The slight frustration on the thread is because none of the people who say they are 'odd' have either defined what constitutes their 'oddity' (other than some stuff about oversharing or being blunt) or - which I think is stranger - have said anything at all about what constitutes this supposed 'mainstream' ordinariness with which they are supposed to be fitting in. To the people who self-identify as 'odd', and say you try to 'talk in a mainstream way' at work, what exactly are you talking about to fit in?
So much of what constitutes 'normal' is dependent on place, education, social class, job, gender, etc etc. As I said up the thread, I am not at all an unusual person in anyway, and have never considered myself to be. However, in the village I live in now, I am considered very unusual (which baffled me initially), because I'm a foreigner with no previous connections to the place (virtually everyone else grew up here, or has lived here for a very long time), a working mother of a pre-schooler (also not usual locally)with a child with an unusual name by local standards, I didn't change my name on marriage, I'm a writer, a Labour voter (very Tory village), a vegetarian who doesn't have a TV, someone who's lived in a lot of different countries etc etc. Not remotely unusual things in themselves, and in my London circles I was entirely ordinary, but by the standards of here I am unusual.
That doesn't make me 'odd' - and I certainly don't attempt to shoehorn myself into a local norm, based on the behaviour of parents I met at a local baby/toddler group - but I makes me 'odd for here'. I think there's a difference.