5 ms·

Enforced communal participation in events — similar to having to file your taxes , you just participate in X number of community events in a X km region from yo

Enforced communal participation in events — similar to having to file your taxes , you just participate in X number of community events in a X km region from your residence — would help people get off the screens and get outside in a context other than work. Similar to how In high school you need 40 hrs of community service to graduate Edit: ok not ‘enforced’ but there should be some sort of government incentive

anonytrary 8y ago
The irony is that if you do this for the purposes of finding a date, then the efficient stay-at-home solution is to essentially just use Tinder, which optimizes the process, so we're full circle. Unless, of course, using Tinder unevenly weights physical attractiveness and going to community events more evenly weights other forms of attraction (which is probably the case), in which case going out more could be better than using Tinder for some people.
- abledon 8y ago
  not efficient in regards that there are many other positive aspects of venturing out and interacting with community. Increased serotonin and feel good emotions of interacting with real people. swiping screens sucks for that. And even if people fail to find a date, which many may do so if were comparing the side conversation of how dating websites have a 80/20 winner take all kind of matching system.... the people who don't find dates may find meaningful friendships and other types or relationships. In the west its sad that 'relationship' is charged with an intimate vibe, there are many other types of relationships humans can create which can be beneficial to ones mental and physical well being.
- skohan 8y ago
  > using Tinder unevenly weights physical attractiveness and going to community events more evenly weights other forms of attraction I am very convinced this would be the case. I remember reading about a study a while ago about relative attractiveness in heterosexual couples (i.e. how the attractiveness of the man compares to that of the woman). The finding was that there was a strong correlation in relative attractiveness in couples who started dating shortly after meeting, and less of a correlation in couples who knew each other for a long time before dating. Both groups of couples reported similar overall relationship satisfaction. It makes sense if you think about it: if you get together right after meeting, you probably didn't have much to go on besides the superficial. Things like personality take longer to understand. Tinder is like a distillation of the superficial.
RandomInteger4 8y ago
Sounds like something out of Nazi Germany. I'm all for people engaging with the community, but enforced?
- abledon 8y ago
  "dude F that S*, I'm staying home, rolling a bunch of fat ones, and grinding on my level 80 Warlock, then logging on to grind up my PathOfExile smurf" (repeat loop for next 40 years) -- lots of people who are no way voluntarily going to break their comfortable cocoon created by addictive gaming & drugs.
  - thatoneuser 8y ago
    Well then that's their choice and they will have to live and die with the consequences.
    - abledon 8y ago
      You could say that for offenders and people who are arrested for crimes/drugs fall into prison system — we have systems in place to reintegrate them back into society —- but the phenomenon of how humans can buy groceries for 2 months, stay inside and entertain themselves , you can’t ‘discipline’ that and schedule those people for parole or counseling —- we’re gonna have a big problem in 10-20 years when more and more people stay inside and have less meaningful relationships
      - ericd 8y ago
        If they haven't done anything to hurt anyone else, that's their right. It's part of being free, that you're free to hurt yourself.
      - thatoneuser 8y ago
        Criminals don't have to do programs either. You're claiming it's worth imposing a forced attendance because some people are a social. Its their right to be so and mine to tell you to eat a bag of dicks if you think you can force me to do something.
yason 8y ago
What a horrible idea unless you're an extraverted person who'd be likely to join the events anyway.
- abledon 8y ago
  ‘What a horrible idea — interacting with other humans face to face - I’d be so uncomfortable’. I see it as a weak social muscle that hasn’t had a lot of workout time and is leaning on a crutch of modern lifestyle staying indoors on screen time. Just like how gradual exercise will make someone stronger , lose weight and take a burden off of the public healthcare system — social exercise will benefit society as well instead of infantalizing and nurturing a generation of socially crippled human beings lol. As for the extroverted person , maybe they only go to bars to pickup people for quick lays, they don’t contribute to community like helping build a house or work on community plots of land or help paint a mural etc , it could balance it out
  - baroffoos 8y ago
    Mandatory bullshit events forced on people who don't want to be there and then likely some stupid process to prove to the government that you attended the event is a horrible idea. If you want to encourage face to face events then you need to transform urban spaces to be more walkable and create more public spaces people actually want to hang out at. If I go outside I could walk around for hours and the only people I would see are out there for fitness and do not wish to be disturbed by random chats. Forcing people to do things is never as effective as making people want to do them in the first place.
    - abledon 8y ago
      I think having 50 people meet up at a community center to go volunteer is way more feasible than redesigning urban infrastructure. I agree forcing is not nice but tell that to all the children who don’t want to go to school haha
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
      I'm not sure that's true. If you look at where people meet their spouses you often find it was in school or at work (at least here in the states), basically places where they were forced to interact with other people.
michaelmrose 8y ago
There is so many things wrong with this statement man where to start. Laws are fundamentally enforced by ya know force. Taxes are enforced by taking your money by force, taking your freedom by force if you disagree strenuously enough, and taking your life if you fail to submit to losing your freedom. You can't legally force someone to associate with others because we put that in the constitution centuries ago. It's also codified in the European Convention on Human Rights, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Your idea pisses on rights fundamental enough and universal enough that the entire free world agrees they are a good idea. If it didn't you would still have to deal with people with social anxiety, people with other obligations including unplanned ones. Would we have to go to the doctor (if we can afford to go to one) to avoid having our medical or mental safety taken from us? Perhaps go to a government office to plead our case for an exemption or excuse for not going to a party within the right time frame. But the harshest criticism and the must fundamental is that this solution is a solution to a wholly imaginary problem. It's not substantially harder to interact with the feminine half of the species than it ever was. In fact its always sucked if you didn't have much social status. Its worse to be low status than it is to be ugly or stupid or both. This isn't new or shocking. If you want a mate find an individual with shared interests and use that to springboard into dating -> relationship -> partnership. If you don't like where you are at improve your position rather than asking society to fix imaginary problems with the dating and mating game.
- abledon 8y ago
  Thanks for your thoughtful reply — I was thinking more along the lines of ‘schedule 4-7 events through the year’ claim them on your tax return for an extra bonus or something . Maybe the word enforce was too strong — that’s why I’m not a lawyer lol
  - michaelmrose 8y ago
    A government incentive is paid for out of tax payers pockets. It would literally mean taking money out of my pocket, spending most of it on social events, and then giving me the minority of it back. Opting out would mean I was paying for other peoples parties when I can barely at this point cover medical expenses. This remains a terrible idea.
icebraining 8y ago
Sounds like you might enjoy watching https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lobster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lobster
wetpaws 8y ago
Why just not cut the fluff and go straight to government mandated divorces? :)

