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

Dull Men’s Club

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 142 posts

Re: Dull Men’s Club

#31

Post by _fat_santa »

This is a cool concept but I have an issue with one being "dull" on a conceptual level. Personally I think that every single person on earth is both the dullest person you have ever met and the most interesting person on earth, it just depends on your perspective.

I have friends that play DnD which I personally find very dull but hearing them talk about it, it's clear they do not see it the same way. Conversely I love cars and talking about cars and I can talk with another gearhead for hours on the topic, but the times my wife has listened in on my conversations she said it was the most boring thing she has ever heard in her life.

Re: Dull Men’s Club

#32

Post by skeeter2020 »

gambiting wrote: post #30
ecshafer wrote: post #8

The Dull Men's Club group of facebook is actually oddly interesting. I would classify it more as a group who point out the very small oddities of every day life that are not very interesting. There is a post where someone saw two geese with 42 bay geese, another where the rental company fixed a door with a piece of pool noodle. Its more like a "huh that's kind of weird I guess" group.

I had to block it because I realized it just completely overtook my feed and 99% of it was in that "interesting but ultimately forgettable within 30 seconds of reading it" zone that's filling up social media. I mean it lived up to its name - it's very "dull" if vaguely interesting.

this is the part of the internet that everyone would be better off avoiding: not bad but no long-term value. When the internet was novel and your engagement limited these were rarer, cool things to share (often face to face!). Now this content is internet sugar that will be the health crisis of a generation.

Re: Dull Men’s Club

#33

Post by leereeves »

Cerium wrote: post #28
rzzzt wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why aren't all numbers in the set uninteresting? Did someone make a mistake when defining it? Perhaps the minimal element should be removed from the set; there will be plenty of members that still remain.

Serious response? In that case the set still has a smallest member which can then be removed, if we keep going eventually there will be no uninteresting numbers remaining.

The problem with that is the explanation of why each number is interesting becomes:

the smallest member of the original set of uninteresting numbers

the second smallest member of the original set of uninteresting numbers

the third ...

...

That version of "interesting" quickly becomes "not interesting". The concept simply defies mathematical logic.

Re: Dull Men’s Club

#34

Post by kergonath »

_fat_santa wrote: post #31

This is a cool concept but I have an issue with one being "dull" on a conceptual level. Personally I think that every single person on earth is both the dullest person you have ever met and the most interesting person on earth, it just depends on your perspective. I have friends that play DnD which I personally find very dull but hearing them talk about it, it's clear they do not see it the same way. Conversely I lov…

> Personally I think that every single person on earth is both the dullest person you have ever met and the most interesting person on earth, it just depends on your perspective.

You are most certainly right, but I don’t think that this is in contradiction with how the Club works. Everyone is dull and interesting depending on the situation and the audience. The Club is for when you found or saw something interesting and important to you, but your audience disagree, does not notice, or does not care.

Nobody is fundamentally dull, but everybody is being dull at some point.

Re: Dull Men’s Club

#35

Post by rramadass »

This seems to be a riff off of the "Diogenes Club" invented by Arthur Conan Doyle in his Sherlock Holmes Stories - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diogenes_Club

"There are many men in London, you know, who, some from shyness, some from misanthropy, have no wish for the company of their fellows. Yet they are not averse to comfortable chairs and the latest periodicals. It is for the convenience of these that the Diogenes Club was started, and it now contains the most unsociable and unclubbable men in town. No member is permitted to take the least notice of any other one. Save in the Stranger's Room, no talking is, under any circumstances, allowed, and three offences, if brought to the notice of the committee, render the talker liable to expulsion. My brother was one of the founders, and I have myself found it a very soothing atmosphere."

Re: Dull Men’s Club

#36

Post by kergonath »

zh3 wrote: post #2

I will exclude myself from this club by finding it interesting enough to comment on.

I find some posts interesting, but most comments utterly stupid and a huge waste of time, although there is an occasional gem.

Re: Dull Men’s Club

#37

Post by kergonath »

sandworm101 wrote: post #5

I think once you are features in a guardian article, you arent dull anymore. Building model airplanes in a shed is dull. Being so good at building them that journalists take time to visit you is not.

> I think once you are features in a guardian article, you arent dull anymore.

Come on, the Graun is the epitome of dull middle class.

Re: Dull Men’s Club

#39

Post by GianFabien »

wccrawford wrote: post #19
notnmeyer wrote: post #16

> The over or under toilet paper debate raged (politely) for two and a half weeks. i found this particularly confusing because we all know that “over” is the only sane choice.

Only if you don't have cats. If you have cats, "under" is the only sane choice.

Don't you love all the punctures in the paper?

Re: Dull Men’s Club

#40

Post by kbelder »

leereeves wrote: post #33
Cerium wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious response? In that case the set still has a smallest member which can then be removed, if we keep going eventually there will be no uninteresting numbers remaining.

The problem with that is the explanation of why each number is interesting becomes: the smallest member of the original set of uninteresting numbers the second smallest member of the original set of uninteresting numbers the third ... ... That version of "interesting" quickly becomes "not interesting". The concept simply defies mathematical logic.

It reminds me about the logic puzzle of the criminal sentenced to death, where the judge says "you will be executed on or before Sunday, and you won't know what day it will be until we come for you."

The criminal knows it can't be Sunday, because he would wake up on Sunday and know he was going to be executed that day. But if Sunday isn't possible, on Saturday he would know he was being executed that day; so Saturday wasn't possible either. The same reasoning can be repeatedly applied to every day between now and Sunday.

It's obviously flawed reasoning (Surprise! they execute you on Thursday), but the flaw is difficult to articulate.

Post reply on HN