Who wants to play the status game? • Hacker News Board

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#191

Post by gustavd » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 11:07 PM UTC

dickjocke wrote: post #142

willemlabu wrote: post #63

I once attended a talk by a man who was head of a creative marketing agency. He also had a side gig of being a presentation consultant. I forget his name and agency, but I don't think I could forget what he said. He would lead his company's pitches to new clients, and would turn up to the presentation wearing a t-shirt, shorts, and flip flops; tattoos all over his arms and neck, and thereby set the expectations of th…

I don't meant to be whiny but it's interesting how ineffective this would be for certain groups of people. Imagine a woman showing up in sweatpants and no makeup or a black guy wearing basketball shorts, white socks and Nike slides. I understand that every room of people is different, and that some might react the exact same way to all three, but I'm skeptical.

In my experience I’ve gotten the same effect just by showing up as female.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#192

Post by celticmusic » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 11:14 PM UTC

luckyscs wrote: post #186

celticmusic wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

absolutely not. You do not need to display security to have it, that's a large part of what I meant when I said people like us value different things. https://www.amazon.com/Millionaire-Next-Door-Surprising-Amer...

Well none of us have eternal security. Money is just a buffer. Network is a part of it. Health is apart of it. Education is a part of it. Network and health and education are hide things to hide when living your life, but they are signals of security and that one can afford to invest time, effort and money into them. If you met these millionaires next door, they signal this security in many different ways outside of…

please stop moving the goalpost. I stated that people like us value different things, and that remains true whether or not you want to argue that people who don't display the typical social status behavior do display behaviors of some sort (of course, but it's not interesting).

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#193

Post by mikelyons » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 11:18 PM UTC

09bjb wrote: post #138

leftyted wrote: post #135

> There is a philosophical conundrum at the root of all this: morality requires we maintain a safety net at the bottom that catches everyone—the alternative is simply inhumane—but we also need an aspirational target at the top, so as to inspire us to excellence, creativity and accomplishment. In other words, we need worth to come for free, and we also need it to be acquirable. And no philosopher—not Kant, not Aristot…

> There is a philosophical conundrum at the root of all this: morality requires we maintain a safety net at the bottom that catches everyone—the alternative is simply inhumane—but we also need an aspirational target at the top, so as to inspire us to excellence, creativity and accomplishment. In other words, we need worth to come for free, and we also need it to be acquirable. And no philosopher—not Kant, not Aristot…

This this this! The problem with trying to teach or share this is that you have to transcend survival and face your death to become Love/God and devils will demonize you for speaking this Truth.

So you must go it alone, and realize that you are ultimately alone as The One.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#194

Post by Evgeniuz » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 11:47 PM UTC

eindiran wrote: post #173

chrisweekly wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great points! Tangent: I wish more games were explicitly collaborative. Some competitive games can easily be adjusted, others not so much. Games like "Forbidden Island" represent, for many, a completely foreign paradigm where everyone's in it together. Shame that's not more common.

There is a fairly large number of collaborative board games: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamemechanic/2023/cooperative... Some interesting ones: * Gloomhaven * Spirit Island * Pandemic (or any of the other games in the series) * Codenames Duet * Arkham Horror (or any of the other games in the series) * Mysterium

Kind of a smaller ones, but "Hanabi" and "Grizzled" are also nice. The good thing in these two games is they're not feeling like group solitaire (and I love a good game of Spirit Island, but point stands), you actually have to cooperate with another people, you can't win them by yourself.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#195

Post by cft » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 11:55 PM UTC

toasterlovin wrote: post #160

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I question whether the described Portland approach is actually subtler. Is it actually? It's definitely more meta. It's definitely less resource-intensive. But in my experience there's nothing subtle about sour grapes.

