thefourthvine | Poll: Compare Amongst Yourselves

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. ;)

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.)

Sexually active, that is. Ignore the repetition. *g*

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)?

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!)

Me neither, to be honest. But I always crack up at "There's a shoe in it," he said.

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!

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*

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.

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?)

Well, for example I checked that I have "less sex" because there's a definite dearth of *any* kind of sex in my life, and I figure that "no sex" is always bound to be less than the "average" even if a number of other people also may not have sex, even if the *majority* also had no sex (unlikely, but I guess everybody who never mentions their sex life or lack thereof could be like me and not have one atm), because I know that at least some of f-list is in steady relationships and those are bound to have some sex, so the "average" would still be "some sex" even if the standard deviation might be so high as to render that "average" not that useful, because in that hypothetical case most would have no sex with some having regular sex, and nobody would have the "a little sex" that would be the average. Does that make sense?

Yup. You're thinking in terms of numerical average. Like, if Friend A is having no sex, Friend B is having no sex, Friend C is having sex four times a week, and Friend D is having no sex, then the mean is once a week, and A, B, and D are below average.

But the other way of looking at that same data, of course, is the median and the mode are both 0, so in actuality, A, B, and D are average and C is above average. (Probably I weighted towards the first view by using the word "average" in the poll.)

Either way, an interesting data point. (And, of course, it could just be one of those things: everyone assumes everyone else is having more sex. Which is really easy to assume if you're having no sex, but even if you're just having less sex than usual, or less than you think you "should" have, stuff like that, it would still be easy to assume you're below average.)

Yeah, when I think "average" I don't think of a median in mymind. I mean, I've mostly done statistics in physics and in the usual cases you want a meaningful average with a standard deviation (and possibly even try to justify kicking out data points that are too extremely skewed to make sense as some kind of error or abberation if they'd mess up your standard deviation too badly *g*) and not the kind of skewed data sets for which I understand median is used.

*nods*

I don't think most (as in, the vast majority, and the only reason I'm not saying that no one does is that I've known some very strange statisticians in my time) people think median for average - but then, one of the points of this exercise was how you defined average, first time through. You think of averages in terms of numbers, and normally so do I, but I realized while taking this that that wasn't how I was judging these things at all. It was really interesting.

Wait, was I doing this wrong? I thought we were supposed to be using a perceived numerical average, because if we're going by the second model, all my answers would be different. As it is, I think once you take the handful of people on my flist who are way more successful, creative, etc. than I am and then the handful who I like but always think wow, reading this is like looking at a cautionary trainwreck, those two extremes cancel each other out, and that was my thought process while answering these questions.

You were doing it entirely right, because what I really wanted was for you to use however you defined average - perceived numerical, in your case.

As it is, I think once you take the handful of people on my flist who are way more successful, creative, etc. than I am and then the handful who I like but always think wow, reading this is like looking at a cautionary trainwreck, those two extremes cancel each other out, and that was my thought process while answering these questions.

*nods*

I wonder if all friends lists have these kinds of extremes. And I wonder what weight we're giving those extremes when we answer these questions. Oh, LJ Poll, why will you not allow more exhaustive statistical analysis? And interviewing selected subjects? And possibly also the answers to life, the universe, and everything?

Oh, I was thinking of a numerical average too. If we're using the median, my answers would be different on a couple.

I wanted people to use whatever they thought of when they thought of average, so whatever you used was right. ("What We Think About When We Think About Average" would be a great title for a book. Although, sadly, it would likely be a self-help book, and I'd want it to be a stats book. *sad*)

It would also be a great name for a band.

Also, could I maybe use it for a story title? You got me all thinky and stuff and now I have this average plot bunny.

Also, could I maybe use it for a story title? You got me all thinky and stuff and now I have this average plot bunny.

Of course! (And cool!)

(And you gave me a title for a piece of meta that, sadly, I will never write. But oh how I want someone else to write "The Typical Plot Bunny: A Survey of the Species.")

And, of course, it could just be one of those things: everyone assumes everyone else is having more sex.

Or people on people's flists talk about the sex they're having a lot. :D

The "less sexually active" was the statistic that drew my attention as well.
Maybe it's that people lie in their text posts but are willing to be truthful in ticky-boxes?

Or, else, we've all read so much fan fiction that we've gotten to the point where we think if we're not in a BDSM foursome, we have boring sex lives?

That's it exactly. I mean, really, I'm having sex on a fairly regular basis, but it's in a bed with sheets and a quilt on top and doesn't involve feathers or Karo syrup, black leather, gun oil, or puddlejumpers, so it doens't really count.

