tailfins
03-13-2020, 10:34 AM
While some seemed to become annoyed by social testing, I will spell it out in sharp detail:
H0 (the null hypothesis): Interacting with random people does NOT have a positive return on effort expended
HA (the alternative hypothesis): Interacting with random people has a positive return on effort expended
Using message boards like this one as a low commitment preview, I would generally have to go with the null hypothesis. One way to have successful interactions is to focus on people's self-serving benefit or agenda. Most people only have a positive response when they get a satisfactory answer to "what's in it for me". For me, people's responses, positive or negative are just data, nothing more. The reason people from places like India or Latin America are easier to deal with is because there are more self-serving reasons to gain one's favor, specifically as a reference for employment or immigration. For fellow American nationals, the self-serving interests exist within one's own profession. If someone hates their job, I'm known as someone who never blows off any serious corporate recruiter. If I'm not on the market, I keep a list of people who hate their job. I give the contact information of the person who hates their job to the recruiter. I just provided two people a type of payoff for one day doing the same thing when I need it.
The moral of the story: Only expect positive interactions from people when it provides them with some kind of payoff. I have a hypothesis on what payoff most people get from being on a message board, but I can discuss that later.
H0 (the null hypothesis): Interacting with random people does NOT have a positive return on effort expended
HA (the alternative hypothesis): Interacting with random people has a positive return on effort expended
Using message boards like this one as a low commitment preview, I would generally have to go with the null hypothesis. One way to have successful interactions is to focus on people's self-serving benefit or agenda. Most people only have a positive response when they get a satisfactory answer to "what's in it for me". For me, people's responses, positive or negative are just data, nothing more. The reason people from places like India or Latin America are easier to deal with is because there are more self-serving reasons to gain one's favor, specifically as a reference for employment or immigration. For fellow American nationals, the self-serving interests exist within one's own profession. If someone hates their job, I'm known as someone who never blows off any serious corporate recruiter. If I'm not on the market, I keep a list of people who hate their job. I give the contact information of the person who hates their job to the recruiter. I just provided two people a type of payoff for one day doing the same thing when I need it.
The moral of the story: Only expect positive interactions from people when it provides them with some kind of payoff. I have a hypothesis on what payoff most people get from being on a message board, but I can discuss that later.