3 ms·

No, but seeing someone over and over in the same place, who acts kind to you can make you "fall" for them. IE the 5-6 receptionist who always smiles at you ever

No, but seeing someone over and over in the same place, who acts kind to you can make you "fall" for them. IE the 5-6 receptionist who always smiles at you everyday can become a 7-8.

wwweston 12y ago
> the 5-6 receptionist who always smiles at you everyday can become a 7-8. Becomes? Or is revealed?
- delecti 12y ago
  I would definitely say "becomes". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect
hawkice 12y ago
I'm going to say this whole line of thinking (maybe this entire story/link) should be marked with the dual "has potential to very easily become offensive for little purpose" and "probably not actually interesting to hackers" asterisks. This comment seems like it will inevitably spark conversation of low value.
- twirlip 12y ago
  Oh, I don't know that at all. Hacking humans -- our perceptions, our behaviors -- is interesting. While pretending to be kind to increase one's attractiveness is deplorable, there is a silver lining in that the world could use more kindness, motives aside. To paraphrase Edmund Burke, I believe one who repeatedly acts kindly will find himself or herself transformed to a kind person.
  - hawkice 12y ago
    My more specific concerns were twofold: (1) Discussions of numeric ranking systems for attractiveness, which are (I hope) strictly out of scope for HN, to say the least. (2) Insinuations of intra-workplace attractions being directed -- not towards coworkers per se -- but towards receptionists. So, I don't want to discuss the actual merits of this, but suffice it to say, I predicted that people would comment along both these lines: "That comment reflects actual gender bias (and possibly sexism) in the field" AND "That comment may encourage workplace frustrations of professional women by implying they cannot escape the sexual interest of their male coworkers". I find those thoughts to be not particularly interesting, at the very least because they are not related to the article that was linked to.

No, but seeing someone over and over in the same place, who acts kind to you can make you "fall" for them. IE the 5-6 receptionist who always smiles at you everyday can become a 7-8.

wwweston 12y ago

> the 5-6 receptionist who always smiles at you everyday can become a 7-8. Becomes? Or is revealed?

delecti 12y ago
I would definitely say "becomes". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect

hawkice 12y ago

I'm going to say this whole line of thinking (maybe this entire story/link) should be marked with the dual "has potential to very easily become offensive for little purpose" and "probably not actually interesting to hackers" asterisks. This comment seems like it will inevitably spark conversation of low value.

twirlip 12y ago
Oh, I don't know that at all. Hacking humans -- our perceptions, our behaviors -- is interesting. While pretending to be kind to increase one's attractiveness is deplorable, there is a silver lining in that the world could use more kindness, motives aside. To paraphrase Edmund Burke, I believe one who repeatedly acts kindly will find himself or herself transformed to a kind person.
- hawkice 12y ago
  My more specific concerns were twofold: (1) Discussions of numeric ranking systems for attractiveness, which are (I hope) strictly out of scope for HN, to say the least. (2) Insinuations of intra-workplace attractions being directed -- not towards coworkers per se -- but towards receptionists. So, I don't want to discuss the actual merits of this, but suffice it to say, I predicted that people would comment along both these lines: "That comment reflects actual gender bias (and possibly sexism) in the field" AND "That comment may encourage workplace frustrations of professional women by implying they cannot escape the sexual interest of their male coworkers". I find those thoughts to be not particularly interesting, at the very least because they are not related to the article that was linked to.