Not necessarily related to introverts per-se, but I see it a lot in the geeky stereotype.
Try getting good clothes. Go to a good store and let the people do their thing. (Or otherwise find some fashion advice).
I did this as an experiment a few years back. Just walked into a place, gave em some cash and said make me look less of a dork. (I usually just wore slacks and a plain tshirt, mostly dark colors, nothing worth noting other than it's lameness and banality.)
The difference was immediate. Night and day. People just noticed and responded better to me, everywhere. It was like this secret power, just putting on a Wardrobe of Charisma +5. It was bizarre.
I haven't kept it up at all, mainly due to lack of need of charisma in general. I've known that dressing up, like wearing a good suit, can be effective in social engineering situations, but I wasn't aware of how powerful just dressing "nice" versus "usable" had just walking around.
I'm sure this is all well-known to most people and you might be shaking your head at the basics of life I am so amazed by, but perhaps someone will find this an interesting anecdote.
Edit: I'd also note that I did what he suggested, too. I look back at my blog and cringe. But I got a fair amount of contacts, book deals (which I never followed through on properly), even respect from strangers on a few occasions, on account of me being active publicly. And back then people linked a lot to random blog posts (maybe they still do) and without any effort, I had a PR6 site which was sorta cool. As a bad career move, I got embarrassed about things and decided I wasn't as good as I thought I was and stopped writing and self-promoting. Traffic and PR went down accordingly.
Two best things, bar none, that a geek can do, if that's what he wants to accomplish: begin working out, and get non-geek clothes (my wife calls them 'anti-girlfriend shirts', when referring to the only-hackers-get-the-inside-joke-on-the-message shirts).
I feel that a lot of geeks underestimate their attractiveness. Geekiness seems to be accepted and even cool in today's society. Geeks will usually have a good job or be doing something interesting, and will generally have their lives in order. The only thing that seems to be really holding them back is some kind of devotion to bad clothing: sneakers and hoodies might be great for Zuck, but for the rest of us non-billionaires, a little better clothes don't hurt.
I was visiting Orange County (ugh) then, and just went to some upscale men's clothing shop/boutique. Shirts were about $100-300 each, pants $100-200, shoes another $100. (I had a very friendly expense account at the time.)
This was south California casual, I guess? Shoes that look good sockless (or wear those little liner socks). Button-down shirts that have some simple design. It was nothing really, and I'd have no problem doing outfits that good myself now, after spending perhaps 10-15 hours reading about fashion and trying stuff out. But at the time it was revelatory.
I am certain that many guys in my position would do fine just going any decent-looking clothing store and asking the salesguy to make you look OK. They're good enough to not let you leave looking like a dweeb. Personally I like some of Banana Republic's stuff, as it's higher quality than Target, and still casual (yet the other half of the inventory seems very "douchy").
People are so vulnerable to social manipulation via clothing and all sorts of other means. The stereotypical programmer person looks down on this, perhaps because they're not comfortable, or because it feels "fake". It might be useful to view social as just another system to be hacked. And in the process, one might realise it doesn't have to be fake and can be quite rewarding.
Yes, I know, this reeks of just blindly following trends and conformity. But we don't say that of other hacks. "Loser! You just shoved some escape characters into a querystring and looked for issues. That's so common, you're such a sheep." Yeah, maybe, but the end result is what matters. And feel free to A/B test versus wearing a "I'm too CSSy for this shirt" tee and decide which leads to a more fulfilling experience.
[The irony of me giving out fashion and social advice. Like someone advising you to "buy a computer with Internet; that's my favourite program".]
I agree with your sentiment about wearing nice clothes for the social hack feeling "fake". At some point in school I made a conscious effort to judge people by who they are, rather than by the material things surrounding them. And even though I'm playing the sheeple's game by dressing nice(r), I try to still give everyone the benefit of the doubt and judge them by who they are. It's paid off; I got a (very welcomed) free lesson in Cassandra at a tech meetup because I started a conversation with someone who other people were avoiding because of appearance.
Adding more to civilian's comment: you will find both good and bad advice in that subreddit. I think a decent wardrobe (fitting shirt, fitting pants, leather shoes, belt) can be acquired for within $500 if you hit Macy's or other department stores. Try not to buy super expensive stuff; clothes and shoes are easy to ruin, and my personal rule of thumb is that its better to buy cheap and replace than to buy some insanely expensive shoes and then be distraught when you spill beer over it or something. Another advice: its all about the fit. If you really want to look good, find clothes that fit really well. Don't try to be 'flashy' or different, it will usually backfire.
