Noisy, in a way, that he always post on Facebook or Twitter anything he did like it is his diary, always commenting other people's posts, retweets every minute or hour, etc. An attention whore or something. Is there a specific word for this kind of personality?

By the way, I didn't mean nosy or nosey.

  • 14
    Attention whore or validation seeker is what comes to mind for me as well. I'd like to hear a more 'formal' word, though.
    – Othya
    Commented Jul 20, 2015 at 18:35
  • 5
    I'd call him "unfriended".
    – Hot Licks
    Commented Jul 20, 2015 at 20:21
  • 4
    @Mari-LouA No, I think he means noisy. It's not about having your nose in other people's business, but about constantly writing stuff—the Internet equivalent to a real chatterbox who never stops talking. That kind of noisy, Commented Jul 20, 2015 at 21:19
  • 2
    I think I was the only one who thought there might be a misunderstanding :)
    – Mari-Lou A
    Commented Jul 21, 2015 at 8:01
  • 3
    i like this question because it sounds like the setup to a joke. "I don't know, what DO you call a person who is two noisy on the internet? :D" Commented Jul 21, 2015 at 22:35

15 Answers 15


Potentially an oversharer, but the word often means sharing details about your life that are either embarrassing to you or discomfiting to others.

overshare -

to disclose too much (personal information) or too many (details) about oneself

It does not, alas, mean that guy that just has to share his 2 cents about everything.

  • I think this is the closest answer on my OP. Attention whore, social media addict, and garrulous can be considered too.
    – Jaeger Jay
    Commented Jul 21, 2015 at 15:47
  • Doesn't this word sound too technically or too "modern"?
    – Croll
    Commented Jul 22, 2015 at 17:51
  • I think this word does the best of any answers I've seen so far without seeming archaic or having unwanted connotations. Being "too modern" is an advantage IMO when the intended meaning is a modern phenomenon. As an alternative, use my answer, exhibitionist. Commented Jul 22, 2015 at 19:36
  • 1
    The OP didn't ask about (or even mention) connotation, therefore you are wrong to argue that other answers are incorrect because of their connotation.
    – L0j1k
    Commented Jul 22, 2015 at 21:39
  • 1
    I agree on to that @L0j1k.
    – Jaeger Jay
    Commented Jul 23, 2015 at 15:24

An "attention whore" is a widely-used term for this, someone who must be the center of attention, and does things and causes situations which puts them in the center of attention, into the spotlight. Of course, it is not something you would say to another person, as it is considered an insult. It conveys the same meaning regardless of whether or not the person is online, and so in this way if you are seeking an exclusively-online term -- or a term which is not insulting -- this may not fit your circumstances.

  • 2
    Some people, especially those with some kind of fundamental social disorder (e.g. the classic Aspergers cases), are often unaware of the intensity of their sharing. Instead of wanting to be the centre of attention, they're oblivious to the fact that the conversation isn't necessarily about them and that sometimes it's better to keep quiet. How do you distinguish between actively seeking attention and just being socially inept?
    – tadman
    Commented Jul 21, 2015 at 17:05
  • 2
    Me personally? I take each person's behavior into consideration. It is after all a social network, and so a blanket answer here would be less than ideal. But to answer your question more broadly: If the door is red, the door is red, regardless of how it got that way.
    – L0j1k
    Commented Jul 21, 2015 at 22:09
  • 1
    This term also conveys an assumed negative attitude towards sex workers (and perhaps towards female sexuality in general), which makes it inappropriate in many contexts and arguably preferable not to use at all. Commented Jul 22, 2015 at 19:31
  • 1
    As linguists, we do not prescribe language, we describe it.
    – L0j1k
    Commented Jul 22, 2015 at 20:21
  • @L0j1k: I don't see how that response is relevant. Coverage of connotations and attitudes implied by word choice are relevant to someone seeking a word to use in speech or writing, and most importantly, mentioning them is descriptive, not prescriptive. Commented Jul 23, 2015 at 1:23

He may have


  1. pathologically incoherent, repetitious speech.
  2. incessant or compulsive talkativeness; wearisome volubility.

