal towards society scale than others, so if that's what you meant, I can change that answer.

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

I seem to have mostly the extreme - people who are having a lot of sex and people who are having none, so I lumped myself in with the people who are in a committed relationship and probably having average amounts.

I tended to think of "committed long-term relationship + regular sex = above average," myself, but that could just be my weirdness.

I think, given my job and husband and plan to have kids, I'm likely on the more normal towards society scale than others, so if that's what you meant, I can change that answer.

I wanted whatever you meant by the term, so your answer works perfectly. Thanks!

[darthfox.livejournal.com]

I actually feel no need to qualify my answer on the "sexually-active" question, because when you're measuring the time since you got laid in years, it's a fair bet that most people are having more sex than you are. I'm just sayin.

I chose "more normal" as a measure of my ability and willingness to blend in with non-fans when necessary.

On "more/less stable", I wasn't sure what that meant, really -- I left it blank and came back to it at the end. I thought it might mean financially stable, but then reflected that there was a financial solvency question right before it, so I decided it referred to emotional stability. Not sure if that's right, though. (And there wasn't a "confidence" question for me to answer "oh, much less", which would apply to my level of certainty about almost all the rest of the questions. [g])

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

I actually feel no need to qualify my answer on the "sexually-active" question, because when you're measuring the time since you got laid in years, it's a fair bet that most people are having more sex than you are. I'm just sayin.

Well, except that most people seem to be thinking that, so, hey, something's up there. (Oh, wow. That was, like, the Worst Unintentional Double Entendre Ever, and I'm only leaving it in to torture us both.)

Not sure if that's right, though.

I wanted people to use their own definitions of the terms in question, so, yup, totally right.

And there wasn't a "confidence" question for me to answer "oh, much less", which would apply to my level of certainty about almost all the rest of the questions.

Ohhhh, man. Now I wish so much that there had been a confidence question, because - yeah. That would be a fascinating variable.

[isiscolo.livejournal.com]

Hee, all I can think of is that this is Virtual Wobegon, where all of us children are above average! Or maybe below, depending on the question.

Like a previous commenter, "more/less normal" as a concept gave me a moment's pause.

Hee.

[fabularasa.livejournal.com]

Virtual Wobegon!!! If there was ever a good candidate for journal title, it's that. And while I'm thinking about it, what is the ETA for your departure?

[minim_calibre]

I have a co-sleeping toddler. I always assume everyone's gettin' more than me.

Esp. if one counts solo acts of affection, which I do.

My Flist leaves me in a constant state of wonder at the things they can create. Therefore, I'm going to assume I'm slightly less creative than they are. (Or perhaps that I can't see my own skills and abilities with any clarity--which, okay, that's why I always test out as borderline autistic on those screeners.)

Oh, and I consider myself to be a worse-than-average driver. Unlike the majority of people.

[thefourthvine.livejournal.com]

I have a co-sleeping toddler. I always assume everyone's gettin' more than me.

You know, I've often wondered about that, how people with co-sleeping kids have sex. Apparently the answer is: they mostly don't. (But then, with small kids, you mostly don't anyway, so.)

Esp. if one counts solo acts of affection, which I do.

Hah! Finally someone who does! Because people have been saying, "I'm not at all sexually active, because I'm a virgin," and I'm like, "...But you can be sexually active without a partner. Right? Right?" Although I suppose I was doomed, using that phrase, because it's what doctors ask during yearly checkups. I mean, when they say, "Are you sexually active?" they aren't asking about solo endeavors.

Oh, and I consider myself to be a worse-than-average driver. Unlike the majority of people.

I consider myself to be a worse-than-average driver - that was pretty much settled for me during driver's ed, where I did something so notorious that the teachers were still talking about it ten years later - but I also firmly believe that all the other cars on whatever stretch of road I'm on are clearly there just to annoy me. I know I'm not the greatest driver in the world, or even average, but I'm still not giving an inch in terms of appreciating anyone else's driving behavior, either.