Following smart people is good and all...but there are many definitions of "smart". You can have all the book knowledge in the world, and still be defined as an idiot in some areas. Discuss. - Helen Sventitsky

totally agree. there are different types of smart. For instance, in addition to being very book smart, I am also very street smart, but I know a lot of people that lack one or the other. - Monique

I grew up reading a lot, but severely lacked in social skills. Parents really didn't think I needed them. Seriously. Whatever street smarts I have these days were hard-won. - Helen Sventitsky

When you're talking about Friendfeed, there's also the added level of text presentation or whatever you want to call it. When I see someone posting here who is using text message speak, no capitalization or punctuation, and ends every sentence with "lol", I automatically put them in a "not very smart" category in my head, whether that's accurate or not. Likewise, there are probably some well-spoken people here who are actually dumber than a box of rocks when it comes down to it. - Rochelle

I don't mind the LOL part. I don't even mind the lack of punctuation at times. People are so busy putting their thoughts down that sometimes that words or punctuation are overlooked. I tend to look at content and context. Sometimes, the sentence syntax used, however, is so bad that I don't bother. - Helen Sventitsky

Like pornography, you know it when you see it. - Mark Trapp

Helen, I don't mind it at times. It's when I see something like this: "hey guyz lol so wat is up lol ur so kewl lol". - Rochelle

Maybe I am really off on this smart thing? I find those with wit have a broader sense of what's going on, I can learn from them and the bonus is the random laughter that just happens is the best. (Not always in the most appropriate places to spit out a loud guffaw.) - jlt-Janet

@Rochelle: Ahh...kids these days... - Helen Sventitsky

BTW, this is what inspired this thread: http://friendfeed.com/e... . I also know a lot of smart people who like to talk about peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, from time to time. :) - Helen Sventitsky

Anyone that referes to themselves as an intellectual has lost me. - Baroness Von Cut-A-Bitch‽

Define smart? Not Plaxico Burress: http://friendfeed.com/e... - Shey

Pronunciation: \ˈsmärt\ Function: adjective Etymology: Middle English smert causing pain, from Old English smeart; akin to Old English smeortan Date: before 12th century 1: making one smart : causing a sharp stinging2: marked by often sharp forceful activity or vigorous strength <a smart pull of the starter cord>3: brisk , spirited <a smart pace>4 a: mentally alert : bright b: knowledgeable c: shrewd <a smart investment>5 a: witty , clever <a smart sitcom> b: pert , saucy <don't get smart with me>6 a: neat , trim <soldiers in smart uniforms> b: stylish or elegant in dress or appearance c (1): appealing to sophisticated tastes (2): characteristic of or patronized by fashionable society7 a: being a guided missile <a laser-guided smart bomb> b: operating by automation <a smart machine tool> c: intelligent 3 — smart·ly adverb — smart·ness noun - Sean Reiser

JLT, I like witty people as well, but then again, it's all perception, isn't it? What may be witty to some folks could sound dumb or being a smartass to others. There are people out there who think Bill O'Reilly is witty, for example, while they would smack you if you quoted them, say Oscar Wilde. It's a rather extreme example, but you get my gist. - Helen Sventitsky

or am I being to literal? - Sean Reiser

Talking about peanut butter and jelly sandwiches is smart information, if you're trying to improve the way you make them at that time. Smart information is useful, but also timely. For example, you might be a whizkid at installing iPhone apps, but I have a Blackberry, so your stream of info that is largely filled with Apps Store stuff, is totally irrelevant to me, and not smart for me to follow. - Ian May

Sean, I'm talking about ALL of that, LOL! Shey, he's not being particularly "smart" about his choices these days, isn't he? ;D Ian, I follow people who develop IPhone apps. One day I may have an IPhone and may need info. - Helen Sventitsky

When someone says "smart," he or she means something very specific. It's easy to equivocate that word with something that makes one feel more comfortable about oneself, but it doesn't serve any purpose but to obfuscate to what the original speaker was referring: if the speaker is talking about people who are rocket scientists and you go around telling people that some other person is smart because he cuts his sandwiches diagonally, you're not talking about the same thing. If you want to know who Robert Scoble thinks is smart, he's talked about it pretty clearly in the past: people from whom he learns things. But what does it matter what Robert Scoble thinks? Look at who he calls smart and figure out, on your own criteria and standards, if you'd value them just as much. - Mark Trapp

Smart is being aware of what you DON'T know and being open to learning from others even if you think they might be wrong. - Rahsheen ™

I understand, Mark. But does pronouncing people you follow in a public platform as "smart", even if it's in one's own opinion, convince others as such? Of course rocket scientists are smart. And of course he's being specific. But does this sort of this thing serve to promote? Or alienate? That's the ultimate question I'm asking. Rasheen: Exactly. And that can apply to all kinds of smart, no? - Helen Sventitsky

