6 ms·

> We show that a failure to ask can occur even when most helpers would help if told about the need, and that even though a greater need makes help both more val

> We show that a failure to ask can occur even when most helpers would help if told about the need, and that even though a greater need makes help both more valuable and more likely to be granted, it can reduce the propensity to ask. Furthermore, when potential helpers concerned about the recipient’s ask-shyness can make spontaneous offers...

diordiderot 4y ago
Why people don't ask 1. Debt aversion: Not wanting to repay the favor 2. Shame or embarrassment: asking reveals need, dependence, or lack of ability 3. Not wanting to impose
- StevenWaterman 4y ago
  4. Not wanting to be rejected and seem demanding Even when there's a 90% chance of being accepted, the expected value could be negative
- _def 4y ago
  I think you are right. Luckily, to fix these worries they can be translated to some principles one can live by if one wants to participate in overcoming this societal problem: 1. Help people without expecting to be repaid for it in any form 2. Practice empathy for shortcomings of others 3. Speak up if you don't want to or are not able to help someone
  - kd5bjo 4y ago
    There's also a potential issue of the "help" being a net-negative, even when provided. If someone has strong ideas about how the work should be done that differ from yours, for instance, accepting their help can make things worse. Unfortunately, you usually can't know whether this is the case until after they've already started.
    - lazide 4y ago
      It’s not uncommon, in say urban homelessness, that shelters or food banks will have conditions that many of the people on the street consider unconscionable or impossible to meet. Some reflection on them tends to be informative about many of the challenges on both sides, and the nature of the problem. Some of them include shelters with: - No dog rules (because many people have dogs which are poorly behaved, lack immunizations, and have attacked other people at the shelters in the past). Many folks have animals for companionship and protection. - No drug rules, including Alcohol (because many people have gone on drug fueled benders and attacked others at the shelters in the last). Many persistent homeless folks have drug problems too. - Sex segregation rules (because women have been raped by others at the shelter in the past). The problem is, many homeless women also have boyfriends that provide a significant degree of safety and support, and even with sex segregation, the shelters have predators. But what else are they supposed to do? If they don’t make rules to at least protect others in the environment, they’re making a giant attractive nuisance/hazard. If they make exceptions, they’re asking to be attacked or sued themselves. (You’d be surprised how many activists are happy to spend serious money suing over something like that).
  - lazide 4y ago
    Good principles. They also sounds like a recipe for being taken advantage of or abused in an Urban environment, or if applied naively. In my experience, do it long enough, and blindly enough, and it’ll end up collecting the worst - in any environment it’s applied to - when the group set is large. Mostly because of a filtering effect. The folks who need help to get self sufficient will use the help, get self sufficient, then go elsewhere. The folks who will fall back on bad habits, will use the help, and break themselves again, and then get into a cycle of dependence on the help until either the help is withdrawn (which often causes anger), or they find an even juicier offer of help. It isn’t a large percentage of people who are like the latter group - maybe 1-2%. But given enough folks and enough time, and it’ll end up collecting a hard core group of people that will be a serious problem.
    - _def 4y ago
      I see your point. Setting healthy boundaries is important. I also want to note that the most effective form of 'help' is the one that will enable the person in need to help themselves better in the future. As long as that point is not reached, they may find themselves in the vicious cycle that you described.
- mupuff1234 4y ago
  Seems like anonymity solves all of these (but introduces some other challenges)
  - nonrandomstring 4y ago
    That's an interesting observation. Also, one wonders why so many big charity donors are anonymous. Not only asking, but giving is a potentially sensitive act that sometimes (perhaps from modesty) demands discretion/anonymity. When giving money to a homeless person I notice I'll prefer to do it when nobody is looking, and move on quickly, avoiding too much of a "thank-you". It's not just that act has to be "Kantian". There's definitely something about giving that carries the same barrier, and it's remedied by anonymity. I'll put cash money in a charity box, but would never use an identifiable card/digital method. Charities ought to know this if they're wise. that the "cash-less" society is the death sentence for them.
