Imperfect

embrace multiplicity

Inspired by Brandon's recent posts:

Herman tucks this neat admission within the hidden blog filter of Bear's discovery feeds:

Not everyone likes everything. Some people like programming posts, others like slices of life.

It's a good reminder of people's sphere of control. Chasing creativity can lead to vanity. One solution can be to practice outcome-agnosticism regardless of upvotes or other happenings not fully within your agency. Another complementary solution could be embracing multiple:

If you find your sample size low, branch out as above. The stories you want to tell can just be told. Inevitable fans, discovered and undiscovered, await your idiosyncratic output. How many more meaningful connections can you create with multiplicity?

Like Brandon, personas fascinate me too. Case in point: my blog title and pseudonym. An aside: I get wanting a title reflective of your project's contents, but you can use one that isn't without resorting to generics. If it weren't for email compartmentalization feeling like such a blocker, I would be enjoying even more online personas than I already have as you read this.

I see Brandon's My Internet Graveyard (blog deleted) as a testament to just how many faces you can adopt, but also counter to continuing to persist with the same projects. While it's okay to jump around, what could have been his output had he hunkered down in one space and branched out instead. Seeing his name pop up in screenshot after screenshot makes me wonder how that affected his efforts, if at all.

Some find it difficult to be authentic online if they use their blog as their online face. Others don't. While I understand that there are benefits of a single online face like convenience and transparency, it's possible that your deepest niches aren't being served as well as they deserve.

While more faces afford a similar redundancy to more backups, you can accrete both over time instead of jumping into the deep end early. The same holds true not only for spaces, but also for your transparency. Instead of scrambling toward a new pseudonym, domain name, or service out of a feeling of emergency, you can reverse that by opening up over time instead of all at once. Hearing stories about almost all online interactions and friendships originating from one face could get you imagining the possibilities originating from more.

Is a hypothetical Internet mob worth fearing, particularly when your defenses can transform their attention into benefits? Does defying prevailing stances on contentious topics increase predicted Internet mob activity? Brandon's reluctance to post supposedly inappropriate jokes makes me consider whether topics like artificial intelligence and Internet optimism are worth discussing in a space with so many seemingly against it. Even the most terminally online players hide so much from each other. It's opaque minds all the way down. The tired anti-privacy argument, "I have nothing to hide", might not even hold up among the selves within you. Would such points be better off expressed through separate faces or in separate spaces? It could be seen as a form of self-censorship, but is that a problem if more receptive audiences can be found elsewhere?

On airing out Internet sickness online: misery loves company. To be fair, airing out your stuckness can be good. You offload thoughts at a minimum. You invite people to share their experience and advice, which can make you realize how many impostors among us there truly are.

That said, I sense a vice fixation from Internet spaces like these. Ironic badmouthing of hated digital "vices" like doomscrolling, screentime, and smartphones rules the land. What have you wanted in your life? How do you seize that in a way which dissipates your allegedly online illnesses? Ranting and raving helps at times, but sharing passions can prevent the former, if not fixing yourself better than the former too.

While I receive much less online socialization than desired, I too am excited and optimistic about improving the Internet. Finding the people sharing your niche interest before posting about it can be a force multiplier. When that isn't possible, enough perseverance and consistency can transform your interests into passive attractors for visitors that share them. It can take a while, but many good things take a while. Build up the body of work you want such that your presence is equipped when chosen ones stumble upon it.

Social media and video game players alike create alts for various purposes. So can you as an Internet creative, whether or not you tie it to your main online presence. A more positive version of yourself combating the negativity in your world can be planned, deployed, and analyzed. Experiment with a new "you" wherever, whenever, and however you want. Join the few playing with personas and the fewer enduring with them. Reframing such creative efforts as life-long projects can benefit your approach toward them.

I think that Logan's final takeaway from The Best Investing Advice I Was Ever Given, "Buy broadly and hold your investments for the long term," not only applies to your finances, but also to your spaces, creations, and selves as well. Diversify them. Even the advice, "The best investment you can make is the one you made 10 years ago," shows how valuable trudging forward is for your success. Why should I quit when I'm only getting started? I can instead continue to show up however I can to avoid the failure of not playing the game. I can reframe comparisons to others to my past self: see how much I have grown since then and can grow from here on out.

Want to reach out? Connect with me however you prefer: