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

91–100 of 105 posts

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

#91

Post by slantyyz »

rokhayakebe wrote: post #83
huggyface wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 need to know if the nanny has an issue, just as I need to react to critical professional demands How often has this situation happen?

My experience with people who like to cite edge cases for their habits is that those cases are either extremely rare, or that issues of less importance are "artificially escalated" to high importance to support their case.

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

#92

Post by RobAtticus »

knz wrote: post #80
blogkitten wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should do that with my husband! I need some new tech. I keep my phone in my purse...if I get a notification (email/text), I'll glance at it and act on it only if it's important. If it's a phone call, I'll only answer if it's my mom (who only calls if it's something important) or my husband. Every one else goes to voice mail.

Using a different ring tone for important contacts takes care of the need to even glance at the phone.

But doesn't really help if it's on vibrate. And you'll probably still need to interact with the phone to at least turn of the ringer if its not somebody you want to answer, lest you annoy everyone around you by letting it continue to ring.

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

#93

Post by baddox »

blhack wrote: post #85

Hmm. I very very rarely use my phone during dinner, but it's always on the table. This isn't because I want to use it, it's because it's relatively uncomfortable to keep it in my pocket.

Then you should be fine with this restaurant, since they let you put your phone in a box at the front desk.

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

#94

Post by baddox »

nagrom wrote: post #59
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…

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 r…

What is considered "basic courtesy" changes, from person to person, region to region, and time period to time period. It's unwise to allow yourself to be offended or bothered by people with different ideas about what constitutes "basic courtesy." Unless you want to be perpetually unhappy, either choose to not be offended, or choose to avoid encounters with people of another ilk than yourself. Personally, I recommend the former.

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

#95

Post by baddox »

rokhayakebe wrote: post #83
huggyface wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 need to know if the nanny has an issue, just as I need to react to critical professional demands How often has this situation happen?

Presumably not very often, but that should make it even more acceptable to keep a phone with you during a dinner.

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

#96

Post by reneherse »

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…

The issue isn't about angry people controlling others, or about the balance of who regards who as "more important", a point that I think you've mistakenly identified as the crux of the issue. It's about manners and social courtesy.

If the people you dine with are "getting angry" and trying to "control" your actions, the likely reason is that you're being offensively rude, and are missing the social signals of people's frustration and displeasure.

There's a time and place for everything, and much like farts and taking a piss, using your phone should only follow an "Excuse me" as you leave the dinner table.

Ever turn your phone off for the duration of a movie, concert, or show? You only use your phone in the lobby, or at the more casual bookends of an event. This isn't rocket science.

Folks who dine with someone who is constantly dropping the conversation of a shared meal to look down at their phone will indeed "deal with it". They'll simply think of you as overwhelmed and rude, and will hesitate to invite you again.

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

#98

Post by cydonian_monk »

blhack wrote: post #85

Hmm. I very very rarely use my phone during dinner, but it's always on the table. This isn't because I want to use it, it's because it's relatively uncomfortable to keep it in my pocket.

I do the same for pretty much the same reason - comfort. And it'll only get worse as smartphones keep growing.

But when my phone is on the table, it is always face down, muted, and off to the side somewhere. Mostly to show whoever I'm with that I'm not watching it, reading messages, or otherwise fiddling with it. I'd have no issue with getting the mentioned discount.

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

#99

Post by guga31bb »

Karunamon wrote: post #84
algorias wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's just a difference in interpretation of language, but for me, a fast food joint is definitely NOT a restaurant. The tone of the story also clearly implied it was an actual restaurant, nothing fast about it.

Ah, I'm kind of used to conflating them. Still, the average restaurant worker, at least around here, is very young, and by definition, unless you're going to an upscale restaurant, likely not getting much money. I'm not sure where you're from, but in the united states, employers can pay an hourly rate of $2-ish to people who are expected to collect tips. The stereotypical fast food kid actually has a better hourly ra…

>Still, the average restaurant worker, at least around here, is very young, and by definition, unless you're going to an upscale restaurant, likely not getting much money.

Since when is the definition of a restaurant worker someone who does not make much money? Especially those not working fast food?

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

#100

Post by Karunamon »

guga31bb wrote: post #99
Karunamon wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, I'm kind of used to conflating them. Still, the average restaurant worker, at least around here, is very young, and by definition, unless you're going to an upscale restaurant, likely not getting much money. I'm not sure where you're from, but in the united states, employers can pay an hourly rate of $2-ish to people who are expected to collect tips. The stereotypical fast food kid actually has a better hourly ra…

> Still, the average restaurant worker, at least around here, is very young, and by definition, unless you're going to an upscale restaurant, likely not getting much money. Since when is the definition of a restaurant worker someone who does not make much money? Especially those not working fast food?

Note "likely". Remember what I said about minimum wage for tipped employees?

Naturally this only applies to the waiting staff, but then again, the chefs aren't going to be the ones handling your phone.

Post reply on HN