13 ms·

The many gifts of awkward silence

200 points by jger15 5y ago

sgarrity 5y ago
...
- teddyh 5y ago
  …
selfsimilar 5y ago
Ruth Bader Ginsberg was notorious for using this to great effect.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
IncRnd 5y ago
This is excellent advice.
marcodiego 5y ago
A colleague of mine once made fun of me because of the tools I used. I got so angry because of the comment that I was ready to berate him. Considering his influence, reputation and being working there for much longer than me, acting furiously could cost my job. I simply silenced took a deep breath, stopped what I was typing and kept looking at my monitor. He went away. Now, I see that the situation may have fallen in the case listed in the article: "You make the situation even weirder—but in your favor. You harnessed the attack and deflected it, simply by letting it linger in the air, like the emotional fart it is."
- baby 5y ago
  The reverse is to keep talking when someone is trying to cut you. If they’re really trying to cut you then you’ll both be speaking out loud which will get really awkward. It is then a test of strength to see who will endure the most cringe and stop speaking last.
  - dorkwood 5y ago
    I've tried this with a serial-interrupter. The danger of this approach is that most other people in the room won't remember who was speaking first. You'll get responses of "you were both talking at the same time. I couldn't understand either of you", and you'll both look like idiots.
    - bitshiftfaced 5y ago
      It's good when talking one on one. I talk "through" them when they attempt to cut me off. It happened once that the other person got angry, and told me I interrupted them. When I recounted the conversation and how I had actually started first, they were stunned. It was a wonderful feeling
    - BurningPenguin 5y ago
      I see you've met my mother. But on a more serious note: I tried that too. Doesn't work with certain people. Some get even angry, give you a "Let me finish talking!" lecture and continue talking for literal hours. What i started doing, was to just leave. Like, physically leave. Now that probably won't work if you're in a meeting or talking to the boss, so use with care.
      - fho 5y ago
        Then there is the class of people that just don't stop talking even if you physically leave the room. I know two of those, so statistically speaking either I am an extreme outlier there or there are a lot of those out there.
        guythedudebro 5y ago
        Currently living with the type
      - tpoacher 5y ago
        Leaving might work with people who are intentionally being rude. Most of the time, people aren't aware they're being rude, but will be offended if you try a passive-aggressive way of implying this is the case.
- theonething 5y ago
  What you're describing is responding to an insult/attack by ignoring it. And I agree that it is often a good tactic. I think the article is kind of strange though. It's framed in the context of negotiation and how to respond to questions. > ...SILENCE. It's the best reply to questions you wish you weren't asked. And yet, as you quoted, it mentions being attacked. I think silence is often a good response to insults/attacks, but not in response to questions. The latter is rude and disrespectful.
- agumonkey 5y ago
  It seems a good trick. It works on kids, it also works on aggressors. Just the other day girls at work discussed self defense and apparently they've been taught to throw a reflex slap to anybody trying to jump them just to send confusion. There's a weird thing about humans and their behavior where a lot of intense ones seems like semi-programmed feedback loops.
version_five 5y ago
I really agree with the "words you use to explain vs words that can be used against you" one. So often, both in person and online, I see people asking "can you explain what you mean by..." or trying to break your concern down further. At face value it seems like a good question, but among political types, it almost certainly is a device to either try and reduce your concern to a bunch of little things so small they don't matter, or to tell you you don't understand or have defined something wrong. If you want to stand your ground, its usually better to give nothing, even if you feel like you haven't explained well, or in an online discussion, if you feel like your counterpart has "won" by getting the last comment in.
- Wowfunhappy 5y ago
  > So often, both in person and online, I see people asking "can you explain what you mean by..." or trying to break your concern down further. ...I mean, I do this all the time out of a genuine desire to understand the other person's thinking; it's not some ploy to "win" an argument or feel somehow superior.
  - kurthr 5y ago
