Taylor,

I came across your blg via a family member, and I think you have much to offer the world, but so far have done nothing of real value with your life. So what's your motivation and/or purpose in gathering such a large audience?

Joe – Your Honestly Interested Groupee.

Joe, he's posting these photos for the same reason you posted your comment: A desire to share with others things you've seen, done, or thought.

being is enough, doing is just the ego pretending to be involved

being is the ultimate thing – the results show up – provided you are truly being and not trying to 'just be'. will be interesting to see your response to the thread though!

I'll admit that at first I was thrown for a loop by your question.

And I'd disagree that I have gathered a “large audience”.

The numbers, in any case, are meaningless, the impact is what is.

And I honestly couldn't tell you how I have impacted people.

And that's why it's a valid question.

Let me ponder.

well and here's another something that showed up through twitter just now (ht/ @fnthawar) http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_st_john_s_8_se…

honestly though, i don't think giving 'what you have to offer the world' is directly related to 'success' – and that's a very sticky thing.

“have done nothing of real value with your life”

wow, what a jackass statement to say without knowing someone. I say, the real value is the relationships. plus he gets to travel like a mad man.

Actually, that's a valid point, even if he only sees a sliver of my life, and a sliver of the “arc” (thanks @qthrul). I question it myself.

You have impacted me and everyone that you know. You don't let anyone tell you differently.

One would have to ask Joe what his definition of a life with “real value” is. But then, that would be irrelevant to anyone else. All that matters is what Taylor decides “real value” is for his own life and the rest of us for ours.

FWIW, Taylor has provided “real value” for me personally (first and foremost) and professionally. This may or may not add to Taylor's sense of “real value” for his own life, however, but I certainly value his impact on and relationship with me.

the jesus pov, my kingdom is not of this world, is an earlier statement of the disconnect between “success” and “what you have to offer to the world” ..

success is so narrowly defined in the west (as is “value) ..

and still to be examined, who says the world needs help? the world is fine :-)

Thank you, of course.

But here's the rub: what if we don't know about the impact we have? What if we don't know that other people care? What if, lost in ambient intimacy, we forget to tell people they matter to us? How do people really know about the impact they have?

I'm just catching up on some previous posts, so forgive this connection coming in late, but my comments on choice of values are obviously related to Taylor's previous thoughts on Zombie travel and the Zombieconomy:

“If someone truly values getting a suntan all day, or lounging in a Starbucks in Beijing, or eating at 7-11 in Japan, and makes those choices consciously, because they truly enjoy those experiences, than who are we to judge?”

http://www.taylordavidson.com/writing/2009/07/2…

Joe i can understand what you're trying to say, even if i totally disagree.
Taylor is building something rare. To understand you have to follow him since the early days to measure his impact.
Taylor is one of ma favorite “smart aggregators”. He brings a lot of “real value” to my work and help me to become less stupid. And that's a lot of work ;-). Maybe it's not the point, but as a photographer, he gives something very original too.
That was my very limited POV which i'm sure, brings no real value…

True. True.

Taylor, the truth is you will impact different people in different ways. That's one of the beauties of this medium. To try to define what you're trying to do here would put a barrier on the possibilities… Which would serve neither you nor your audience well. Keep doing what you're doing… Because you're great at it. You are impacting countless different people in ways you do not even know. That's something to be proud of.

related, as I noted to @DanaLanePhoto on twitter: http://www.davidsanger.com/blog/authenticity#co…

Taylor, great to see that you're back in the UK Love the photos. As always, great stuff. Please do drop by to see us when you're back in VA. Anyhow, if you are looking for places to see and things to do, swing by Asturias, Spain — where my folks lived while we were at ACS together. It's a wonderful less, traveled part of northern Spain. If you do go, make sure you stop by Gijon, which is the city in which my parents lived. There are flights out of Stansted straight into Oviedo. Or, you could take a flight into Madrid and then take a bus north. Best travels!

Thank you; and one very important point, which I think is proved by this comment stream, is that it's not an audience, it's a community. It's not a broadcast, but a conversation. And I learn more from the community than you know.