And the answer to the ultimate question is no doubt 42 - Brian Sullivan

It serves to promote his own benefit: I don't know why there has to be some ulterior motive. He's looking for people he can learn things from. Considering how liberal Robert is with his networking compared to other popular social media people, and how much of a real hassle it is to think the worst of people all the time, I think it's reasonable to take him at his word. If you spend all your time trying to figure out who everyone else is alienating, is it seriously worth the trouble? - Mark Trapp

Mark, once upon a time, I expected people to take me at my word as well. :) My reaction to his tweet here is almost purely based on my life experiences, not his. I'm sure his intentions are pure. Not everyone who views his posts online will feel the same way. - Helen Sventitsky

There's skepticism and then there's paranoia. What evidence is there to assume something different than what is presented? Furthermore, what other possible motive could Robert have? Complex malevolence should not be posited without necessity: what constructive purpose does it serve? - Mark Trapp

Mark, at the risk of sounding paranoid, it comes from the same place that 'trust, but verify' comes from. Some people don't feel the need for evidence. Some people do. Back in my BBS days, I had one so-called adversary CONSTANTLY question my motives for posting something, even though I truly meant nothing other than what was posted. Also, I didn't see motives being questioned here, unless it was unintentionally indicated as such. - Helen Sventitsky

Helen, you said "But [what] does this sort of this thing serve to promote? Or alienate? That's the ultimate question I'm asking." My response is: is it constructive to boil down what another person, who has shown very little to deserve it, says to a covert malevolent act? Who cares what it promotes? Does it matter who it alienates? Do we gain any value from tearing Robert down? It's up to individuals to decide, for themselves, if they can get value from what Robert, or anyone else, said. - Mark Trapp

It's one thing to show a cogent argument illustrating a point, it's entirely another to put out questions that don't illustrate anything. For every "But what if he's being evil and what if he has ulterior motives or what if he's alienating people?" there's an equally valid "But what if he isn't?" in response. So what are we left with? - Mark Trapp

Mark, I'm not tearing anyone down. If anything, you viewed that question as an attack. Which it very clearly was not. Who's being paranoid now? ;) Also, what I'm illustrating here is that different people value different things. You put something out there that has value to you, that's fine. You also put it out there for discussion. That doesn't necessarily mean that everyone has to agree with it. I mean, seriously where did I "attack" him? Really? - Helen Sventitsky

LOL Shey! To me, smart means: Ow! That smarts! Yow! That hurts! Hey! That's no fair poking a guy down there! INTERJECTIONS show excitement, and emotion... - Josh Haley

Helen, I never said you attacked Robert. I'm merely questioning the value of not taking Robert's project at its face value: when I presented you what Robert is trying to accomplish, you questioned what it was promoting and who it was alienating. Those were your words. My question is: what does it matter what it's promoting or who it is alienating? It's something he's interested in, and he's letting others know in case they find value in it. Do we really need to deconstruct it down to an ulterior motive he's promoting or who he's alienating? Do our lives become more valuable by deconstructing it that way? "Oh what he says is clearly stupid because he's not talking about X type of smart," or "Don't listen to Robert because he's just trying to alienate all people who are Y," or "You can't take Robert's project seriously because he's just trying to promote Z." It sure makes us feel better, but none of those address what Robert's talking about. - Mark Trapp

I asked people, initially, to define "smart", not what Robert thinks is smart or stupid, nor to define what whether his opinions about smart people are smart or stupid. I put up his link as a reference point, but it's not about him specifically. It was a jumping off point, if you will. Yes, I am questioning it, as I question a lot of things I read online, but that doesn't invalidate his opinion, nor anyone else's, in any way, shape, or form. As I mentioned previously, it's all up to interpretation. - Helen Sventitsky

Helen: I know that was your initial question, but can you explain the point of "I understand, Mark. But does pronouncing people you follow in a public platform as "smart", even if it's in one's own opinion, convince others as such? Of course rocket scientists are smart. And of course he's being specific. But does this sort of this thing serve to promote? Or alienate?" If you're only interested in listing off the ways people think of "smart," what is the point of getting into this? - Mark Trapp

The point is: you have a following. You publicly state that you have certain types of "smart" people in your following. Fine, but it's not the be all and end all. It just comes off that way. I'm just arguing for alternatives to that point of view. He's already had people discuss on his threads this morning that they consider themselves "smart" as well, and stated why. And that's cool. No shame in their game. The thing is, you post something like that, there's going to be some blowback. Inevitable. - Helen Sventitsky

Helen, look at it this way: one person makes a statement; you're arguing that smartness is not the be all and end all, that there are different types of smart and, if I may be so bold, that it's subjective. Great. So what does that have to do with what other people, including Robert, are talking about when they talk about smart people? When someone says "smart" they mean something specific. Arguing that there are other types of smart misses the point: it's like pointing out "yeah well 2+2=11 in base 3" when someone says "2+2=4." I'm not sure why it becomes more relevant merely because the person saying the latter has a following. - Mark Trapp

Sure, he's being specific, and I'm arguing the point that it doesn't have to be. Not everything has to be so black and white. I wish I had avowed doctors in my following, but it's not gonna happen. The smallest violin in the world is playing for me, as a result. - Helen Sventitsky