    Unfortunately, it has been weaponized (especially on-line) for a long enough period that many people will not give the benefit of doubt. And frankly, unless they really want your compassion or understanding they have no incentive or any obligation to. Except for very well moderated forums and positive company cultures, it seems like that's where we are. One on one things stil seem much better.
  - version_five 5y ago
    Thus my caveat of "among political types". In a good faith conversation it doesn't matter (and presumably staying silent and staring down your conversation partner happens less often generally). But as the other reply mentioned, there are lots of people - not friends, I've encountered it at work and online- that are basically trying to get you to talk more so they can trap you. The real trick is to recognize when it's happening with minimal false positives so you don't just look like a defensive jerk (been there also)
quadrangle 5y ago
I really like this. But I also think it depends on the social dynamic. The extreme form of silence is ghosting or stonewalling. There's certainly power in choosing not to speak, but it can also be abuse of power. If the silence is focused on getting yourself to the place where you have the best compassionate, win-for-all decision about how to engage, that's great. If the silence is basically a refusal to have a relationship based in candor, that can sabotage a relationship. Lots of dysfunctional relationships have a dynamic where one person withholds and withdraws and the other person gets more and more anxious and aggressive because they are desperate for the other person to engage. Taken thoughtfully and critically, the idea of allowing silence is excellent. We should certainly not fill silence just because we can't accept it.
- josephg 5y ago
  Yep. Everything powerful can be weaponized - by other people, by ourselves, or by the scared parts in ourselves which are afraid of feeling powerless. Silence. Analysis. Strong emotion. Withdrawal. Violent outbursts. Love. Sacrifice. All of it. Daniel Schmachtenburger talks about this a lot, with lots of examples: https://youtu.be/9QGrffjOFko https://youtu.be/9QGrffjOFko
  - andrei_says_ 5y ago
    And let’s remember that in business, like in war, the one with less empathy wins.
    - catlikesshrimp 5y ago
      The one with the most power ( highest numbers, best weapons) wins. Empathy is lost when war starts. Not all business is zero sum.
    - afc 5y ago
      Maybe I'm very lucky, but that's not my experience in the corporate world. I think there's a lot of 2nd effects and feedback loops that favor cooperative behaviors and strongly penalize jerks, at least in the medium/long term.
hunter2_ 5y ago
Definitely some overlap with the advice to not talk to police. Granted, it's probably better to calmly explain to police that you won't be speaking on the topic at hand, but similar power move.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
scottious 5y ago
Sometimes if you try this you enrage the person on the other end so much that they LITERALLY stop what they're doing to SCREAM at the top of their lungs. After their voice is hoarse they go right back to the vicious attacks. I'm not sure this advice works when used on people with Narcissistic Personality Disorder or Borderline Personality Disorder. I was being berated unfairly, verbally abused, accused of things that didn't happen, and gaslit. Instead of defending myself I actually tried the approach laid out in this article: "SHUT UP when you aren’t sure what to say". I wasn't about to defend myself when everything I do is suddenly on trial for some reason.
- bredren 5y ago
  There is a modified response for these types of situations called “grey rock.”
  - zakary 5y ago
    Can you elaborate on what grey rock entails?
    - sodality2 5y ago
      https://www.e-counseling.com/mental-health/what-is-the-grey-rock-method/ https://www.e-counseling.com/mental-health/what-is-the-grey-... >The grey rock method is a practice where an individual becomes emotionally non-responsive, boring, and virtually acts like a rock. Emotional detachment serves to undermine a narcissist’s attempts to lure and manipulate, causing them to grow uninterested and bored. The grey rock method takes away what the narcissist needs and desires most–attention.
- Spooky23 5y ago
  When you deal with people like this, the screaming crazy is victory.
ggm 5y ago
Can be weaponised. Therefore, not totally lawful-neutral. c/f gaslighting as others have said. If you chose to be only passive in all conversations, you aren't sharing knowledge: you may be acquiring it, but across the specifics of a relationship this is in effect weaponised information asymmetry.
Spooky23 5y ago
The problem with the silence technique is when people apply it for normal conversations. Every business conversation does not need to be adversarial, and silence is a control technique used to assert dominance. When people pull this shit on my teams where inappropriate, they are in the cold as far as I’m concerned. Peers need to collaborate, not conduct themselves like apes. In a natural adversarial context (procurement, legal, audit) that’s a different story.
