>The article, though, at least to me, seemed more like it was more about just not using the popular thing.

How's that bad? Being able to resist what's popular is a good thing too. We rely too much on following fashions and trends.

Resisting things just because the are popular is as effective as doing them just because they are.

Effective at what?

Pursuing one's actual goals rather than letting emotions, arising from identity challenges, guide one's behaviour. Or not, in this case.

Of course we wouldn't know that without knowing these people's actual goals.

Your comment makes no sense in regards to the parent discussion.

First, someone said this:

==How's that bad? Being able to resist what's popular is a good thing too. We rely too much on following fashions and trends.==

You responded with this:

==Resisting things just because the are popular is as effective as doing them just because they are.==

I am pointing out that you have no idea what the motives are and have simply assumed it is "because they are popular". Maybe the reason they want to resist what is popular is in order to spark their creativity or focus on specific niches. You are trying to make value judgements with almost no information.

> The article, though, at least to me, seemed more like it was more about just not using the popular thing.

If you're never going to dive deeper than that I can see where your misconceptions come from.

Sometimes the popular thing should be avoided, for very good reasons.

I've definitely addressed the fact that there are good reasons for not using social media in other comments on this very thread.

I'm just saying that not using social media doesn't make you "better" than anybody else.

That is literally all I am saying.

I might not respond to any more comments after this, because I'll end up repeating myself all afternoon.