Tracing it back again, also, maybe more directly than that of my original link, related:

“In the end, it doesn’t matter what I think: what matters is what you think. The fruits of your life are the only validation you need.”

http://www.taylordavidson.com/writing/2009/07/2…

As a sidebar (apart from the big meaning of life and your place in it comments) I'd love a Yelp for street art as well as skate parks. I always am looking into places I travel to for the best street art because that to me says so much about the place, the kids growing up there, their influences. If you have pictures of these you've taken, post them too.

Love London, enjoy!

Yelp listings for street art; there must be, right? What places in cities are famous for their street art? There must be websites, fanboards, flickr groups, etc. for street art in various cities, for certain artists, right? How could I have lived this long and not know?

Let me look… and will do :)

I’m late to the conversation, but I wanted to add my experiences.

Knowing and following Taylor has been of great value to me. He is one of the most accessible people I know, and is not an echo chamber unlike so many others. Nicholas Gabard may have understated things when he said above, Taylor is a “smart aggregator”. Taylor not only brings together many different ideas in unique ways that is very deserving of consideration, but freely puts new ideas out there with no preconceptions.

However, you don’t get the full picture from just reading a few posts on his blog:
<ul><li>He has demonstrated – through actions – that it is both possible and realistic to live a life of travel and building real world interpersonal networks</li>
<li>He has demonstrated that you can actually be the person you want to be by living the life you say you will</li>
<li>He is bringing together people in both photography and business to create a sustainable photojournalism industry for all</li>
<li>He is creating new ways to engage people on multiple levels</li>
<li>He has demonstrated the serendipity that happens when you connect diverse groups of people</li></ul>

Finally, he is one of the few people that can make you think, not just about ideas, but about your actions. What do his photos, posts and interactions say to you? When you can answer that you will realize his full value.

Hey Taylor – Funny how people feel intimate enough, without knowing you, that they are cool with intimating you've done nothing of real value with your life. I don't know I'll ever get used to the presumption that the internet seems to encourage :-)

You make a distinction in saying that you don't have an audience but a community, and I'm not sure the it can't be both. I get what you're saying, that it's not a unilateral sermon but a discussion, but is there value in recognizing where you have both influence and an audience as the hub of a community? I have my own tribe and see things in a similar way as you, i think, but seeing them in part as an audience – people who listen – is not entirely inaccurate. Not everyone will participate in the discussion. To those on the fringes, the ones who haven't started drinking the Kool Aid, their first point of entry into the community is not conversation but listening. No?

Safe travels, man.

I agree Will and you explain perfectly what my “french english” can't. Taylor sorry for the understatment ;-)

Well David I would recommend reading “Fooled By Randomness”. The book offers excellent incite into how humans tend to make inferences from a minimum of information that are wholly wrong. The truth is prior to making my comment and question, I had been given a brief but intense summary of Taylor's work by two admirers who soundly defended his work and motives and both of whom have known Taylor for nigh upon a decade. My question, although pithy and trite, is one of genuine intellectual debate. Taylor has chosen a medium and mode of work that requires a large and interactive audience. Most of his friends chose to defend him with a discussion of the value they see in his work. I am intrigued that your defense comes in the form of an attack upon the questioner with an implication that a certain period of “listening” is required before acceptance is to be had. Personally, I evaluate and answer questions for what they are, and I think, based on his initial response, Taylor does also.

I must admit that I find the video to which you have linked is an unbelievable example of drivel being fed to the masses. Sadly I will take the easy way out and offer the same advice here that I offered above and on the website to which you linked. Try reading “Fooled By Randomness” to gain a healthier sense of inquiry.

And what would you say are the problems with my sense of inquiry? Very interested to hear.

David (@pixelatedimage): Agreed, perhaps, listening is a safe entry into the conversation. I listen and learn from many conversations on the web that I do not directly engage in.

But here's the problem: without telling other people they matter, how do they know? How do they dig deeper? How do they learn to refine what they create, how they connect? How can we change without being able to gauge or measure our impact?

It's not a new issue in my mind.

Joe: Length of time is still an incomplete slice; all of us impact people in ways that are invisible to others, perhaps even invisible to ourselves.

And yes, I take the question as it is, as a sincere question that requires a mindful, intellectual, emotional response. Defenses aren't necessary, attacks are off-base, thought is the issue.

I would argue my “medium and mode” does not require a “large and interactive audience”.

I prefer an interactive audience, because I learn from the conversation, I learn from the case studies, and because it offers me the opportunity to dig deeper, to customize my ideas to people and their needs.