- Demcox 5y ago
  Exactly, as with any technique it takes experience and an understanding of the immediate social situation. People whipping out dominance-inducing tools makes them, well, seem like the tool with a complete disregard for the greater aim.
- klyrs 5y ago
  I've had a superior barrage me with questions, faster than I could possibly answer them. It was incredibly adversarial. I was kinda stunned, to be honest, and i took a beat to collect my thoughts. Gave him a brief, mostly involuntary wide-eyed stare, took an audible breath, and set about deliberately answering his questions in an order that made sense. The rest of our meeting went smoothly. When a coworker is acting like an ape, a moment of silence can inject some calm into the situation.
- Qub3d 5y ago
  I agree, and I feel the article implicitly focuses on workplace discussions. But it is good to make it explicit -- if you do this with your friends, you may "win" in the short term but you won't have many friends in the long term.
ctdonath 5y ago
When there is nothing you can say which will improve the situation, don't say. When someone doesn't want to discuss an issue to mutual conclusion (if only agreeing to disagree), don't discuss. When someone's statement/question speaks for itself, don't speak for it.
tomcam 5y ago
Incredibly useful tactic when someone is selling you a high-ticket item. When they pause and say something like “so, are you ready to invest [they always use this term when you’re spending a lot]?” just wait a couple of beats. Amazing how often they talk themselves into dropping the price… so you go a notch further down.
- mordechai9000 5y ago
  I've seen this formalized as a strategy (probably here on Hacker News): 1. Express disbelief at the offer. You might just repeat the offer with appropriate inflection and body language, like it's hard to believe they are asking that much. 2. Don't say anything, no matter how uncomfortable it gets. Wait until the other party makes a concession. I suspect professional sales people will be wise to this, but they probably already have a concession they are willing to make to close the deal.
sghiassy 5y ago
Can this principle of silence be applied to emails/txts? Seems like in the context of emails, silence is just ghosting, and is unprofessional. (Hope I’m wrong)
- bartvk 5y ago
  Emails and texts also have a rhythm. Perhaps the outlined strategy can be modified here, by taking more time to respond than your previous replies.
theonething 5y ago
> SHUT UP when you aren’t sure what to say. > Just don’t say anything. Just don’t. Nothing. No. Not a syllable. SILENCE. So if a person asks you a question you don't like you just don't answer? Totally ignore them? Am I missing something or does this seem rude and disrespectful? I mean, if I'm not sure if the answer, why not, you know, just say so? e.g. "Hmmm... I'm not sure, can I get back to you on that?" Or in the case of one of their example questions. "Can you work for free?" Instead of ignoring them, how about "No, I can't do that. My policy is not to work for free"? What am I missing here?
- rewgs 5y ago
  > In the case of one of their example questions. "Can you work for free?" Instead of ignoring them, how about "No, I can't do that. My policy is not to work for free"? What the blog is suggesting only really works when communicating face to face, in person. But if someone asks me if I can work for free, and I simply stare at them, I think the most likely outcome is that they realize they've made a mistake by asking it and back peddle, or say something stupid.
  - theonething 5y ago
    My comment applies in most person to person contexts, face to face or otherwise. > But if someone asks me if I can work for free, and I simply stare at them Again, I think a better solution is to politely decline. It shows respect for the other person and I think it increases the likelihood of reciprocated respect. I don't see how ignoring them is better.
    - taejo 5y ago
      If somebody thinks they're better than you, their disrespecting you while you respect them is exactly what they expect. Staring silence shows that their expectation was wrong and they should reconsider.
- MaulingMonkey 5y ago
