I have trouble with the discussion of the detail of 'thing' with the people who are into it as, potentially, their only thing. There's a line, somewhere, in every "being really into things", that becomes unhealthy obsession.

I love me some roller skating (inline), and I want to learn and get better at "all the things", but I don't want to discuss it incessantly, as the discussion gets in the way of the feeling and the flow, which is what initiated the enjoyment in the first place.

I used to enjoy Pokemon Go (and still do much less frequently), but some of the people that got really into it were unbearably 'discussional' about details that made no material difference (yes, pedants, one combination in 3,375 can iterally be 'the best' - but, you see, it'll draw you into a life-sucking spiral).

I think, possibly, in both examples, they're people on social fringes, and maybe having a connection, no matter how tenuous, to another human being, is treasured in, sadly, its rarity.

I'm somewhat blessed / cursed to be missing an inherently human need to be 'within', and maybe this is the high-school version of 'cool', even though I've never been cool (roller skating and pokemon go you say? Yeah, nah, club's full man). I've also got kids, which means I value my time enough to require the application of the pareto principle to my "really-into things". But then, I also find almost anything interesting once the surface has been scratched, so maybe my aloof-ness is self-preservation from falling down every single rabbit hole put in my path. I consider it a Denial-of-Service attack when someone introduces me to something I find interesting.

As another reply stated, however, in slightly different words, it's the unhealthily obsessed that create the slipstream for us causal types to cruise in. I am thankful for their existence, and respect their knowledge and commitment if not their life choices.

> the bachelorette

Can't agree. This one's unhealthy in any dosage.