If you do go there, please take in account that a lot of the advice there is not really what you want unless you want to look to other 20ish year olds going out to bars/clubs. You will get mileage of going to a decent store and tell them you want to look for: going out/work event/golfing/etc. What loks good for trendy 20's in new york will look out of place/weird at a marina or a friend's birthday party. As everything, context matters!
I'll probably be down voted for this, but I don't see how this has anything to do with introversion. This reads more like "The shy person's guide to getting noticed".
I'm an introvert. After a particular long week, I'll go into my apartment and only talk to the delivery person that is bringing me my food. I do that because I just have to recharge and don't want to be around people.
But I have zero problems talking to people. I'm usually the loudest person in a design meeting. I am not afraid to make my opinions known. Mostly in person because I like to read people's body language.
Yes. This is just one person's account. But please don't assume introversion == shyness.
A more appropriate name would be "An introvert's guide to being extroverted".
I like the idea of using your actual name for usernames, but that could lead to some unnecessary risk if you don't practice proper password security.
The meetups aren't a bad idea, but telling people to "talk to someone" is a bad idea. How about "Listen to someone"? That's much better, especially for introverts.
You're preaching as an extrovert to introverts. Associating yourself with your work, thinking through it, positively engaging those who criticize it while remaining calm - those are ways to get noticed as an introvert. Incorporating what you hear from others - that's how you get noticed. Talking to people and talking, talking, talking... that's how you get noticed for the wrong reasons.
I had the same first reaction; being an intense introvert. To that part of me – the part that has dealt with depression my whole life – it sounded just like the advice I think all people who deal with clinical depression get: "Just be happy! Problem solved!" "Sad? Cheer up! Thats what I do!"
However, on the opposite side, sometimes you do just have to grit your teeth and get started.
Anecdotally, a few years ago I was in a outdoor shopping center and noticed a boxing gym tucked away behind some other store-fronts. And in that moment, I said "fuck it, I'm going to learn to box". I wasn't particularly in shape, nor is "fighting" really in my social demeanor; I'm kinda of a pacifist. It was awkward, difficult, and at times painful. But it was also intensely rewarding, and I ended up training for the next 3 years and even competed in some amateur events.
Sometimes, it does help to just take a dive.
But I think there is a subtle difference that a lot of people overlook when it comes to introversion. Some people are introverted because they fear failure and lack confidence. Other people are introverted, not because of social incompetence, but because they just don't enjoy superficial - and i don't mean that in a condescending way, but to highlight the difference between 'acquaintance' and 'friend' - connections with other human beings and such interactions are inherently draining, not invigorating.
This is probably good advice for the former, not so much for the latter.
All that said, I honestly do wish the OP the best of luck in their 52 week challenge, and I hope that it helps them improve whatever they feel they need to personally improve. More power to you!
From my perspective, this article is not suggesting people try to be someone else.
It reminds me of the popular book "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking"
In that book, the author suggest that introverts fake extroversion in short bursts.
As an introvert myself, this is something I've done for a decade. It's tiring but pays off. Sometimes we introverts miss out on great opportunities because we don't stretch our comfort zone.
I think this article is good advice on small ways for introverts to put themselves out there and "fake extroversion".
I do pretty much the same thing he does. I don't like playing the game and schmoozing, I do because it's better for me long-term. I build systems and write code that can back up the talk, because that's not optional--but if all I did was write code, it doesn't matter how good it is. Nobody would engage with it in the first place to have feedback to incorporate.
This is a social profession. Humans come first. Actual code quality is probably fifth. People who listen, valuable though they often are, are not the ones who get noticed--for any reason, good or bad.
> Understand trolls will always try and bring you down.
> It's easier said than done. The reality is, it stings. You'll question your work. You'll start seeing their point. You just have to realize they are wrong. Chances are, they are an insecure douche and have nothing better to do with their time than belittle other people. They are faceless.
This is much easier for men than women. Women are harassed more online and the harassment is more personal for women than men. Men get their work attacked, women get their identity attacked:
> According to a 2005 report by the Pew Research Center, which has been tracking the online lives of Americans for more than a decade, women and men have been logging on in equal numbers since 2000, but the vilest communications are still disproportionately lobbed at women. We are more likely to report being stalked and harassed on the Internet—of the 3,787 people who reported harassing incidents from 2000 to 2012 to the volunteer organization Working to Halt Online Abuse, 72.5 percent were female. Sometimes, the abuse can get physical: A Pew survey reported that five percent of women who used the Internet said “something happened online” that led them into “physical danger.” And it starts young: Teenage girls are significantly more likely to be cyberbullied than boys. Just appearing as a woman online, it seems, can be enough to inspire abuse. In 2006, researchers from the University of Maryland set up a bunch of fake online accounts and then dispatched them into chat rooms.