  > So if a person asks you a question you don't like you just don't answer? Totally ignore them? Not ignore, per se. To ignore someone might involve continuing on about something else, for example, which is a much different thing than shutting up. Shutting up might involve making eye contact, raising an eyebrow. Perhaps a pained expression. Nonverbal communication. > Am I missing something or does this seem rude and disrespectful? It can be. Some of the questions are rude and disrespectful in their fundamental construction, so responding some in kind might be warranted. Hell, silence might be a hell of a lot more polite than called for. But silence is not always rude and disrespectful. Consider for a moment a fool who's made an unreasonable ask or put their foot in their mouth. It might take them a moment for their brain to catch up with their mouth - perhaps after wondering a moment why you aren't asnwering, before they put themselves in your shoes and realize what they've done. You might pause a moment to let them realize this for themselves, without having them suffer the added injury and injustice of you explaining, spelling out, and spoonfeeding their error to them as if they were incapable of realizing it for themselves, if only you'd be so decent as to just give them a moment. Or two. Letting them do their own self-critique may lessen their guard and defensiveness, as you won't come across as wanting to tear them down. Of course, this won't work well unless you can respect and trust the person to actually do such things. In this case, if you squint hard enough, saying nothing could be seen as an extremely simplified version of the socratic method - the implicit question being perhaps "do you realize what you've just said/asked?" or "and what do you think I think about that?"
pcmoney 5y ago
The quickest ~$40k I ever made was by introducing 5s of awkward silence during a salary negotiation. It felt like 5 minutes though.
- nkskalyan 5y ago
  At what time do you remain silent? Salary negotiation is one of those things I suck at and don't get the chance to practice a lot either. I wish there were more opportunities to practise
  - Qub3d 5y ago
    A good moment is in the offer/counter-offer phase. If you're talking numbers, when the person across the table says, "We'd like to offer you $x to join our team", don't instantly reply, but sit and mull it over. (If this is happening over email, turn a few seconds into an hour or so. Similar practice.) If you immediately say "no" it could give the impression you aren't interested or even considering them. By giving a few seconds of silence, it telegraphs, "I'm interested in this job. I'm considering this carefully." Then, give a counter-offer*. After your initial silence, you can say something like, "That is an interesting offer. I really like $Company, and I want to work here. Could we (don't use I/you, use "we") consider $x+n? I think that reflects my skills and experience well." And don't say anything else, wait for the other party to break silence. Don't elaborate on your skills, no "What I mean is..." -- they've seen your resume, your code challenge, etc. It is hard to do, but it can be very effective. Just make sure you keep a polite but firm stance. If they won't move on base pay, move to looking at signing bonuses, equity, etc. --- * You almost always should do this, by the way. If you are at the point where a job offer is extended, any place worth working at is not going to instantly rescind the offer because you had the audacity to ask. Its letting the sunk cost fallacy work in your favor.
    - nkskalyan 5y ago
      Thanks - This is some great advice :) Another thing to note - This would also require research to come up with some numbers. Stay silent, take time to think, show excitement but not too much
Efimeridopolis 5y ago
I've only used this a few times when someone asked me something egregious or made a ridiculous demand and they surprisingly caved. I am also including a very extreme example of silence being used for manipulation purposes by You Know Who, just before a speech before a hostile crowd. The Mexican artist Diego Rivera describes this in his autobiography, My Life My Art: A few days later I saw Adolf Hitler address a mass meeting in Berlin, [...] As he prepared to speak, Hitler drew himself rigidly erect, as if he expected to swell out and fill his oversized English officer's raincoat and look like a giant. Then he made a motion for silence. Some Communist workers booed him, but after a few minutes the entire crowd became perfectly silent. As he warmed up, Hitler began screaming and waving his arms like an epileptic. Something about him must have stirred the deepest centers of his fellow Germans, for after awhile I sensed a weird magnetic current flowing between him and the crowd. So profound was it that, when he finished, after two hours of speaking, there was a second of complete silence. Not even the Communist youth groups, instructed to do so, whistled at him. Then the silence gave way to tremendous, ear-shattering applause from all over the square. As he left, Hitler's followers closed ranks around him with every sign of devoted loyalty. [...] [Muenzenberg] had been watching Hitler, then nearly at the other end of the square. He had noticed that the crowd was still applauding. Before leaving the square, Hitler turned and gave the Nazi salute. Instead of boos, the applause swelled. It was clear that Hitler had won many followers among these left-wing workers. So you know, it CAN be a dick move.
pmdulaney 5y ago
Seems to me this can be filed under "How being a jerk can sometimes yield benefits". Being a jerk can yield benefits. See Psalm 37.