    - retcore 4y ago
      London (City of London) pre pandemic used to regularly have troops of charity employees hard selling their pitch and only accepting monthly subscription payments via Direct Debit, which is the legal equivalent of granting joint custody of your funds to the extent that the Halifax savings and loan used to refuse to cancel a direct debit payment for the customer, claiming that the customer has no such right, and the severality of granting regulated but effectively unfettered withdrawal authority lead me to think twice about taking them to court. The UK Direct Debit system doesn't even verify the customers name against the account details, wide open to fraud. Anyhow the argument for declining both cash and once off card donations wasn't anything to do with the sidewalk venue, but the charity wanting me to give them my tax deduction as well. They'd be lined up across Cheapside in funnel formations. No wonder that WFH is still so popular.
      - nonrandomstring 4y ago
        Ah yes..chuggers [1] (charity muggers) Sometime in the early 2000s the most of British charity was transformed (dragged through the mud) by corporate whackjobs, PR gurus, and Feng Shui design soothsayers to align their ley-lines and whatnot. Charity shops stopped having any actual bargains in them, and the money boxes we used to enjoy putting spare change into vanished. They made up all kinds of bizarre, frankly unbelievable stories about how the staff "weren't trained to handle cash" and that robbers would steal their charity tins (in broad daylight outside Waterloo station under 200 CCTV cameras... like Jimmy Reckon!) Then all those charity scandals about abuse and corruption came out. Heartbreaking what a few clueless, vicious vandals and scumbags in suits can do to brand reputations earned over centuries. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/04/secret-life-chugger-charity-fundraiser https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/04/secret...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- nonrandomstring 4y ago
  > asking reveals need, dependence, This is a much bigger issue than people realise in our technological society. Once, interaction with any doctor would be considered confidential. Today surveillance capitalism and so-called "big data" creates a new problem for everyone, young or old, male or female. We've long known that many men "die of embarrassment", because they won't go to the doctor. Pride/shame aside, that now affects everyone. People stop reporting symptoms because they don't want the stigma or economic penalty resulting from data being "shared" (increasingly without consent for "research" etc) - potentially to employers, insurance companies, and various gatekeepers popping up in the digital world. It's ironic at many levels. The information age should give us better health through ease of communication and access to data. However, the research benefits to the many that accrue from big-data are a burden upon the few/individuals. Searching on Google for medical ailments is a sure way to let the advertising world know all about your health complaints, real or imagined, and invite spam, inappropriate and intrusive insinuations. And, as we know recently, for women seeking abortions it can lead to violence or imprisonment. So there is an odd communistic utilitarianism at play that defeats the very benefits our technologies should bring.
  - rocqua 4y ago
    We do need to be careful about medical data sharing. It has risks. However I doubt there are any (or any meaningful number of) cases of doctors and medical data-sharing actually causing stigma or economic penalties. That is outside of the 'traditional' a doctor just tells some friends. But that traditional case happens regardless of big data. The reason medical data sharing is risky is because _if_ it does leak, it can cause large stigma and economical damage. But I am not aware of any big-data related cases where that did happen. The legal protections (imperfect as they are) have either worked, or have caused the people who abuse them to hide their tracks.
    - xboxnolifes 4y ago
      The problem isn't about where data is shared or is leaked. The problem is if it is perceived to be, and if those who perceive it so are influenced by the perception.
- danielbln 4y ago
  A reason why I like to ask large language models a bunch of things, it takes care of all 3 issues. Of course, it's not always suitable, but if it is, I prefer it over burdening a human with my query.
- tlogan 4y ago
  I always wonder about that. Maybe the first two are the most important? Many companies have a policy to give a discount, upgrade or similar if customer asks nicely for it. But somehow majority of people are just rude and they want discount because “your hotel is shitty, too expensive service, etc.” (put some lie or insult). There is no “thank you”. No “please” So people will demand but not ask..
  - lazide 4y ago
    I think it’s based in large part on the customers emotional state. Asking nicely requires a relatively positive emotional state. Demanding a discount due to a perceived slight, doesn’t. In my experience, it’s a lot easier for someone to stay or go into a negative place than a positive one.
    - lisper 4y ago
      In situations like that I always try to remind myself that the person I'm talking to is almost certainly not the one responsible for the shitty situation I'm dealing with. >90% of the time the shitty situation is the result of a policy decision made by someone that neither of us has ever met or likely will ever meet. Both of us are victims of their shitty decision. I find it much easier to be civil when I keep that in mind. And on those occasions when that's not enough I try to remember to say, "I'm sorry, I know you're not responsible for this shitty situation, and I apologize for taking my frustrations out on you." I've gotten an enormous amount of mileage out of this strategy over the years.
