Sorry, I've had some things going on and haven't had much time to think about it. Thanks for adjusting the settings for me, Callaway. I didn't mean interesting people being disinteresting at all. I meant that a topic is usually what interests me and the people less so. Whereas, I2 is proving that the opposite might be possible to achieve. Why is there no topic and yet I'm engaging in conversation? It could be that I've looked into my continued discussion and attributed more interest than I have, or that I'm not attributing enough to those topics that have been covered (albeit light heartedly). Maybe the most interesting thing here is that I don't know what the topic is and it's really my interest in discovering what it is that keeps me entertained. At any rate, I'm not sure what the range of discussions are here. I mean shouldn't any decent discussion have some focus? Where would the point be in merely sharing opinion without scrutiny of a logical nature? There must be a dividing line between opinion and fact (or what is considered fact) otherwise there is nothing but an impractical null argument (opinion based). When it comes to moving on, or becoming involved; it's important to me to establish where I'm going, or what I'm motivated toward, or what purpose, etc can be met, or achievement be obtained. I'm still lost as to that. But in a way that could make for progress in working with ambiguity. But judging by some responses I've received, I seem to have plenty of that going on. Or maybe that's the result of having a lack in handling ambiguity and being less able to define my position in concrete terms. I think the free expression of this site might be a nice break because social rules could probably do with more "breaking", and it seems that members here are able to express themselves more openly here than most places to the benefit of venting like anyone does and where having a generally limited capacity toward expression in this communities population would allow a greater amount of healthy venting which might otherwise be hampered by the inherent issues of communication and said social rules. But that mightn't necessitate the action being positive since having developed such a habit on I2 could lead to unfavorable situations where such behaviour isn't tollerated. Then again, having developed bad habits might deter those who wouldn't tollerate such from reprimanding an individual acculturated with I2, or in the case that reprimanding the individual concerned were to come about, that individual might harbour a generally more aggressive attitude to happily sustain that. But to what disagreement which would ensue? One of opinion, or something logical, based on fact and since when is a logical argument concerned with emotion? It wouldn't be in the spirit of arriving at the truth, if it were.