Ahem, does that presentation say anything else? It’s explicitly about people who are introverts. It doesn’t mention or target extroverts at all. It doesn’t say anything whatsoever negative about extroverts or imply that there is anything wrong with them.

You don't get my point. The author claims that he does all that because he is an introvert which is not the case at all. Introverts do not try so hard to make themselves generally available. It's a choice.

There's a certain ring to being an introvert lately I think? Maybe it's the new chic? A revival of teenage angst? In any case call a spade a spade.

Yeah, because being overwhelmed by prolonged social interaction and preferring to spend time alone makes you an extrovert.

What???

The whole presentation is about how to avoid being all that.

It’s about getting the best of both worlds. It’s about getting some of the benefits of being an extrovert without having to act (because that’s how it feels to introverts) like one.

> [...] The author claims that he [...]

She.

The point is a good one though - has nothing to do with extroversion VS. introversion.

Being a connector is about adding value selflessly. Thinking of others first, and yourself second.

I would argue that at the root of all true connectors is a deep sense of altruism.

(Haven't looked at the OP, yet.)

I think something that is too often missed is that for some if not all the motivation is not simply a "selfless" altruism. True, helping others brings a deep satisfaction. But it also is an individual step in creating the kind of world we want to inhabit. One of cooperation, to mutual benefit and enjoyment.

I think some people get hung up on the term "selfless". For me, it's not selfless -- it's the essence of self. A self that seeks to be connected with and of use to other people. (And perhaps hopes a bit, but doesn't specifically expect on a case by case basis, for the same in return.)

P,S. Looked at the link, but it's Flash. So, not viewing it, for now.

Excellent point - I completely agree. (Interesting choice of HN name by the way, "no needs".)

I often tell people the following:

The world only works if you think of others first, and yourself second.

If everyone thought of your needs, they'd be met by now. If you only think about your needs, you have long road ahead of you.

I apologize in advance for being a pedant but since you do say you find it interesting, "pas besoin" is used in the context of [subject] don't/doesn't need [noun] rather than in the sense of having "no needs" which would be written "pas de besoin".

This comment is gold. As one of my rabbis put it, the key to life is not nullification of Self, but rather the expansion of Self to include those around you.

EDIT: adding missing "not".