      - lazide 4y ago
        Sounds like you’re self aware and actively trying to improve folks situation - you’re a good person, and work to stay that way! If someone is in a customer service role, they’ll deal a lot with the other part of the population who isn’t (today) in that group, and they’re very memorable.
        lisper 4y ago
- dqpb 4y ago
  4. They don't really want to know the answer
- daniel-cussen 4y ago
  Plus being told it's wrong for the poor to beg. In Chile only the rich are allowed to beg. It goes like this: "hey can I have ten cents!" [poor begging rich] "Get a fucking job you piece of shit!" [rich begging poor]. Telling a poor man to get a job, in Chile, is begging, because jobs they realistically can get all pay less than they cost, it's a gift to the rich man, a donation, charity for the rich, begging. And injure the poor in the process, or demand he betray his fellow man. That's why I always try to come up with something for beggars, they're doing the best thing they could be doing by begging, working would be terrible then they'd get a back injury on the first day, feel denigrating, which addressing (which society dodges, prefers they take that injury and insult to their graves) would cost millions. Just huge waste of money. Better they beg and I give, that has objectively superior economics. Like I talked to one who got a job, told him yeah duh that job is over it was a shit job, he was like uh how did you know? I just know because I just know. And then I gave him a 20000 peso bill, which I first broke for him at the kiosk which I can do but he can't, so he could spend it. And told him "spend it on whatever you want! Whatever you want!" Dude try to preempt him asking me, asking hurts, people insult you, it's degrading, people call you inferior, people beat you for asking just like people piss on people sleeping on the street to indulge their sadism. I've also seen guys take out a 10000 bill (like $10, but big money in Chile), stretch it out, and then laugh their ass off. Dude it's so cruel. Nobody thinks it could be them sitting on the concrete. And they have all kinds of stories these guys, dude I love talking to Jonathan Ramos here, dude way better than all therapists I've ever spoken to in my whole life combined. He told me "obviously you got tortured, look at the things you say, you lay out the truth for people clearly!" No picólogo could have ever said that! Dude categorically superior to every professional therapist! And that cost 4 dollars!
- peteradio 4y ago
  4. Knowing the answer is going to be shortsighted and miss the point of the question.

diordiderot 4y ago

Why people don't ask 1. Debt aversion: Not wanting to repay the favor 2. Shame or embarrassment: asking reveals need, dependence, or lack of ability 3. Not wanting to impose

StevenWaterman 4y ago
4. Not wanting to be rejected and seem demanding Even when there's a 90% chance of being accepted, the expected value could be negative
_def 4y ago
I think you are right. Luckily, to fix these worries they can be translated to some principles one can live by if one wants to participate in overcoming this societal problem: 1. Help people without expecting to be repaid for it in any form 2. Practice empathy for shortcomings of others 3. Speak up if you don't want to or are not able to help someone
- kd5bjo 4y ago
  There's also a potential issue of the "help" being a net-negative, even when provided. If someone has strong ideas about how the work should be done that differ from yours, for instance, accepting their help can make things worse. Unfortunately, you usually can't know whether this is the case until after they've already started.
  - lazide 4y ago
    It’s not uncommon, in say urban homelessness, that shelters or food banks will have conditions that many of the people on the street consider unconscionable or impossible to meet. Some reflection on them tends to be informative about many of the challenges on both sides, and the nature of the problem. Some of them include shelters with: - No dog rules (because many people have dogs which are poorly behaved, lack immunizations, and have attacked other people at the shelters in the past). Many folks have animals for companionship and protection. - No drug rules, including Alcohol (because many people have gone on drug fueled benders and attacked others at the shelters in the last). Many persistent homeless folks have drug problems too. - Sex segregation rules (because women have been raped by others at the shelter in the past). The problem is, many homeless women also have boyfriends that provide a significant degree of safety and support, and even with sex segregation, the shelters have predators. But what else are they supposed to do? If they don’t make rules to at least protect others in the environment, they’re making a giant attractive nuisance/hazard. If they make exceptions, they’re asking to be attacked or sued themselves. (You’d be surprised how many activists are happy to spend serious money suing over something like that).