> I question whether the described Portland approach is actually subtler. Is it actually? I think it is, FWIW. Nothing about the game is actually spoken aloud; everything is inferred and gathered via subtle clues. In my experience, one major factor that separates the social classes is the ability to notice these subtleties and modify your behavior accordingly. > It's definitely less resource-intensive. I'm not sure t…

Actually getting money is harder than playing intellectual sophistry. By the fact that you have to deal with the reality, which is more complex than the Portland model of it.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#196

Post by mjevans » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 11:56 PM UTC

chrisweekly wrote: post #27

afpx wrote: post #19

Another "more advanced game" is the collaboration game. In this game, the players determine their common ground. The players evaluate each other and think, "Hey this person seems to be good at X and knows a lot about Y. I know a lot about Z. Maybe we can join forces." They then identify common goals that they can work on together. I don't know about most people, but I'm definitely more interested in playing the colla…

Great points! Tangent: I wish more games were explicitly collaborative. Some competitive games can easily be adjusted, others not so much. Games like "Forbidden Island" represent, for many, a completely foreign paradigm where everyone's in it together. Shame that's not more common.

Betrayal at the House on the Hill is _supposed_ to be like this, at least most of the time in my experience.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#197

Post by hyperpallium » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 12:31 AM UTC

kristianc wrote: post #73

willemlabu wrote: post #63

I once attended a talk by a man who was head of a creative marketing agency. He also had a side gig of being a presentation consultant. I forget his name and agency, but I don't think I could forget what he said. He would lead his company's pitches to new clients, and would turn up to the presentation wearing a t-shirt, shorts, and flip flops; tattoos all over his arms and neck, and thereby set the expectations of th…

> Setting expectations low, and then making them feel foolish for misjudging you. It's a risky game. People tend to make their first impressions within seconds, and then spend the rest of the time looking for evidence to validate that assumption.

And ignore evidence against it. Ambiguity, permitting differing interpretation based on prior assumption, is far more prevalent than you'd think.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#198

Post by throw_14JAS » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 12:32 AM UTC

dickjocke wrote: post #142

willemlabu wrote: post #63

I once attended a talk by a man who was head of a creative marketing agency. He also had a side gig of being a presentation consultant. I forget his name and agency, but I don't think I could forget what he said. He would lead his company's pitches to new clients, and would turn up to the presentation wearing a t-shirt, shorts, and flip flops; tattoos all over his arms and neck, and thereby set the expectations of th…

I don't meant to be whiny but it's interesting how ineffective this would be for certain groups of people. Imagine a woman showing up in sweatpants and no makeup or a black guy wearing basketball shorts, white socks and Nike slides. I understand that every room of people is different, and that some might react the exact same way to all three, but I'm skeptical.

It might be ineffective, or the subconscious bias we all have might automatically lower the person's status. IOW, they might have this effect normally.

If that feels unlikely, it's because it is. But we have very little way of knowing how this would play out in any other situation.

My point is we should all be less certain of the stories we tell.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#199

Post by throw_14JAS » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 12:33 AM UTC

antisthenes wrote: post #149

willemlabu wrote: post #63

I once attended a talk by a man who was head of a creative marketing agency. He also had a side gig of being a presentation consultant. I forget his name and agency, but I don't think I could forget what he said. He would lead his company's pitches to new clients, and would turn up to the presentation wearing a t-shirt, shorts, and flip flops; tattoos all over his arms and neck, and thereby set the expectations of th…

> In his words: it had varied success. I mean, he was head of a marketing agency, which in itself already implies a certain level of success (that many people can only aspire to). Seeing as how he was a consultant on the side too, I'm assuming that he's done okay for himself. Perhaps he was judging himself too harshly. You're not going to win 100% of prospective clients anyway, so it's easy to interpret that as varie…

It's possible he succeeded in spite of these behaviors, not because of them. The only difference in the two interpretations is our own initial biases.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#200

Post by throw_14JAS » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 12:34 AM UTC

enraged_camel wrote: post #118

willemlabu wrote: post #63

I once attended a talk by a man who was head of a creative marketing agency. He also had a side gig of being a presentation consultant. I forget his name and agency, but I don't think I could forget what he said. He would lead his company's pitches to new clients, and would turn up to the presentation wearing a t-shirt, shorts, and flip flops; tattoos all over his arms and neck, and thereby set the expectations of th…

To me, what you wear to a meeting is not about signaling status. It's about signaling respect. And that's directly correlated with how much effort you have put into how you present yourself.

Signaling respect based on how much status a person has is not about respect, its about status. Unless you also dress up for e.g. serving soup at a soup kitchen.