Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Restaurant offers a 5% discount if you eat without your phone on the table

money.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 105 posts

Re: Restaurant offers a 5% discount if you eat without your phone on the table

#51

Post by huggyface »

geebee wrote: post #40
huggyface wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your post is very charged. If I am at dinner and I decide that I want to keep on top of my device (I have four children and a very busy professional life), those with me have to deal with it . Most of the time my phone is more important than the discardable conversation happening over a meal. It doesn't make me more important than them, though maybe it means that I have different values. I generally veer away from th…

I'll give it to you that you aren't a hypocrite - you have no problem with cell phone conversations at the table, and you'd grant other people the right to do this in exchange for your own right to do it. It doesn't work, though. What you're proposing essentially allows the lowest common denominator to impose a low standard of basic courtesy on everyone else. Can you think of anything you wouldn't want someone else d…

you have no problem with cell phone conversations at the table

It isn't the lowest common denominator. It is the evolution of society, empowered by new communication methods. I need to know if the nanny has an issue, just as I need to react to critical professional demands, as quickly as possible. Modern technology has made that possible. If someone is personally offended because I keep my smartphone with me and check if I receive priority messages, that's rather quaint and traditionalist, but it doesn't blend with the real world.

Re: Restaurant offers a 5% discount if you eat without your phone on the table

#52

Post by codegeek »

dylanz wrote: post #39
debacle wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do similar. We need to develop a new etiquette. Perhaps placing the phone beyond your reach (in the center of the table) signifies that it's not a distraction, but just a bauble.

I usually place it to the edge of the table, and upside down.

upside down is a good idea but you need to have the discipline of not looking at every beep or noise.

Re: Restaurant offers a 5% discount if you eat without your phone on the table

#53

Post by rprasad »

rdtsc wrote: post #11
codegeek wrote: post #2

I find this really interesting. I wonder what other restaurants would make out of this. Is it really that important that the diners do not use their phones while dining ? Does that make them orde rmore food ? How will this 5% discount create more ROI for the restaurant?

Sounds like a cool publicity stunt. Admit it you are already wondering what restaurant this is and what they serve. If that it is the case, they have done their job well. But taken at face value, it is about the principle. It will push people who like to talk on the phone and disregard everyone around them to either not show up (or it will prompt them to assert themselves and they'll show up and pay 5% but in return…

They're in LA. The food is okay, but the no-cell phone thing is really just a marketing stunt to bring in business.

Re: Restaurant offers a 5% discount if you eat without your phone on the table

#54

Post by geebee »

huggyface wrote: post #51
geebee wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll give it to you that you aren't a hypocrite - you have no problem with cell phone conversations at the table, and you'd grant other people the right to do this in exchange for your own right to do it. It doesn't work, though. What you're proposing essentially allows the lowest common denominator to impose a low standard of basic courtesy on everyone else. Can you think of anything you wouldn't want someone else d…

you have no problem with cell phone conversations at the table It isn't the lowest common denominator. It is the evolution of society, empowered by new communication methods. I need to know if the nanny has an issue, just as I need to react to critical professional demands, as quickly as possible. Modern technology has made that possible. If someone is personally offended because I keep my smartphone with me and chec…

I said earlier that I never field a call at the table. That isn't completely true. I (discretely, I hope) noticed that the green light was flashing, and I went outside to listen to the message, because it was from an unlisted number and like you I have kids, one in school, one in daycare.

I guess the big difference is that I don't say "deal with it". I actually felt I owed my colleagues a quick explanation and apology.

Think of how different the reaction would have been if instead of writing this:

"If I am at dinner and I decide that I want to keep on top of my device (I have four children and a very busy professional life), those with me have to deal with it. Most of the time my phone is more important than the discardable conversation happening over a meal."

you'd written something like this instead:

"Because I have four children and I want to be reachable in an emergency, I do keep an eye on my phone and occasionally take a call outside. But I try to do this in a way that minimizes the disruption to the people at the table. I hope that people can understand the distinction between putting your phone on the table and fielding casual conversations."

People are generally pretty nice and understanding if you're respectful rather than telling them to deal with it.

Re: Restaurant offers a 5% discount if you eat without your phone on the table

#55

Post by noblethrasher »

Karunamon wrote: post #26

Mind your own damn business and I'll do the same. If I'm carrying a phone to a nice restaurant, it's because I'm on call. No, I do not raise my voice to talk, because I've mastered the arcane art known as "volume settings". If my phone rings, there's a high likelihood I won't be there for long anyways. And in the meantime, if me texting at my own table bothers you, or a couple of low volume buzzes bother you, I highl…

The proprietor of the restaurant is literally minding his own business since a business is just a vehicle for achieving the ends of its owners [1].

In this case, the owners want to create a world in which dining is a more sacrosanct activity. If you don't like it then you don't have to dine there thus it is, in fact, none of your business.

[1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3392357

Re: Restaurant offers a 5% discount if you eat without your phone on the table

#56

Post by Karunamon »

noblethrasher wrote: post #55
Karunamon wrote: post #26

Mind your own damn business and I'll do the same. If I'm carrying a phone to a nice restaurant, it's because I'm on call. No, I do not raise my voice to talk, because I've mastered the arcane art known as "volume settings". If my phone rings, there's a high likelihood I won't be there for long anyways. And in the meantime, if me texting at my own table bothers you, or a couple of low volume buzzes bother you, I highl…

The proprietor of the restaurant is literally minding his own business since a business is just a vehicle for achieving the ends of its owners [1]. In this case, the owners want to create a world in which dining is a more sacrosanct activity. If you don't like it then you don't have to dine there thus it is, in fact, none of your business . [1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3392357

Considering they're penalizing me to the tune of 5% to give up a very expensive device containing untold amounts of personal and business data to an unknown person of questionable trustworthiness, I wouldn't be caught dead there anyways.