200 points by jger15 5y ago

sgarrity 5y ago

...

teddyh 5y ago
…

selfsimilar 5y ago

Ruth Bader Ginsberg was notorious for using this to great effect.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

IncRnd 5y ago

This is excellent advice.

marcodiego 5y ago

A colleague of mine once made fun of me because of the tools I used. I got so angry because of the comment that I was ready to berate him. Considering his influence, reputation and being working there for much longer than me, acting furiously could cost my job. I simply silenced took a deep breath, stopped what I was typing and kept looking at my monitor. He went away. Now, I see that the situation may have fallen in the case listed in the article: "You make the situation even weirder—but in your favor. You harnessed the attack and deflected it, simply by letting it linger in the air, like the emotional fart it is."

baby 5y ago
The reverse is to keep talking when someone is trying to cut you. If they’re really trying to cut you then you’ll both be speaking out loud which will get really awkward. It is then a test of strength to see who will endure the most cringe and stop speaking last.
- dorkwood 5y ago
  I've tried this with a serial-interrupter. The danger of this approach is that most other people in the room won't remember who was speaking first. You'll get responses of "you were both talking at the same time. I couldn't understand either of you", and you'll both look like idiots.
  - bitshiftfaced 5y ago
    It's good when talking one on one. I talk "through" them when they attempt to cut me off. It happened once that the other person got angry, and told me I interrupted them. When I recounted the conversation and how I had actually started first, they were stunned. It was a wonderful feeling
  - BurningPenguin 5y ago
    I see you've met my mother. But on a more serious note: I tried that too. Doesn't work with certain people. Some get even angry, give you a "Let me finish talking!" lecture and continue talking for literal hours. What i started doing, was to just leave. Like, physically leave. Now that probably won't work if you're in a meeting or talking to the boss, so use with care.
    - fho 5y ago
      Then there is the class of people that just don't stop talking even if you physically leave the room. I know two of those, so statistically speaking either I am an extreme outlier there or there are a lot of those out there.
      - guythedudebro 5y ago
        Currently living with the type
    - tpoacher 5y ago
      Leaving might work with people who are intentionally being rude. Most of the time, people aren't aware they're being rude, but will be offended if you try a passive-aggressive way of implying this is the case.
theonething 5y ago
What you're describing is responding to an insult/attack by ignoring it. And I agree that it is often a good tactic. I think the article is kind of strange though. It's framed in the context of negotiation and how to respond to questions. > ...SILENCE. It's the best reply to questions you wish you weren't asked. And yet, as you quoted, it mentions being attacked. I think silence is often a good response to insults/attacks, but not in response to questions. The latter is rude and disrespectful.
agumonkey 5y ago
It seems a good trick. It works on kids, it also works on aggressors. Just the other day girls at work discussed self defense and apparently they've been taught to throw a reflex slap to anybody trying to jump them just to send confusion. There's a weird thing about humans and their behavior where a lot of intense ones seems like semi-programmed feedback loops.

version_five 5y ago

I really agree with the "words you use to explain vs words that can be used against you" one. So often, both in person and online, I see people asking "can you explain what you mean by..." or trying to break your concern down further. At face value it seems like a good question, but among political types, it almost certainly is a device to either try and reduce your concern to a bunch of little things so small they don't matter, or to tell you you don't understand or have defined something wrong. If you want to stand your ground, its usually better to give nothing, even if you feel like you haven't explained well, or in an online discussion, if you feel like your counterpart has "won" by getting the last comment in.