- lazide 4y ago
  Good principles. They also sounds like a recipe for being taken advantage of or abused in an Urban environment, or if applied naively. In my experience, do it long enough, and blindly enough, and it’ll end up collecting the worst - in any environment it’s applied to - when the group set is large. Mostly because of a filtering effect. The folks who need help to get self sufficient will use the help, get self sufficient, then go elsewhere. The folks who will fall back on bad habits, will use the help, and break themselves again, and then get into a cycle of dependence on the help until either the help is withdrawn (which often causes anger), or they find an even juicier offer of help. It isn’t a large percentage of people who are like the latter group - maybe 1-2%. But given enough folks and enough time, and it’ll end up collecting a hard core group of people that will be a serious problem.
  - _def 4y ago
    I see your point. Setting healthy boundaries is important. I also want to note that the most effective form of 'help' is the one that will enable the person in need to help themselves better in the future. As long as that point is not reached, they may find themselves in the vicious cycle that you described.
mupuff1234 4y ago
Seems like anonymity solves all of these (but introduces some other challenges)
- nonrandomstring 4y ago
  That's an interesting observation. Also, one wonders why so many big charity donors are anonymous. Not only asking, but giving is a potentially sensitive act that sometimes (perhaps from modesty) demands discretion/anonymity. When giving money to a homeless person I notice I'll prefer to do it when nobody is looking, and move on quickly, avoiding too much of a "thank-you". It's not just that act has to be "Kantian". There's definitely something about giving that carries the same barrier, and it's remedied by anonymity. I'll put cash money in a charity box, but would never use an identifiable card/digital method. Charities ought to know this if they're wise. that the "cash-less" society is the death sentence for them.
  - retcore 4y ago
    London (City of London) pre pandemic used to regularly have troops of charity employees hard selling their pitch and only accepting monthly subscription payments via Direct Debit, which is the legal equivalent of granting joint custody of your funds to the extent that the Halifax savings and loan used to refuse to cancel a direct debit payment for the customer, claiming that the customer has no such right, and the severality of granting regulated but effectively unfettered withdrawal authority lead me to think twice about taking them to court. The UK Direct Debit system doesn't even verify the customers name against the account details, wide open to fraud. Anyhow the argument for declining both cash and once off card donations wasn't anything to do with the sidewalk venue, but the charity wanting me to give them my tax deduction as well. They'd be lined up across Cheapside in funnel formations. No wonder that WFH is still so popular.
    - nonrandomstring 4y ago
      Ah yes..chuggers [1] (charity muggers) Sometime in the early 2000s the most of British charity was transformed (dragged through the mud) by corporate whackjobs, PR gurus, and Feng Shui design soothsayers to align their ley-lines and whatnot. Charity shops stopped having any actual bargains in them, and the money boxes we used to enjoy putting spare change into vanished. They made up all kinds of bizarre, frankly unbelievable stories about how the staff "weren't trained to handle cash" and that robbers would steal their charity tins (in broad daylight outside Waterloo station under 200 CCTV cameras... like Jimmy Reckon!) Then all those charity scandals about abuse and corruption came out. Heartbreaking what a few clueless, vicious vandals and scumbags in suits can do to brand reputations earned over centuries. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/04/secret-life-chugger-charity-fundraiser https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/04/secret...
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
nonrandomstring 4y ago
> asking reveals need, dependence, This is a much bigger issue than people realise in our technological society. Once, interaction with any doctor would be considered confidential. Today surveillance capitalism and so-called "big data" creates a new problem for everyone, young or old, male or female. We've long known that many men "die of embarrassment", because they won't go to the doctor. Pride/shame aside, that now affects everyone. People stop reporting symptoms because they don't want the stigma or economic penalty resulting from data being "shared" (increasingly without consent for "research" etc) - potentially to employers, insurance companies, and various gatekeepers popping up in the digital world. It's ironic at many levels. The information age should give us better health through ease of communication and access to data. However, the research benefits to the many that accrue from big-data are a burden upon the few/individuals. Searching on Google for medical ailments is a sure way to let the advertising world know all about your health complaints, real or imagined, and invite spam, inappropriate and intrusive insinuations. And, as we know recently, for women seeking abortions it can lead to violence or imprisonment. So there is an odd communistic utilitarianism at play that defeats the very benefits our technologies should bring.
