3 ms·

> Signalling too little interest might result in missed opportunities, but excessive eagerness could prematurely resolve uncertainty in situations where expecta

> Signalling too little interest might result in missed opportunities, but excessive eagerness could prematurely resolve uncertainty in situations where expectations about the prospect of a relationship are actually not aligned. There's something else with aloofness that I thought a lot about when dating. Being aloof, as in unconcerned with outcome, signals fitness, when done properly, because it signals a lack of need to invest in this particular interaction. This does not mean being unkind, just that when someone signals that they have lots of resources and other options, it can come off as being aloof. Not uncaring, just not desperate to escalate. So a "too quick" escalation signals desperation (I'm unfit and cannot attract others), lack of patience, or unconcern about the deeper person - "I've seen enough to charge". All red flags. I actually think this is a better reason to be cautious in social encounters, or at least patient, than the one presented in TFA, at least in modern times. Being able to signal "I'm playing the long game" is attractive all around.

prepend 3y ago
> Being able to signal "I'm playing the long game" is attractive all around. I think it’s also a valuable action, not just signal. As important decisions should take time to make.
- saiya-jin 3y ago
  Yeah serious relationships are not a 'game' and shouldn't be approached as such. Otherwise you bring very wrong incentives and mindset into interaction (relationship) that shouldn't be there if you actually seek high quality long term stable one. There are only few setups/recipes for such result, they all look very similar and this is not the way. Also if you find somebody with properly good heart and you are not pulling your weight between you both, they will eventually notice and act accordingly. I know it sounds trivial and automatic, but I've met surprisingly few such couples. And all those questions of 'what did I do wrong' have an answer, usually quite a few (and on both sides, but its never 50:50 guilt).
  - jvanderbot 3y ago
    "Game" here refers to "model of human interaction for outside parties" not "ignore your emotional connection and try to 'win' using these few tricks!". Game theory is not a suitable guide to finding a romantic partner. I'm applying it retrospectively, to attempt to explain some otherwise sensible dating advice, just like TFA did.
enraged_camel 3y ago
As a man, when I was still in the dating pool, I found aloofness to be a huge turnoff. The thing is, when I show interest in someone, I'd like to see it reciprocated. I doubt I'm the only one who feels that way.
- arketyp 3y ago
  As a man, I'm happy to even get a foot in the door. I doubt I'm the only one who feels that way.
- jvanderbot 3y ago
  Sure, everyone plays the game differently. Maybe I'm writing this as a good strategy from a man's perspective because I am one. As in "aloofness as a signal of fitness might work better for men"
  - enraged_camel 3y ago
    >> Sure, everyone plays the game differently. No, that’s the thing: not everyone treats it as a game. For a lot of people it feels more like work and is draining like no game is.
    - jvanderbot 3y ago
      It's tempting to over analyze the term game. The point of TFA, and my comment, was not to portray dating as a Machiavellian rule driven process. The point of TFA and this comment is that we can understand perfectly normal and beautiful and organic human messiness in interpersonal relationships with game like analogies. That's the point of the term Game Theory. In Game theory, one does not necessarily consciously act as though playing a game, it just so happens that their organic choices are often understood using game analogies. That's why the field is valuable. It wouldn't be a valuable model if everyone could wake up tomorrow and opt out.
      - enraged_camel 3y ago
        I would posit that it’s people who apply game theory to dating are the ones over analyzing things.

prepend 3y ago

> Being able to signal "I'm playing the long game" is attractive all around. I think it’s also a valuable action, not just signal. As important decisions should take time to make.

saiya-jin 3y ago
Yeah serious relationships are not a 'game' and shouldn't be approached as such. Otherwise you bring very wrong incentives and mindset into interaction (relationship) that shouldn't be there if you actually seek high quality long term stable one. There are only few setups/recipes for such result, they all look very similar and this is not the way. Also if you find somebody with properly good heart and you are not pulling your weight between you both, they will eventually notice and act accordingly. I know it sounds trivial and automatic, but I've met surprisingly few such couples. And all those questions of 'what did I do wrong' have an answer, usually quite a few (and on both sides, but its never 50:50 guilt).
- jvanderbot 3y ago
  "Game" here refers to "model of human interaction for outside parties" not "ignore your emotional connection and try to 'win' using these few tricks!". Game theory is not a suitable guide to finding a romantic partner. I'm applying it retrospectively, to attempt to explain some otherwise sensible dating advice, just like TFA did.

enraged_camel 3y ago

As a man, when I was still in the dating pool, I found aloofness to be a huge turnoff. The thing is, when I show interest in someone, I'd like to see it reciprocated. I doubt I'm the only one who feels that way.

arketyp 3y ago
As a man, I'm happy to even get a foot in the door. I doubt I'm the only one who feels that way.
jvanderbot 3y ago
Sure, everyone plays the game differently. Maybe I'm writing this as a good strategy from a man's perspective because I am one. As in "aloofness as a signal of fitness might work better for men"
- enraged_camel 3y ago
  >> Sure, everyone plays the game differently. No, that’s the thing: not everyone treats it as a game. For a lot of people it feels more like work and is draining like no game is.
  - jvanderbot 3y ago
    It's tempting to over analyze the term game. The point of TFA, and my comment, was not to portray dating as a Machiavellian rule driven process. The point of TFA and this comment is that we can understand perfectly normal and beautiful and organic human messiness in interpersonal relationships with game like analogies. That's the point of the term Game Theory. In Game theory, one does not necessarily consciously act as though playing a game, it just so happens that their organic choices are often understood using game analogies. That's why the field is valuable. It wouldn't be a valuable model if everyone could wake up tomorrow and opt out.
    - enraged_camel 3y ago
      I would posit that it’s people who apply game theory to dating are the ones over analyzing things.