And if the above is tempting but not quite a perfect fit, I'd like to humbly submit the not-yet-a-real-word "blogorrhea" for your specific case.

Unfortunately of course this is a name for his condition, not for him himself.


You could use social media addict.

It's doesn't fit the description exactly, as a social media addict doesn't necessarily overshare publicly (eg, you can have social media addicts who are just messaging their friends, or browsing instagram).


Bob is a bit of a social media addict - he's liked twenty pictures and commented on ten of them in the last hour alone.

  • 12
    ..and they were all his own..
    – Mou某
    Commented Jul 21, 2015 at 8:42
  • @user3306356 forever alone. haha
    – Jaeger Jay
    Commented Jul 24, 2015 at 15:53

There is a punchline to a Penny Arcade comic that I think sums this up very well: A Twitter Shitter


garrulous - excessively talkative, especially on trivial matters

is usually applied in spoken contexts, rather than to "non-vocal" online postings. But given OP has already used noisy himself, I think it's appropriate.

  • 1
    Seems to me that OP is specifically looking for something like "noisy" without the connotation of it being spoken. Commented Jul 21, 2015 at 16:43
  • @MatthewRead Exactly. I have already explained in my OP my definition of "noisy".
    – Jaeger Jay
    Commented Jul 22, 2015 at 2:20
  • 1
    @Matthew: Until relatively recently, one of the big differences between spoken and written "conversations" was that only the former could normally take place in anything approximating real-time, but online chat facilities have changed all that. So it's now perfectly reasonable to extend words like talk, conversation and garrulous online to contexts such as a garrulous blog. Commented Jul 22, 2015 at 12:01

How about an *E*-ttention whore?

  • 4
    And the closely related i-Diot?
    – WernerCD
    Commented Jul 21, 2015 at 12:41
  • @WernerCD e-xactly. Haha
    – Jaeger Jay
    Commented Jul 21, 2015 at 15:45
  • I think you win.
    – tadman
    Commented Jul 21, 2015 at 17:05


A person who behaves in an extravagant way in order to attract attention

If desired you could attach an adjective [phrase] like "online", "social media", "digital", etc. to be more specific, but I don't think it's needed.


Although not particularly Internet related, I'd call them a


A person who likes to chatter.


Talk informally about unimportant matters.

  • I think this is vaguely more internet related than you might think due to I.R.C. I think chatty is also applicable, albeit not necessarily as derogatory.
    – Tonepoet
    Commented Jul 21, 2015 at 18:17

Lifelogging enthusiast. Was a thing before twitter/facefook, albeit non-public.


All the actions of person revolve around seeking attention, so

attention seeker

  • I presume attention seeker and attention whore are synonymous.
    – Jaeger Jay
    Commented Jul 23, 2015 at 13:11

vain, adjective –MW

4 : having or showing undue or excessive pride in one's appearance or achievements

Anyone who feels the need to update their status for the world at large is vain. They probably also think this song is about them.

  • One up for the song reference -- though it's stuck in my head now...
    – W9WBH
    Commented Jul 31, 2015 at 8:17

A very active (or overactive) user is what I would call them.
A troll would be someone who posts comments to things ad nauseam and out of spite.

  • 7
    I don't think troll is a good word here. Trolls may sometimes be attention seekers, but often being a troll is associated with doing something that seems earnest, but is actually not (often to provoke infuriating reactions, etc.) There are trolls who post very little and whom are rather quiet online, for example.
    – Othya
    Commented Jul 20, 2015 at 18:37
  • @Othya This does not say that troll is the correct word, but rather that the correct word is not troll because "a troll would be someone who post[s] comments ... out of spite." Commented Jul 20, 2015 at 19:16
  • @Blubberguy22 I disagree with your reading, but even if so -- why mention it? There is a virtually limitless number of words that are not correct here, and the OP does not mention "troll". Commented Jul 21, 2015 at 16:45
  • @MatthewRead I agree with you there, "troll" is indeed irrelevant. Commented Jul 21, 2015 at 17:11

How about a loudmouth? While granting that, being the internet, we can't actually hear them. At least not yet, web3?

Cambridge: loudmouth


Itchy-fingers sounds appropriate Just like some of the above suggestions this is also not formal English as such

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.