Which, when typed out like that, is incredibly stupid, but as requested, I'll not go back and change my answer.

See, this is why this poll is so interesting. Because I'm also having good sex on a regular basis, though it doesn't involve feathers, Karo syrup (thank god), black leather, gun oil, or puddlejumpers, and I considered that "more sexually active."

(And thank you for resisting the temptation to change your answers. I know half the time with polls I do that, and I really do want people's first reactions, here.)

I think it may be more that we tend to hear about sex people are having, if that makes sense. If three people post about having sex all the time, and everyone else is silent on the subject, what we think of when asked about sexual activity is those three people.

Of course, my own theory doesn't work on my friends list, where people are very vocal about the sex they're not having.

Hmmm.

Or very vocal about the sex *other* people are having, which seems to be a common theme on my flist.

("And then I realized why the ceiling was shaking and OH MY GOD.")

"All I did was walk into the living room and now I'm TRAUMATIZED FOREVER OH GOD MY EYES."

Yeah, I see that on my friends list from time to time, too. (And I also once lived in an apartment complex that - well, it was sort of built around a courtyard, and the courtyard echoed, and all I can say is that one woman did not need the echo to help carry her glad tidings, if you see what I'm saying, but it certainly ratcheted things up to operatic scale for her. This was particularly bad in hot weather, when everyone had windows open. I mean, yay for sex, but I think you should somehow manage to be less noisy and disruptive than cats in heat. (There was a theory in the building that she was just making the noise for entertainment purposes, with no sex involved. That would have made sense, because I have heard many an orgasm in my time and none has been quite that - um.))

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.)

(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.

Howdy. I came over here from

foreverdirt's journal to fill out your poll. I'm not a mathematician, but I like to think medievalists are decent folk too.

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

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*

Ah. It's just since there was no link to that (and that was months ago, so I had forgotten about it) I assumed the first part must have been recent and I missed it.

(Those are adorable lurkers supporting you in email, by the way. They are just about the cutest lurkers ever, in fact. *pats lurkers*)

I actually changed the title of the post, at any rate, because this isn't quite the poll I had planned as part of the consensus series, and in any case, you're right - it's very confusing, coming so long after the first part. I think this one is better. I hope, anyway.

(Those are adorable lurkers supporting you in email, by the way. They are just about the cutest lurkers ever, in fact. *pats lurkers*)

Heh, yeah, it's too bad they're kind of shy...

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.)

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.)

I think it can be very diverse even if your criteria is "must be literate". After all, there's no point in being diverse just to be diverse if it makes you claw your eyes out. XD

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

I'm really intrigued by these results.

OTP WHEEEE!

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

Awww. I miss you, and you've been gone less than 12 hours. But - *snuffles*.

(Although it probably would've helped if you'd been able to sneak out silently in the night. But, alas, sleep is one of those things you can't ever expect me to do properly. And, hee - I should totally have put that on the quiz: "Compared to your friends list, are you more well-rested/as well-rested as the average/more sleep-deprived?")

No, it was perfect - I was glad to see you again and get one! more! hug! and blither at you for another minute or two half-asleep. I wish wish wish we lived closer. I got home and...well. See my journal for how well my day is going. There's a reason I never talk about my problems - because then I THINK about my problems, and then they bother me. :-/ AVOIDANCE IS TOTALLY A VALID LIFESTYLE CHOICE. *ostrich*

(LESS RESTED OMG. OMFG. Though you certainly bring down the mean!)

\S< is the new emoticon of choice for all the cool kids...

OTP totally yay, except that now she is gone again. *sad*

I'm really intrigued by these results.

Me, too. Like, there are questions where I expected to see massive skew and I'm totally seeing a bell curve, and others I expected not to skew at all and yet they do. I am gripped! Statistics has fixed me with its mesmerizing stare!

Holy Hell.

Slathering you with ICON LOOOOVE!

(That is one of the Hernandez Bros., yes? Eeeep!)

Hee, yes! That's Jaime's Maggie and Hopey.

Here, have another Hopey, this time with sneering lip-curl action (because it makes her *even* cuter).

::wibbles brokenly::

Oh... Esparancita. I've been looking for a Maggie of my very own since I was a raucous baby trollop on the Oxnard streets. And yet, I have never found one. Of course, these days I'd have to say I have a lot more in common with Izzy than I do with Hopey--particularly in the way I commiserate with my bookshelves :-)

Thank you for making my day in a spectacularly nostalgic way!

Heartbroken Tambien--
Aristide

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! :)

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.