anonytrary 8y ago

The irony is that if you do this for the purposes of finding a date, then the efficient stay-at-home solution is to essentially just use Tinder, which optimizes the process, so we're full circle. Unless, of course, using Tinder unevenly weights physical attractiveness and going to community events more evenly weights other forms of attraction (which is probably the case), in which case going out more could be better than using Tinder for some people.

abledon 8y ago
not efficient in regards that there are many other positive aspects of venturing out and interacting with community. Increased serotonin and feel good emotions of interacting with real people. swiping screens sucks for that. And even if people fail to find a date, which many may do so if were comparing the side conversation of how dating websites have a 80/20 winner take all kind of matching system.... the people who don't find dates may find meaningful friendships and other types or relationships. In the west its sad that 'relationship' is charged with an intimate vibe, there are many other types of relationships humans can create which can be beneficial to ones mental and physical well being.
skohan 8y ago
> using Tinder unevenly weights physical attractiveness and going to community events more evenly weights other forms of attraction I am very convinced this would be the case. I remember reading about a study a while ago about relative attractiveness in heterosexual couples (i.e. how the attractiveness of the man compares to that of the woman). The finding was that there was a strong correlation in relative attractiveness in couples who started dating shortly after meeting, and less of a correlation in couples who knew each other for a long time before dating. Both groups of couples reported similar overall relationship satisfaction. It makes sense if you think about it: if you get together right after meeting, you probably didn't have much to go on besides the superficial. Things like personality take longer to understand. Tinder is like a distillation of the superficial.

