Is this the whope quiet qutting I've been hearing about?

Weird how everyone has a different definition of quiet quitting lol. To *me*, quiet quitting is actively performing in a way which doesn't provide enough value to the company to warrant your employment, i.e., the company would be better off firing you than continuing to pay you. How this is approached can vary, though. Some people will do the bare minimum, recognizing that they're technically doing their job adequately while knowing that someone else could almost certainly do it better. Other times, it's basically doing so little that they're just waiting for their employer to figure it out and fire them. Regardless of the specifics, I think there's an expectation that they're likely to be canned once someone notices the discrepancy. Based on that and what you said, it doesn't sound like you're quiet quitting. If you're performing your responsibilities adequate and your employer wouldn't make an obvious improvement to their workforce by firing you, then you're just doing your job. You're *not* working towards growing your career like your coworkers, but most people aren't, and that's expected. >I zero attachment to the company and quite frankly to most of my coworkers. If tomorrow it went bankrupt I wouldn't bat an eye. It's worth pointing out that one can put in that extra effort without it being due to being "attached" to their company or coworkers. Arguably, most people who operate like this are doing so for their own personal benefit. It's how you build your career, make more money, find better opportunities, etc., and this dynamic is essentially the basis of business. So don't think you're unique or out of place at your job by not having a personal attachment to it- it's just that these other people have *something* that they care about in which putting in that extra effort benefits them.