- rocqua 4y ago
  We do need to be careful about medical data sharing. It has risks. However I doubt there are any (or any meaningful number of) cases of doctors and medical data-sharing actually causing stigma or economic penalties. That is outside of the 'traditional' a doctor just tells some friends. But that traditional case happens regardless of big data. The reason medical data sharing is risky is because _if_ it does leak, it can cause large stigma and economical damage. But I am not aware of any big-data related cases where that did happen. The legal protections (imperfect as they are) have either worked, or have caused the people who abuse them to hide their tracks.
  - xboxnolifes 4y ago
    The problem isn't about where data is shared or is leaked. The problem is if it is perceived to be, and if those who perceive it so are influenced by the perception.
danielbln 4y ago
A reason why I like to ask large language models a bunch of things, it takes care of all 3 issues. Of course, it's not always suitable, but if it is, I prefer it over burdening a human with my query.
tlogan 4y ago
I always wonder about that. Maybe the first two are the most important? Many companies have a policy to give a discount, upgrade or similar if customer asks nicely for it. But somehow majority of people are just rude and they want discount because “your hotel is shitty, too expensive service, etc.” (put some lie or insult). There is no “thank you”. No “please” So people will demand but not ask..
- lazide 4y ago
  I think it’s based in large part on the customers emotional state. Asking nicely requires a relatively positive emotional state. Demanding a discount due to a perceived slight, doesn’t. In my experience, it’s a lot easier for someone to stay or go into a negative place than a positive one.
  - lisper 4y ago
    In situations like that I always try to remind myself that the person I'm talking to is almost certainly not the one responsible for the shitty situation I'm dealing with. >90% of the time the shitty situation is the result of a policy decision made by someone that neither of us has ever met or likely will ever meet. Both of us are victims of their shitty decision. I find it much easier to be civil when I keep that in mind. And on those occasions when that's not enough I try to remember to say, "I'm sorry, I know you're not responsible for this shitty situation, and I apologize for taking my frustrations out on you." I've gotten an enormous amount of mileage out of this strategy over the years.
    - lazide 4y ago
      Sounds like you’re self aware and actively trying to improve folks situation - you’re a good person, and work to stay that way! If someone is in a customer service role, they’ll deal a lot with the other part of the population who isn’t (today) in that group, and they’re very memorable.
      - lisper 4y ago
dqpb 4y ago
4. They don't really want to know the answer
daniel-cussen 4y ago
Plus being told it's wrong for the poor to beg. In Chile only the rich are allowed to beg. It goes like this: "hey can I have ten cents!" [poor begging rich] "Get a fucking job you piece of shit!" [rich begging poor]. Telling a poor man to get a job, in Chile, is begging, because jobs they realistically can get all pay less than they cost, it's a gift to the rich man, a donation, charity for the rich, begging. And injure the poor in the process, or demand he betray his fellow man. That's why I always try to come up with something for beggars, they're doing the best thing they could be doing by begging, working would be terrible then they'd get a back injury on the first day, feel denigrating, which addressing (which society dodges, prefers they take that injury and insult to their graves) would cost millions. Just huge waste of money. Better they beg and I give, that has objectively superior economics. Like I talked to one who got a job, told him yeah duh that job is over it was a shit job, he was like uh how did you know? I just know because I just know. And then I gave him a 20000 peso bill, which I first broke for him at the kiosk which I can do but he can't, so he could spend it. And told him "spend it on whatever you want! Whatever you want!" Dude try to preempt him asking me, asking hurts, people insult you, it's degrading, people call you inferior, people beat you for asking just like people piss on people sleeping on the street to indulge their sadism. I've also seen guys take out a 10000 bill (like $10, but big money in Chile), stretch it out, and then laugh their ass off. Dude it's so cruel. Nobody thinks it could be them sitting on the concrete. And they have all kinds of stories these guys, dude I love talking to Jonathan Ramos here, dude way better than all therapists I've ever spoken to in my whole life combined. He told me "obviously you got tortured, look at the things you say, you lay out the truth for people clearly!" No picólogo could have ever said that! Dude categorically superior to every professional therapist! And that cost 4 dollars!
peteradio 4y ago
4. Knowing the answer is going to be shortsighted and miss the point of the question.