RandomInteger4 8y ago

Sounds like something out of Nazi Germany. I'm all for people engaging with the community, but enforced?

abledon 8y ago
"dude F that S*, I'm staying home, rolling a bunch of fat ones, and grinding on my level 80 Warlock, then logging on to grind up my PathOfExile smurf" (repeat loop for next 40 years) -- lots of people who are no way voluntarily going to break their comfortable cocoon created by addictive gaming & drugs.
- thatoneuser 8y ago
  Well then that's their choice and they will have to live and die with the consequences.
  - abledon 8y ago
    You could say that for offenders and people who are arrested for crimes/drugs fall into prison system — we have systems in place to reintegrate them back into society —- but the phenomenon of how humans can buy groceries for 2 months, stay inside and entertain themselves , you can’t ‘discipline’ that and schedule those people for parole or counseling —- we’re gonna have a big problem in 10-20 years when more and more people stay inside and have less meaningful relationships
    - ericd 8y ago
      If they haven't done anything to hurt anyone else, that's their right. It's part of being free, that you're free to hurt yourself.
    - thatoneuser 8y ago
      Criminals don't have to do programs either. You're claiming it's worth imposing a forced attendance because some people are a social. Its their right to be so and mine to tell you to eat a bag of dicks if you think you can force me to do something.

yason 8y ago

What a horrible idea unless you're an extraverted person who'd be likely to join the events anyway.

abledon 8y ago
‘What a horrible idea — interacting with other humans face to face - I’d be so uncomfortable’. I see it as a weak social muscle that hasn’t had a lot of workout time and is leaning on a crutch of modern lifestyle staying indoors on screen time. Just like how gradual exercise will make someone stronger , lose weight and take a burden off of the public healthcare system — social exercise will benefit society as well instead of infantalizing and nurturing a generation of socially crippled human beings lol. As for the extroverted person , maybe they only go to bars to pickup people for quick lays, they don’t contribute to community like helping build a house or work on community plots of land or help paint a mural etc , it could balance it out
- baroffoos 8y ago
  Mandatory bullshit events forced on people who don't want to be there and then likely some stupid process to prove to the government that you attended the event is a horrible idea. If you want to encourage face to face events then you need to transform urban spaces to be more walkable and create more public spaces people actually want to hang out at. If I go outside I could walk around for hours and the only people I would see are out there for fitness and do not wish to be disturbed by random chats. Forcing people to do things is never as effective as making people want to do them in the first place.
  - abledon 8y ago
    I think having 50 people meet up at a community center to go volunteer is way more feasible than redesigning urban infrastructure. I agree forcing is not nice but tell that to all the children who don’t want to go to school haha
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
    I'm not sure that's true. If you look at where people meet their spouses you often find it was in school or at work (at least here in the states), basically places where they were forced to interact with other people.

michaelmrose 8y ago

There is so many things wrong with this statement man where to start. Laws are fundamentally enforced by ya know force. Taxes are enforced by taking your money by force, taking your freedom by force if you disagree strenuously enough, and taking your life if you fail to submit to losing your freedom. You can't legally force someone to associate with others because we put that in the constitution centuries ago. It's also codified in the European Convention on Human Rights, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Your idea pisses on rights fundamental enough and universal enough that the entire free world agrees they are a good idea. If it didn't you would still have to deal with people with social anxiety, people with other obligations including unplanned ones. Would we have to go to the doctor (if we can afford to go to one) to avoid having our medical or mental safety taken from us? Perhaps go to a government office to plead our case for an exemption or excuse for not going to a party within the right time frame. But the harshest criticism and the must fundamental is that this solution is a solution to a wholly imaginary problem. It's not substantially harder to interact with the feminine half of the species than it ever was. In fact its always sucked if you didn't have much social status. Its worse to be low status than it is to be ugly or stupid or both. This isn't new or shocking. If you want a mate find an individual with shared interests and use that to springboard into dating -> relationship -> partnership. If you don't like where you are at improve your position rather than asking society to fix imaginary problems with the dating and mating game.

abledon 8y ago
Thanks for your thoughtful reply — I was thinking more along the lines of ‘schedule 4-7 events through the year’ claim them on your tax return for an extra bonus or something . Maybe the word enforce was too strong — that’s why I’m not a lawyer lol
- michaelmrose 8y ago
  A government incentive is paid for out of tax payers pockets. It would literally mean taking money out of my pocket, spending most of it on social events, and then giving me the minority of it back. Opting out would mean I was paying for other peoples parties when I can barely at this point cover medical expenses. This remains a terrible idea.

icebraining 8y ago

Sounds like you might enjoy watching https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lobster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lobster

wetpaws 8y ago

Why just not cut the fluff and go straight to government mandated divorces? :)