That's interesting; I wondered, looking at that question, how many people were talking about background (in other words, socioeconomic class - "I come from people who are poor/rich/middle class/whatever"), how many were talking about current living situation (whether or not the relative comfort of that is determined by someone else's finances), and how many were talking about, you know, the numbers in the accounts with their names on it.

Oh, polls. Why do you always leave me wanting to do three thousand more polls? Poll proliferation: one of the greatest threats to our modern LJ community.

I was thinking about being financially comfortable, versus people who worry about making rent or never have spare cash for non-essentials. Not socioeconomic class, which I suspect evens out somewhat because of the barriers to entering LJ: regular access to a computer, and means of getting online.

LOL. I had the same response. I have no problem claiming I'm smarter than most people I encounter in everyday life and my degrees may support that (though then again my practical intelligence is pretty nil :). But given that on last count I had over 50 fellow academics on my flist, I feel happily average indeed :D

Ah, the selection bias at work. *grins*

(Although, you know, I had a really hard time estimating my intelligence as compared to my friends list. I know studies have shown we're supposed to be good at that, but I personally suck at it. That was one of the hardest questions for me - I kept wafffling between average and below average.)

(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 actually thought I was pretty smart until I discovered fandom . . .

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?

I think it says we talk more about sex we're having than sex we're not having, maybe?

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

*grins*

Then you're probably right. Studies have shown that people can estimate the intelligence of others in ordinary conversation with startling accuracy, especially in general categories of "smarter than me" and "less smart than me." I do wonder, though - lots of people are saying they didn't want to say they were smarter than their friends list, even if they thought they were. So that stat is way skewed, I think.

I look forward to seeing your analysis of all this!

I look forward to figuring out my analysis of all this. Shiny, shiny data to process!

Am I really conceited for being willing to say I think I'm smarter than the average of my friendslist? There are some brilliant people on there, some less so, some median, but I really do think that on average I'm smarter. And I didn't even have to think about it for too long.

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"::

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?

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).

The results are visible to

thefourthvine, so she could track the statistics about it if she wanted to.

Cim's right that I could, in fact, track that if I wanted to. But, sadly, LJ does not offer poll data in any kind of downloadable form, and hand-coding this many responses would be - well, more work than I'm willing to do without being paid.

*sad*

When will LJ respond to my need to do SPSS-X analysis on my poll data? When, damn it? *shakes tiny fist*

Mmmm, with the right bribe, I could be persuaded to input the data for you.

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.

*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.

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.

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.

See, I think a lot of other factors come into play with the sex question.

Like...when I was younger (in my early twenties), the assumption was that people who'd been married more than a few years were getting little or no sex, while we (who were single) were getting a lot of sex. :)

Nowadays I prefer to nap.

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

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

It never occurred to me that fandom would *not* be wrapt into the package. *g* It might just be me, though - Vic (below) had the same response.

- hg

Yeah, I assumed career success, when I read that.

Me four at this point. I went for career success.

Me 5.

*throws up hands*

All I can say is, I love my job, I love what I'm going to do, but god help me if the only thing I thought of when someone said success was what produced my paycheck.

(Okay, I can see that other people think that way, okay, fine, but really - kids don't count? the kind of work you do? your place in the community? It's all position and paycheck? Or am I reading too much into it?)

*shakes head, really bemused and surprised at fandom/flist*

- hg

Well, I don't know if I mean purely career, I didn't put that much thought into it. What I know is that I didn't mean *fandom*.

I think that assuming people meant "pure career" was a misstep on my part.

I wasn't, myself, specifically thinking of things that had to go into "being successful", but when I think of "having a successful life" I know I wrapt fannishness in with that - having something to love, something to be enthusiastic about, having friends, being creative, doing something well, being useful to others.

It can't make my life successful alone, just as neither work nor family (including my parents and siblings) nor church nor writing could. But if I were miserable and utterly incompetent at my hobbies, I wouldn't feel successful, either.

*shrugs and waves and flails* I'm - I guess I spoke too strongly because I'm just gobsmacked that other people (so many other people!) didn't including being fannish as part of what made them successful.

*is still possibly confused*

- hg

Yes, that didn't occur to me as well.

Yeah well, in my mind you can't really "fail" at fandom (which is what it makes it so nice), so there's no "success" either. I mean, sure there's popularity and prolificness and all that, but for example I don't write fic, and it's not as if fandom wouldn't work for me. In the end for me fandom is the ultimate low pressure thing in that really the only thing you have to do to get fun stuff out of it is to show up, and anything else is optional and you can do it or not or do it for a while and stop at any time etc.

