There are differences in public v. private discourse and some of them have been mentioned. And there are some reasons for why persons may choose a different conversational style depending on whether they have a large audience or an audience of one.
What we are talking about here, I think, is attitude and self-awareness.
It is very easy to get caught up in the spirit of the moment when one is in a group. I think I've seen that happen here several times. One person enters the scene and makes a few smart remarks and others, who perhaps wouldn't normally do so on their own, join in the spirit.
Those of us who like being in the spotlight probably tend to put on a bit of persona for flash when we have the opportunity. Those of us who dislike being in the spotlight may put on their "shy" or "cute" armor when they feel observed.
If a person has not developed a habit of self-awareness they may switch, nearly unconsciously, into a habit they've developed. Such as being cocky. Or being "shy."
Can happen to me when I'm being thoughtless. When it does, I need to catch myself and do a check on myself.
Some people just never think about it. We tell them, "You're different around me when we're alone than you are when your friends are here." And they claim to not have a clue what we're talking about.
Takes a while, and paying attention, to learn to be consistent across the board, to become integrated. Once aware that we have more than one communication style we then have a choice which to use for which occasion. (It doesn't hurt to know why we choose the style we do, as well.)
I find it difficult to buy the idea that someone doesn't know when he's being offensive to others if, in private conversation, he is not.
There can be a number of reasons for that. To give the person the benefit of the doubt I suppose we could say, "He is not self-aware." If we want to cast judgement we can say, "He is doing it because he likes to do it."
Either way, it is to the other's benefit that his attention be called to what may be a thoughtless, but self-defeating, habit. What he choses to do with that information is his business.
Those who fail to make the leap of self-recognition? We call them "disengenuous."
"No ray of sunshine is ever lost, but the green which it awakes into existence needs time to sprout, and it is not always granted to the sower to see the harvest. All work that is worth anything is done in faith." - Albert Schweitzer
As INTP, you should of course know that your behavior is the standard, and it is everyone else who has quirks. Those idiots.
Not really. What's the definition of normal?
1. conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.
2. serving to establish a standard.
3. Psychology: approximately average in any psychological trait, as intelligence, personality, or emotional adjustment.
Many users feel uninhibited and unrestrained because of a lack of social context cues and therefore exhibit more "disinhibition" in the form of insults, swearing, and hostile language (Walther, 1993) than if they were communicating in a face-to-face situation with the same people (Siegel, Kiesler and McGuire, 1984). The lack of social context cues can cause excited and uninhibited communication..."
Not necessarily, I've known several people who've carried themselves quite foolishly in more social settings, however when speaking one on one they were much easier to speak to, they weren't nearly as rude. I don't know if the same thing applies online.
Me too, and it's annoying. I figured they do the public thing because they want to impress their friends.