3 ms·
I've heard of the McDonald's theory many years ago and I do somewhat agree that it works. But I'm not so sure that Seinfield for conversation-starting works in
by godot 6y ago
I've heard of the McDonald's theory many years ago and I do somewhat agree that it works. But I'm not so sure that Seinfield for conversation-starting works in a similar way. I was an immigrant in the US from Asia. Even though that was almost 25 years ago and I've lived in the US for far longer than in Asia now, I'm still not familiar with Seinfield; and that's the case for many other immigrants friends I know as well.
But take that idea further, I'm not even talking about Seinfield in particular. Let's say we use any subject-X for this purpose of conversation-starting. I'm not a natural conversationist, and most conversations with acquaintances or strangers often end in awkward silences after a sentence or two. I've had great conversations sure, but usually it's because they happen to touch on very specific topics that I really am interested in. In other words, I don't really buy this whole idea that all you need to do is to start with a topic common enough, and the conversation flows. It just hasn't been my experience.
- shittycoder2000 6y agoI can’t find it now, but somewhere I read about the FORD method, and it always worked: Family, Occupation, Recreation, Dreams. I keep trying until something hits. At professional gatherings, I usually do a sequence of ODRF: what do you do? What would you do if you won the 100mil lottery? What do you do do fun? What does your family hope fo you? Reading over the above, I now realize how much I agree with the author’s thesis: good icebreakers use both commonality and creative prompts.
- owlninja 6y agoNot sure how Dale Carnegie's book "How to Win Friends and Influence People" is received on HN, but a point that always stuck with me is: People like to talk about themselves.