Wowfunhappy 5y ago
> So often, both in person and online, I see people asking "can you explain what you mean by..." or trying to break your concern down further. ...I mean, I do this all the time out of a genuine desire to understand the other person's thinking; it's not some ploy to "win" an argument or feel somehow superior.
- kurthr 5y ago
  Unfortunately, it has been weaponized (especially on-line) for a long enough period that many people will not give the benefit of doubt. And frankly, unless they really want your compassion or understanding they have no incentive or any obligation to. Except for very well moderated forums and positive company cultures, it seems like that's where we are. One on one things stil seem much better.
- version_five 5y ago
  Thus my caveat of "among political types". In a good faith conversation it doesn't matter (and presumably staying silent and staring down your conversation partner happens less often generally). But as the other reply mentioned, there are lots of people - not friends, I've encountered it at work and online- that are basically trying to get you to talk more so they can trap you. The real trick is to recognize when it's happening with minimal false positives so you don't just look like a defensive jerk (been there also)

quadrangle 5y ago

I really like this. But I also think it depends on the social dynamic. The extreme form of silence is ghosting or stonewalling. There's certainly power in choosing not to speak, but it can also be abuse of power. If the silence is focused on getting yourself to the place where you have the best compassionate, win-for-all decision about how to engage, that's great. If the silence is basically a refusal to have a relationship based in candor, that can sabotage a relationship. Lots of dysfunctional relationships have a dynamic where one person withholds and withdraws and the other person gets more and more anxious and aggressive because they are desperate for the other person to engage. Taken thoughtfully and critically, the idea of allowing silence is excellent. We should certainly not fill silence just because we can't accept it.

josephg 5y ago
Yep. Everything powerful can be weaponized - by other people, by ourselves, or by the scared parts in ourselves which are afraid of feeling powerless. Silence. Analysis. Strong emotion. Withdrawal. Violent outbursts. Love. Sacrifice. All of it. Daniel Schmachtenburger talks about this a lot, with lots of examples: https://youtu.be/9QGrffjOFko https://youtu.be/9QGrffjOFko
- andrei_says_ 5y ago
  And let’s remember that in business, like in war, the one with less empathy wins.
  - catlikesshrimp 5y ago
    The one with the most power ( highest numbers, best weapons) wins. Empathy is lost when war starts. Not all business is zero sum.
  - afc 5y ago
    Maybe I'm very lucky, but that's not my experience in the corporate world. I think there's a lot of 2nd effects and feedback loops that favor cooperative behaviors and strongly penalize jerks, at least in the medium/long term.

hunter2_ 5y ago

Definitely some overlap with the advice to not talk to police. Granted, it's probably better to calmly explain to police that you won't be speaking on the topic at hand, but similar power move.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

scottious 5y ago

Sometimes if you try this you enrage the person on the other end so much that they LITERALLY stop what they're doing to SCREAM at the top of their lungs. After their voice is hoarse they go right back to the vicious attacks. I'm not sure this advice works when used on people with Narcissistic Personality Disorder or Borderline Personality Disorder. I was being berated unfairly, verbally abused, accused of things that didn't happen, and gaslit. Instead of defending myself I actually tried the approach laid out in this article: "SHUT UP when you aren’t sure what to say". I wasn't about to defend myself when everything I do is suddenly on trial for some reason.

bredren 5y ago
There is a modified response for these types of situations called “grey rock.”
- zakary 5y ago
  Can you elaborate on what grey rock entails?
  - sodality2 5y ago
    https://www.e-counseling.com/mental-health/what-is-the-grey-rock-method/ https://www.e-counseling.com/mental-health/what-is-the-grey-... >The grey rock method is a practice where an individual becomes emotionally non-responsive, boring, and virtually acts like a rock. Emotional detachment serves to undermine a narcissist’s attempts to lure and manipulate, causing them to grow uninterested and bored. The grey rock method takes away what the narcissist needs and desires most–attention.
Spooky23 5y ago
When you deal with people like this, the screaming crazy is victory.

ggm 5y ago

Can be weaponised. Therefore, not totally lawful-neutral. c/f gaslighting as others have said. If you chose to be only passive in all conversations, you aren't sharing knowledge: you may be acquiring it, but across the specifics of a relationship this is in effect weaponised information asymmetry.

Spooky23 5y ago

The problem with the silence technique is when people apply it for normal conversations. Every business conversation does not need to be adversarial, and silence is a control technique used to assert dominance. When people pull this shit on my teams where inappropriate, they are in the cold as far as I’m concerned. Peers need to collaborate, not conduct themselves like apes. In a natural adversarial context (procurement, legal, audit) that’s a different story.

