I think it was a bit of a sleight of hand to make it about time. Because time is quantifiable. You can give 5 minutes of your time but I figure most people can attest that has little to do with how much actual attention you’re giving. And it’s attention that we crave. That’s what social media is built upon. When you really love and enjoy something or someone, you’re thinking of it, even if you’re not actively engaged with it. And on the other hand, if you give something attention for long enough, you do start to develop some kind of an attachment on it ( which easily becomes unhealthy too, like doom scrolling ).
Then you aren’t giving them your time
Get it?
“Seat time” is literally what you are giving them in that situation. You can say that it’s not “time” but I can say that it is because there is nuance and we are doing many things at same time. Being present physically, mentally, paying attention to your surroundings, putting in effort, etc, can in many ways be counted separately. Who’s to say if your way of accounting for time is the “correct” one or whether somebody else’s is?
Sure but then you are the one specifically saying it’s “seat” time which is an overt signal it’s not “real” time
If you just said an unqualified time it’s rightfully assumed to be your legitimate attention
Eh, I see what you mean but I think in this culture and point in time, it’s useful for human well-being to see them as separate things. Like I said, conflating them is a sleight of hand. Because the reality is that you can book 1h for a meeting and then be totally mentally absent from it. People think that you’re committed in the meeting, you’re giving it your time as can be measured. You are not actually giving your time to the meeting but due to being physically present, you’re also not using your time (and attention) freely on what you really want to. So you’re doing a sleight of hand possibly on yourself and people observing you in the meeting.
The sleight of hand is being committed by you and your work-culture problem
Tbh this sounds like a kinda personal issue you have with work and working too much or having a shitty job or something and it’s somehow morphing into a linguistic dispute instead when it shouldn’t be
Are you a boss at work of some kind? Maybe your perspective is tied up with some problem you have with your work culture. People are just complicating things when this is actually just so simple, right?
I’m actually your boss and very disappointed
I wrote very broadly (on purpose). Never defined the nature of the meeting. What your mind says about me has little to do with my life.
You’re the one who wrote a paragraph about how work meetings suck lol
You wrote an entire paragraph literally describing work meetings being a waste of time and somehow don’t even realize it?
I think i now understand why the phrase was so confusing to you
Quite frankly it’s somewhat disturbing that you take a fairly neutral description of an unspecified event as “writing an entire paragraph about how work meetings suck”. You are overlaying a hell of a thought framework of your own onto the text I wrote and then telling me I’m the one with a problem. Ironic really, since you started off saying the world is illiterate.
Lots of psychoanalysis in this thread.
New to the Internet?
No, but it seems unusually aggressive for very little reason.
Then why are they still paying me for it?
They don’t have the ai technology implanted into your brain yet to only clock moments actually spent working