> Accounts with feminine usernames incurred an average of 100 sexually explicit or threatening messages a day. Masculine names received 3.7.
> [W]omen’s harassment is more likely to be gender-based and that has specific, discriminatory harms rooted in our history. The study pointed out that the harassment targeted at men is not because they are men, as is clearly more frequently the case with women. It’s defining because a lot of harassment is an effort to put women, because they are women, back in their “place.”
Prepare to be disappointed, especially by the meetups. The meeters-up may not be a bunch of "greasy salespeople", but that doesn't make them (the meetups) awesome by default.
In my experience most meetups, unless they are specifically culled, super narrow (language, stack, hardware, industry specific etc...) or invite-only are typically made up of "wantrepreneurs," people who want you to sign an NDA to talk to them, grease-ball recruiters, a few rare independent people and the token public sector person trying to do tech-transfer or some other hare-brained initiative that is only good for the city/state/federal government.
"Create opinionated material and share the shit out of it." ... this is downright terrible advice, for either introverts or extroverts.
And introverts are generally capable of going through life without being noticed as much as extroverts, and don't feel the need to create divisive clickbait to share like an asshole. That's why we're introverts. It's okay!
It's not that being introverted is bad. It's totally fine. But sometimes introverted people end up not getting what they want because they don't get noticed. That's not intrinsically bad, but it can be frustrating at times if you aren't getting the opportunities that you would like to have.
Look at some well-known popular tech personas that have done well for themselves. Many of them seem to know approximately nothing, technically. I roll my eyes when I see them linked to as some all-knowing sage. Yet they've now got tons of resources to do whatever they want. If they had thought "wow, I don't know shit and my skills are probably below average" they wouldn't have continued to pump out those "divisive clickbait" articles and be an "asshole" and subsequently land all sorts of lucrative contracts.
Hello troll. I knew you'd show up. In case you missed it in the article...
"Understand trolls will always try and bring you down.
It's easier said than done. The reality is, it stings. You'll question your work. You'll start seeing their point. You just have to realize they are wrong. Chances are, they are an insecure douche and have nothing better to do with their time than belittle other people. They are faceless."
There are others in this thread that disagree with me and I'm not calling them trolls. This person's tone and choice of words landed them in "troll category" in my mind.
The most interesting part is the meetups section. I just can't fathom that meeting people and listen to them talk about themselves is using my time wisely. As you mentioned, most of them are bullshitters. I feel as though it should be spent improving my product, or writing a blog post about my product.
Is this the wrong way of thinking? I am the only employee. I'm supposed to do what I'm good at, and that's coding... not talking.
Eventually, if my product is good enough, someone has to notice. Right...?
Yes, someone will notice your product. That someone, by necessity, is someone who knows of your product. So you need to expose people to your product. And ideally, you want this someone to be someone who knows a lot of other people. (A "multiplier". Or "influencer". Or whatever it's called this week)
As an engineer, you might be tempted to call those people "bullshitters", because they talk more than they create. They're not - they have different strengths than you do, that is all. And when you need somebody to talk, you want those people.
And so, knowing them is a good plan. As is, in general, building a network of people you can contact for advice on things you're not good at. This is not about going there and talking. This is about going there and finding people who can complement your strengths. This is about getting feedback on your product. This is about hearing new ideas.
Think of it this way. Who are you creating your product for, yourself or these other people that you're blogging to?
If it's not solely for you, and you do really want to build a good product, then you have to listen to what people say about it. And you can't just close your ears when they stop talking about your product and about themselves and their own problems; to be a good listener you have to listen to all of it.
Retreating into what you're good at is just that: retreating. To make progress in any area you have to get past obstacles, including the ones you create for yourself. In the end, you will never be successful without communicating. And communicating goes both ways.
This can be dangerous advice. The recent article about the girl that tweeted something that was considered by others to be racist makes me very wary of increasing my online cross-section. You literally can never know whether someone will take something you share, go on over to 4chan, and whip a ton of people into a doxxing storm over it.
No, that is terrible advicc! Saying "you should never do X because someone cold misinterpret it and bad stuff could happen" will lead to never doing X, or anything else for that matter. You just have to take that risk n real life that people might disagree with you, not understand you, or just not care. See the point about trolls in the article.
My advice: determine your briggs meyers' personality type, and see what you can change about being introvert, and what is just part of your personality. Also, if you have many social problems, it may be the case that you suffer from (social) anxiety, and you should talk to your doctor about it.