Demcox 5y ago
Exactly, as with any technique it takes experience and an understanding of the immediate social situation. People whipping out dominance-inducing tools makes them, well, seem like the tool with a complete disregard for the greater aim.
klyrs 5y ago
I've had a superior barrage me with questions, faster than I could possibly answer them. It was incredibly adversarial. I was kinda stunned, to be honest, and i took a beat to collect my thoughts. Gave him a brief, mostly involuntary wide-eyed stare, took an audible breath, and set about deliberately answering his questions in an order that made sense. The rest of our meeting went smoothly. When a coworker is acting like an ape, a moment of silence can inject some calm into the situation.
Qub3d 5y ago
I agree, and I feel the article implicitly focuses on workplace discussions. But it is good to make it explicit -- if you do this with your friends, you may "win" in the short term but you won't have many friends in the long term.

ctdonath 5y ago

When there is nothing you can say which will improve the situation, don't say. When someone doesn't want to discuss an issue to mutual conclusion (if only agreeing to disagree), don't discuss. When someone's statement/question speaks for itself, don't speak for it.

tomcam 5y ago

Incredibly useful tactic when someone is selling you a high-ticket item. When they pause and say something like “so, are you ready to invest [they always use this term when you’re spending a lot]?” just wait a couple of beats. Amazing how often they talk themselves into dropping the price… so you go a notch further down.

mordechai9000 5y ago
I've seen this formalized as a strategy (probably here on Hacker News): 1. Express disbelief at the offer. You might just repeat the offer with appropriate inflection and body language, like it's hard to believe they are asking that much. 2. Don't say anything, no matter how uncomfortable it gets. Wait until the other party makes a concession. I suspect professional sales people will be wise to this, but they probably already have a concession they are willing to make to close the deal.

sghiassy 5y ago

Can this principle of silence be applied to emails/txts? Seems like in the context of emails, silence is just ghosting, and is unprofessional. (Hope I’m wrong)

bartvk 5y ago
Emails and texts also have a rhythm. Perhaps the outlined strategy can be modified here, by taking more time to respond than your previous replies.

theonething 5y ago

> SHUT UP when you aren’t sure what to say. > Just don’t say anything. Just don’t. Nothing. No. Not a syllable. SILENCE. So if a person asks you a question you don't like you just don't answer? Totally ignore them? Am I missing something or does this seem rude and disrespectful? I mean, if I'm not sure if the answer, why not, you know, just say so? e.g. "Hmmm... I'm not sure, can I get back to you on that?" Or in the case of one of their example questions. "Can you work for free?" Instead of ignoring them, how about "No, I can't do that. My policy is not to work for free"? What am I missing here?

rewgs 5y ago
> In the case of one of their example questions. "Can you work for free?" Instead of ignoring them, how about "No, I can't do that. My policy is not to work for free"? What the blog is suggesting only really works when communicating face to face, in person. But if someone asks me if I can work for free, and I simply stare at them, I think the most likely outcome is that they realize they've made a mistake by asking it and back peddle, or say something stupid.
- theonething 5y ago
  My comment applies in most person to person contexts, face to face or otherwise. > But if someone asks me if I can work for free, and I simply stare at them Again, I think a better solution is to politely decline. It shows respect for the other person and I think it increases the likelihood of reciprocated respect. I don't see how ignoring them is better.
  - taejo 5y ago
    If somebody thinks they're better than you, their disrespecting you while you respect them is exactly what they expect. Staring silence shows that their expectation was wrong and they should reconsider.
MaulingMonkey 5y ago
> So if a person asks you a question you don't like you just don't answer? Totally ignore them? Not ignore, per se. To ignore someone might involve continuing on about something else, for example, which is a much different thing than shutting up. Shutting up might involve making eye contact, raising an eyebrow. Perhaps a pained expression. Nonverbal communication. > Am I missing something or does this seem rude and disrespectful? It can be. Some of the questions are rude and disrespectful in their fundamental construction, so responding some in kind might be warranted. Hell, silence might be a hell of a lot more polite than called for. But silence is not always rude and disrespectful. Consider for a moment a fool who's made an unreasonable ask or put their foot in their mouth. It might take them a moment for their brain to catch up with their mouth - perhaps after wondering a moment why you aren't asnwering, before they put themselves in your shoes and realize what they've done. You might pause a moment to let them realize this for themselves, without having them suffer the added injury and injustice of you explaining, spelling out, and spoonfeeding their error to them as if they were incapable of realizing it for themselves, if only you'd be so decent as to just give them a moment. Or two. Letting them do their own self-critique may lessen their guard and defensiveness, as you won't come across as wanting to tear them down. Of course, this won't work well unless you can respect and trust the person to actually do such things. In this case, if you squint hard enough, saying nothing could be seen as an extremely simplified version of the socratic method - the implicit question being perhaps "do you realize what you've just said/asked?" or "and what do you think I think about that?"

