3 ms·
> Or when you’re in a meeting, make sure everyone else has three times the chances to speak that you do. That rhymes with something I "deducted" lately: somebo
by fho 5y ago
> Or when you’re in a meeting, make sure everyone else has three times the chances to speak that you do.
That rhymes with something I "deducted" lately: somebody at work just talks with no end. One of those persons that keep on talking even though you left the room, requiring you to do double turns because it is not socially acceptable to just leave a conversation.
One observation (shared by co-workers) is that talking to him alone (two person dialog), is actually quite bearable. He is definitely a smart guy and has a lot of interesting (if opinionated) things to say about basically every topic.
Where this becomes unbearable is in conversations with three or more participants. Once more than two people are in conversation the "alotted conversation time" per person immediately drops by a significant percentage (two persons -> 1:1, three -> 1:2, n persons -> 1:(n-1)).
tl;dr: A person that talks non-stop only uses double his "alotted speaking time" in a two person conversation, but that same person uses thrice his share once three persons converse.
- simiones 5y agoSmall off-topic note: dialogue has nothing to do with di-, 2, its etymology is dia-, "across, between". For all n > 1, n people speaking together are in a dialogue.
- fho 5y agoOh! The more you know! I guess then I shouldn't be using the "trialog" wording above.
- hluska 5y agoThis is kind of funny, but trialog or trialogue are both reasonably correct. Thanks to my friend Christine (I genuinely thought simiones was Christine), I can tell you that tria is Greek for trio. Dialogue would come from “dia” and “legein”, or “through” and “speak”. Trialog could be seen as coming from “tria” “legein”, or “trio” “speak”. Greek is really cool. For the most part, if it would work in math, it’s likely okay in Greek. Edit - Dia is still most precise. It means ‘through’ or ‘between’ and implies you can have a dialogue between two up to a limit of an infinite number of people.
- hluska 5y agoIf this is Christine, I’m very happy you’re here. Dia legein! :)
- hluska 5y agoFirst off, this is incredibly interesting and you seem like an unbelievably cool person. I’m serious - this is one heck of a great addition, I’m glad you shared and I really dig knowing that other people add numbers to social things too. :) I’m going to figure out how to express my advice differently. Three times works well in a three person conversation but you’re right - it will start to fail when groups get bigger. Thanks friend!!!
- fho 5y ago> an unbelievably cool person Thanks ;-) One consequence of that 1:(n-1) "rule" above is that at some point it basically does not make a difference anymore. The step from 1:1 to 1:2 is "huge" (2x vs 3x more than the alotted speaking time), but once more people are in the room every other person joining just changes the denominator by a tiny amount.