I'm a little shocked that people seem okay with this on a site full of people that regularly berate companies for privacy gaffes.

Re: Restaurant offers a 5% discount if you eat without your phone on the table

#57

Post by beeneto »

stinos wrote: post #14
AznHisoka wrote: post #7

People who use their phones in any social situation, whether in a restaurant, or movie is annoying. It's like you're trying to subconsciously tell others you're popular and have lots of friends.

first sentence I agree.. Walking on the streets these days, it seems the amount of people I see bending their neck over some electronic device is growing everyday. A sad evolution if you ask me. Second sentence: I doubt that is the reason, however I have not yet figured out what the reason is. Firstly because I hardly ever use my cellphone, nor feel the need to, secondly because when I ask people that do, they have n…

I think evolution is the right word. When I was little I often played a game where I would imagine I'd found a genie who would grant me three wishes, and I'd try to think of what to wish for. Most often, two of those wishes would be to be able to talk to my friends with telepathy, and for a book that would answer any question I wrote in it.

Here I have a machine that grants two of my wishes, I use it very often, and using it is very compelling. I dont think its ridiculous to say that when you carry such a powerful and easy to use machine, you start to think of it as being part of yourself, and "why can't you keep it in your pocket" becomes as strange and unanswerable a question as "why can't you keep your hands in your pocket", or "why can't you keep your eyes closed".

You can argue this is an unhealthy trend in culture, and an unhealthy propensity for people who live in an increasingly technological world, but it's unfair - I think so - to judge/condemn/pity people who have the addiction.

Re: Restaurant offers a 5% discount if you eat without your phone on the table

#58

Post by Encosia »

huggyface wrote: post #44
Encosia wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't make me more important than them, though maybe it means that I have different values. > It's probably a welcome gesture by the other party, given that they've clearly indicated that you are less important to them regardless. So, which is it (way to keep it classy, by the way)?

Do you think those are contrasting points? There is a subtle wording difference that means the world. If I'm at dinner with a casual friend or workplace peer, my family and even critical professional activities are more important than them to me . That doesn't make me more important than them, though, which is what enrages so many people, sure that they need to put people in their place.

I do think those are contrasting points.

No matter what subtleties you wrap the difference in, relative importance is what you're communicating to everyone else at the table whether you intend to or not. If that's your priority then so be it, but don't be surprised if people who prioritized being present at dinner aren't fond of your choice.

I'm not trying to change you though. Like I said before, I just wouldn't want to eat dinner with you if you couldn't leave the phone alone.

Re: Restaurant offers a 5% discount if you eat without your phone on the table

#59

Post by nagrom »

huggyface wrote: post #23
nagrom wrote: post #13

I get really annoyed when I eat with someone and they have their phone on the table. There's something about that behaviour that seems to say "I'll pay attention to you for now, but I'm really hoping for a distraction.". I'd much rather go to a restaurant where phone use is discouraged as it seems to have become socially acceptable to fuck around with phones even during face-to-face conversation with someone. Regardi…

Your post is very charged. If I am at dinner and I decide that I want to keep on top of my device (I have four children and a very busy professional life), those with me have to deal with it . Most of the time my phone is more important than the discardable conversation happening over a meal. It doesn't make me more important than them, though maybe it means that I have different values. I generally veer away from th…

Your post is similarly charged and you get more confrontational during this thread I think, although I think it may be a cultural thing. In the UK, swearing isn't a big deal, but table manners can be.

Part of basic courtesy (for me) is to pay attention to the person that you're eating with; if you don't want to be here, then don't accept or offer an invitation. There's nothing wrong with that, but if we're out at a restaurant together then it's because I want to be there with you...not because I need to consume a meal. I won't watch television, read a book or do routine paperwork during dinner with someone. I consider messing with texts, checking email or taking a phone call to be similar activities.

For what it's worth, with close friends over a snack, I really don't mind. But with new acquaintances, I do expect a certain level of formality and table manners. There is a large swathe of people who would not watch TV, read a book or do paperwork at a table over dinner but they would mess with a phone.

I'd have absolutely no problems whatsoever with geebee's behaviour as described in this thread; (s)he seems polite, considerate and like someone it'd be nice to share a meal with. Noticing that you've got a potentially important message and leaving the table to check would be fine to me! Fiddling with facebook, taking routine calls or texts would seem inconsiderate. Having the phone on the table, but firmly ignored, isn't all that bad, I guess...but I'd rather leave it in a jacket pocket and not have the potential distraction personally.

If that comes over as controlling, well fair enough. Horses for courses, etc. But if my behaviour comes across as controlling and judging, I must say that yours comes across as self-absorbed and somewhat arrogant. But like I said at the start, that may just be a cultural thing.

Re: Restaurant offers a 5% discount if you eat without your phone on the table

#60

Post by noblethrasher »

Karunamon wrote: post #56
noblethrasher wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The proprietor of the restaurant is literally minding his own business since a business is just a vehicle for achieving the ends of its owners [1]. In this case, the owners want to create a world in which dining is a more sacrosanct activity. If you don't like it then you don't have to dine there thus it is, in fact, none of your business . [1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3392357

Considering they're penalizing me to the tune of 5% to give up a very expensive device containing untold amounts of personal and business data to an unknown person of questionable trustworthiness, I wouldn't be caught dead there anyways. I'm a little shocked that people seem okay with this on a site full of people that regularly berate companies for privacy gaffes.

I have the same privacy concern. In the NPR interview, when asked if they'd ever lost a phone, the owner replied "non yet".

But the small chance of losing my phone and personal data (which is something I can easily mitigate) is the price of admission that I'm eager to pay.

Post reply on HN