pcmoney 5y ago

The quickest ~$40k I ever made was by introducing 5s of awkward silence during a salary negotiation. It felt like 5 minutes though.

nkskalyan 5y ago
At what time do you remain silent? Salary negotiation is one of those things I suck at and don't get the chance to practice a lot either. I wish there were more opportunities to practise
- Qub3d 5y ago
  A good moment is in the offer/counter-offer phase. If you're talking numbers, when the person across the table says, "We'd like to offer you $x to join our team", don't instantly reply, but sit and mull it over. (If this is happening over email, turn a few seconds into an hour or so. Similar practice.) If you immediately say "no" it could give the impression you aren't interested or even considering them. By giving a few seconds of silence, it telegraphs, "I'm interested in this job. I'm considering this carefully." Then, give a counter-offer*. After your initial silence, you can say something like, "That is an interesting offer. I really like $Company, and I want to work here. Could we (don't use I/you, use "we") consider $x+n? I think that reflects my skills and experience well." And don't say anything else, wait for the other party to break silence. Don't elaborate on your skills, no "What I mean is..." -- they've seen your resume, your code challenge, etc. It is hard to do, but it can be very effective. Just make sure you keep a polite but firm stance. If they won't move on base pay, move to looking at signing bonuses, equity, etc. --- * You almost always should do this, by the way. If you are at the point where a job offer is extended, any place worth working at is not going to instantly rescind the offer because you had the audacity to ask. Its letting the sunk cost fallacy work in your favor.
  - nkskalyan 5y ago
    Thanks - This is some great advice :) Another thing to note - This would also require research to come up with some numbers. Stay silent, take time to think, show excitement but not too much

Efimeridopolis 5y ago

I've only used this a few times when someone asked me something egregious or made a ridiculous demand and they surprisingly caved. I am also including a very extreme example of silence being used for manipulation purposes by You Know Who, just before a speech before a hostile crowd. The Mexican artist Diego Rivera describes this in his autobiography, My Life My Art: A few days later I saw Adolf Hitler address a mass meeting in Berlin, [...] As he prepared to speak, Hitler drew himself rigidly erect, as if he expected to swell out and fill his oversized English officer's raincoat and look like a giant. Then he made a motion for silence. Some Communist workers booed him, but after a few minutes the entire crowd became perfectly silent. As he warmed up, Hitler began screaming and waving his arms like an epileptic. Something about him must have stirred the deepest centers of his fellow Germans, for after awhile I sensed a weird magnetic current flowing between him and the crowd. So profound was it that, when he finished, after two hours of speaking, there was a second of complete silence. Not even the Communist youth groups, instructed to do so, whistled at him. Then the silence gave way to tremendous, ear-shattering applause from all over the square. As he left, Hitler's followers closed ranks around him with every sign of devoted loyalty. [...] [Muenzenberg] had been watching Hitler, then nearly at the other end of the square. He had noticed that the crowd was still applauding. Before leaving the square, Hitler turned and gave the Nazi salute. Instead of boos, the applause swelled. It was clear that Hitler had won many followers among these left-wing workers. So you know, it CAN be a dick move.

pmdulaney 5y ago

Seems to me this can be filed under "How being a jerk can sometimes yield benefits". Being a jerk can yield benefits. See Psalm 37.