4 ms·
If you play hard to get, aren't you selecting for the most desperate suitors? And therefore the ones of the lowest "value" themselves?
by twic 6y ago
If you play hard to get, aren't you selecting for the most desperate suitors? And therefore the ones of the lowest "value" themselves?
- jcbrand 6y agoYou could use "determined" instead of "desperate" and then suddenly it sounds like a value proposition again.
- ChuckNorris89 6y agoNobody is forcing you to select from your desperate suitors. Having many suitors means you have options and are free to casually pursue your own interests and the queue of suitors is there to validate your high status in the eyes of the interest you are pursuing.
- BariumBlue 6y agoIf you assume there are plenty of suitors, then playing hard to get would advertise yourself to the folks on the higher end of the desirability curve, possibly giving you more selection there, and having reasonable fallbacks otherwise. If there aren't a lot of suitors, then you'd probably want to go for the best you can get, because there's probably not much better, but almost certainly worse. I wonder if there's a good way to formally analyze this
- twic 6y agoThis is somewhere in the vicinity of the secretary problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_problem
- lexicality 6y agoThat depends entirely on how hard you play and when you allow yourself to get got. The article points this out. You've got to make the other person think you're just out of reach but maybe if they stretch . . . It's basically flirting but longer?