And “large” is entirely unnecessary; what's better, a large impact on a small number of people, or a small impact on a large number of people? Or, is it to refine my own life to increase my own happiness, my own personal nirvana? What is more meaningful?

Thank you for the question, because this is how I learn, to reflect on the past and guide my future; and hopefully the conversation will impact others as well.

Thank you for the long and thoughtful reply. The citations to thoughts that are meaningful to you is in essence a mini-case study, an example of what is meaningful to you.

David (@pixelatedimage): Agreed, perhaps, listening is a safe entry into the conversation. I listen and learn from many conversations on the web that I do not directly engage in.rnrnBut here’s the problem: without telling other people they matter, how do they know? How do they dig deeper? How do they learn to refine what they create, how they connect? How can we change without being able to gauge or measure our impact?rnrnIt’s not a new issue in my mind.rnrnJoe: Length of time is still an incomplete slice; all of us impact people in ways that are invisible to others, perhaps even invisible to ourselves.rnrnAnd yes, I take the question as it is, as a sincere question that requires a mindful, intellectual, emotional response. Defenses aren’t necessary, attacks are off-base, thought is the issue.rnrnI would argue my “medium and mode” does not require a “large and interactive audience”. rnrnI prefer an interactive audience, because I learn from the conversation, I learn from the case studies, and because it offers me the opportunity to dig deeper, to customize my ideas to people and their needs.rnrnAnd “large” is entirely unnecessary; what’s better, a large impact on a small number of people, or a small impact on a large number of people? Or, is it to refine my own life to increase my own happiness, my own personal nirvana? What is more meaningful? rnrnThank you for the question, because this is how I learn, to reflect on the past and guide my future; and hopefully the conversation will impact others as well.

Thank you for the long and thoughtful reply. The citations to thoughts that are meaningful to you is in essence a mini-case study, an example of what is meaningful to you.

I'm the first to admit that I have yet to achieve anything of “real” measurable value by the normal metrics of society, I'll admit to that.

But perhaps that's simply because the metrics we know and use are the wrong metrics.

As I noted above, perhaps I just need better metrics.

Another “mini-case study”…

Thank you, I will indeed, even if I'm not exactly sure when “back in VA” will be, of course :)

Expanding a bit further, Ben Garvey gave me a way to think about this, which I'm going to modify slightly:

(a * b) – c = d

a = people who you reach
b = the average value they take from it
c = the amount of work / time / cost for me to create
d = the net value created

Therefore a couple ways to look at it. For one, a can be sufficiently small if b is large enough to make d worthwhile.

Sean Tario has asked me versions of this question, pushed me to think about how to impact deeper, wider, and how to make conscious decisions of the trade-off.

Still working out the answer.

This simple equation shows why things like public art or even the Internet itself, are incredibly valuable. As long as d is a positive number, go for it!

I’m the first to admit that I have yet to achieve anything of “real” measurable value by the normal metrics of society, I’ll admit to that.rnrnBut perhaps that’s simply because the metrics we know and use are the wrong metrics.

As I noted above, perhaps I just need better metrics.rnrnAnother “mini-case study”…

Thank you, I will indeed, even if I’m not exactly sure when “back in VA” will be, of course :)

Expanding a bit further, Ben Garvey gave me a way to think about this, which I’m going to modify slightly:rnrn(a * b) – c = drnrna = people who you reachrnb = the average value they take from itrnc = the amount of work / time / cost for me to creaternd = the net value createdrnrnTherefore a couple ways to look at it. For one, a can be sufficiently small if b is large enough to make d worthwhile.rnrnSean Tario has asked me versions of this question, pushed me to think about how to impact deeper, wider, and how to make conscious decisions of the trade-off.rnrnStill working out the answer.

This simple equation shows why things like public art or even the Internet itself, are incredibly valuable. As long as d is a positive number, go for it!

[...] a highly interesting stream of comments on a recent post, I returned to an old thought about ambient intimacy and creating archetypes from avatars: As much [...]

[...] kickstart to a Thursday: “I think you have much to offer the world, but so far have done nothing of real value with [...]

[...] Favorite places? Istanbul, Turkey; Sofia, Bulgaria; hiking in the Rila Mountains in Bulgaria; Brasov, Romania; Kyoto, Japan; and of course, London, England. [...]