Connection ErrorBad RequestSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
So, everyone you haven't met is just... trash, not people? That's quite an interesting approach...
You've twisted my words somehow...
Basically, the idea is this: a person's perception of the external world is the construction of a certain model of that external world in their mind. The more accurate the model, the more potentially effective actions can be. But the more complex the model, the more potentially troublesome it can be to do something with it.
For each task, there is a certain optimal level of model complexity. A psychotherapist needs one level of modeling, a salesperson needs another.
The main types of deviations from this optimum are:
1) A model that is too simple and does not take into account important nuances.
2) A model that is too complex, with an excess of nuances that are unnecessary or even harmful for solving specific tasks.
3) Attributing non-existent factors (the worst).
For modeling a significant portion of forum users (on most forums), the model "talking picture + a few lines of notes" works well. This eliminates points 2 and 3, and point 1 is eliminated by gradually refining the model as you communicate with the person.
Attempts to communicate with everyone "as if they were people" (people often use this exact phrase) only lead to a waste of time and the creation of inadequate illusions about the audience.