3 ms·

Not talked about: you're married. Having worked from home while being single it has its ups and downs. Sure you can get to the gym more but unless you're a natu

Not talked about: you're married. Having worked from home while being single it has its ups and downs. Sure you can get to the gym more but unless you're a natural extrovert you're going to meet way less people - and you'll be less likely to "find someone" (if thats what you're after) compared to the huge number of single people in the city. I feel like this is a hidden motivation for many people. Maybe just me.

chrisseaton 9y ago
Surely the only difference is you won't meet the people at work, but you probably wouldn't date them anyway would you. You'd still meet people at every other place people meet, which is where people look for dates anyway.
- kbenson 9y ago
  > Surely the only difference is you won't meet the people at work, but you probably wouldn't date them anyway would you. Traditionally, work has been a very common place to meet future spouses. I believe the rate has dropped in recent decades, but I would be surprised if it was so low as to be inconsequential, especially when considering something as important as many people view this.
  - rovolo 9y ago
    According to 'Searching for a Mate: The Rise of the Internet as a Social Intermediary' (2010) http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0003122412448050 http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0003122412448050 , around 10% of (hetero) couples met at work as of 2010, down from a peak of 20% in 1990. It is the fourth most common method behind friends, bars, and online. Just the graph: https://cdn.technologyreview.com/i/images/internet-dating.png https://cdn.technologyreview.com/i/images/internet-dating.pn...
    - kbenson 9y ago
      I figured it was probably sub 20%. 10% is still quite high, in my eyes.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - xapata 9y ago
      There's some overlap, as one can be friends with coworkers and go to bars with them.
      - rovolo 9y ago
        The paper aims to categorize how people met rather than how their relationship developed. This is how they describe their criteria for categorizing relationships (the paper is focused on internet dating, but the same criteria would be used for coworkers): >By meeting online, or meeting through the Internet, we mean that a couple’s relationship began with an online interaction and then developed into a personal and physical relationship. We coded couples as having met online only if the online interaction was crucial to their having met, regardless of how the couple communicated once they had met. … If the couple first met decades earlier, fell out of touch, and then rediscovered each other through Facebook, that would be “meeting online” for our purposes. Based on my reading of their criteria, the relationship would be categorized as 'coworker' if they either knew the person at work prior to visiting the bar, they were introduced at the bar through a coworker, or a work event took place at a bar.
- babesh 9y ago
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_multiplier_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_multiplier_effect https://be.helpful.com/helpful-how-the-math-of-viral-growth-actually-works-a4fcee693ace https://be.helpful.com/helpful-how-the-math-of-viral-growth-... Transitive property of dating. You might not date your coworker but you might date their friend... or a bit less likely a friend of their friend. Etc... Also known in social gaming as virality, a statistic you can measure. Also applies to knowledge transfer which is a reason to live near a hub.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

chrisseaton 9y ago

Surely the only difference is you won't meet the people at work, but you probably wouldn't date them anyway would you. You'd still meet people at every other place people meet, which is where people look for dates anyway.

kbenson 9y ago
> Surely the only difference is you won't meet the people at work, but you probably wouldn't date them anyway would you. Traditionally, work has been a very common place to meet future spouses. I believe the rate has dropped in recent decades, but I would be surprised if it was so low as to be inconsequential, especially when considering something as important as many people view this.
- rovolo 9y ago
  According to 'Searching for a Mate: The Rise of the Internet as a Social Intermediary' (2010) http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0003122412448050 http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0003122412448050 , around 10% of (hetero) couples met at work as of 2010, down from a peak of 20% in 1990. It is the fourth most common method behind friends, bars, and online. Just the graph: https://cdn.technologyreview.com/i/images/internet-dating.png https://cdn.technologyreview.com/i/images/internet-dating.pn...
  - kbenson 9y ago
    I figured it was probably sub 20%. 10% is still quite high, in my eyes.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - xapata 9y ago
    There's some overlap, as one can be friends with coworkers and go to bars with them.
    - rovolo 9y ago
      The paper aims to categorize how people met rather than how their relationship developed. This is how they describe their criteria for categorizing relationships (the paper is focused on internet dating, but the same criteria would be used for coworkers): >By meeting online, or meeting through the Internet, we mean that a couple’s relationship began with an online interaction and then developed into a personal and physical relationship. We coded couples as having met online only if the online interaction was crucial to their having met, regardless of how the couple communicated once they had met. … If the couple first met decades earlier, fell out of touch, and then rediscovered each other through Facebook, that would be “meeting online” for our purposes. Based on my reading of their criteria, the relationship would be categorized as 'coworker' if they either knew the person at work prior to visiting the bar, they were introduced at the bar through a coworker, or a work event took place at a bar.
babesh 9y ago
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_multiplier_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_multiplier_effect https://be.helpful.com/helpful-how-the-math-of-viral-growth-actually-works-a4fcee693ace https://be.helpful.com/helpful-how-the-math-of-viral-growth-... Transitive property of dating. You might not date your coworker but you might date their friend... or a bit less likely a friend of their friend. Etc... Also known in social gaming as virality, a statistic you can measure. Also applies to knowledge transfer which is a reason to live near a hub.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]