Huh. It never even occurred to me to answer in terms of fannish success.

Well, I can't compartmentalize worth crap, so that likely had something to do with it.

And even if we're just talking RL - what about writing vs paying job vs family - I know people who are very happy with their situations in one or all of those, but how do we define 'success' in each of those - is a person who is married with childern and happy about it more successful than a person who is single and unattached and happy about it? Is a person with a 'good' job and happy about it more successful than a disabled stay-at-home who is *quite* content with just breathing and typing, thank you, and astonished that she's still doing that, after all she's gone through?

(There was a survey done some years back, which tried to define 'successful parenting' - which ended up using, I think, "drug-free, never incarcerated, high school graduate and continously employed" as their standard of a "successful end product" of parenting. So. *shrugs*)

- hg

I folded fandom into 'creative' and rated myself 'less creative'.

'Successful' to me meant a bunch of idiosyncratic life milestones (all of which your hypothetical fangirl B failed at, so maybe they're not so idiosyncratic after all.)

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.

That is veeeery interesting. I think - hmmm. Some of the ones I ticked gave me guilt, but the only one that would seriously have bothered me is if I'd ticked "less smart."

What would be v. interesting is if we could see what the average concept of "successful" is

One of the things that interests me, that is really beyond the scope of any quiz, is how people define success, what constitutes success. Like, for me, fandom doesn't figure into it - although fandom definitely figured predominantly into "liked" and "creative" - but a lot of things that might not count under "success" for other people did. I guess what I was really asking there was, "How much have you met the standards/goals/dreams you set for yourself, as compared to your perception of how your friends list has?"

But I used a few very ambiguous - or at least very personally defined - terms deliberately; part of what interests me is how people respond instinctively to questions using terms like that.

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.

It'd be interesting to do a whole post on success, actually - asks what people think constitutes success in fandom, what they think constitutes success in RL, if those intersect at all, and how folks are doing with that. *thoughtful* Of course, I myself would not do a post like that, because I don't have the guts, but - oh, it would be so interesting.

I myself would not do a post like that, because I don't have the guts, but - oh, it would be so interesting.

I think you could get away with a poll on just about any topic you like.

This one was very interesting, and a full analysis of how answers to the various questions correlate would be even more so!

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???

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?

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.

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.)

I think I probably do have fairly accurate sense of how well my flist is doing financially. While I am quite certain that the vast majority of them come from more affluent backgrounds than I do (me = first generation to grow up with indoor plumbing), but, the bulk of them have less money. This is primarily because a large contingent are students, a smaller number have some rather serious and expensive medical problems, and others have recently had bad luck/made unwise decisions/who can really tell which - and then there are the 10 or 15 who seem to have successful careers.

I have a very boring, very secure clerical job. My income is very, very average but, I am probably more financially secure than some of the careerists just because I am quite manic about managing it and not spending more than I take in.

I put average for that one.

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.

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*

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.

(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*

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.

(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.)

I answered stable in terms of emotional/mental stability. I think I probably folded career into "success".

I took stable to mean emotionally, and seeing as most of my flist (and most of fandom, it seems) tends towards clinical depression, I've definitely got a leg up there.

With open, I defined it as willing to share personal information, but I wasn't sure if you might mean emotionally open or whatever.

Some of these questions, I think people are answering entirely different questions than each other. XD

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.

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!

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])

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.

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.

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?

all I can think of is that this is Virtual Wobegon

*giggles helplessly*

That's awesome. That should be the name of all fandom, really.

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

Yeah, it's a challenging question. I mean, I spent some time pondering a few of these and weighing them out, and I wrote the damn poll, so you'd think I'd know what I meant. (Which I did, but it's a whole different thing when you're answering the question.) Although "normal" wasn't one of the hard ones for me. Less normal! In almost all company! It could be my slogan, just like Virtual Wobegon should be fandom's.

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.

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.

Co-sleeping people have sex in the following ways:

* Get a babysitter, consider a pay-by-the-hour-motel.
* Wait until child is deeply, deeply (do the arm drop test) asleep. Have the kind of quiet, puritanical sex you thought you left behind when you moved out of your parents' house.
* If child falls asleep in car, place child in crib, count to ten, and go to town.

Driver's ed took me three times to pass. As did the actual test.

The other drivers, of course, remain evil. Even if they're technically good drivers, doesn't mean they're using that power FOR good, you know?

Poll: Compare Amongst Yourselves

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Success

Re: Success

Re: Success

Re: Success

Re: Success

Re: Success

Re: Success

Re: Success

Possibly less obnoxiously worded...