Early Retirement Extreme Forums » Lifestyle Questions

Being frugal and not cheap

(48 posts)
  1. karim

    Apprentice
    Joined: Oct '11
    Posts: 47

    I'm trying my best to be frugal but at times I think to outside parties it looks like I'm being cheap. The two words in my mind don't equate.

    Recently I went to a dinner at restaurant (I know not very ere) and it was decided everyone should pay an equal share though everyone didn't eat the same amount. Rather than making a fuss I quietly paid knowing that I'm subsidizing people's meals and alcohol, because I didn't want to appear cheap.

    Unfortunately I'm surrounded by typical Americans who spend frivolously, like one who has a BMW lease and puts it in a garage that is as expensive as the lease.

    I know of two solutions, get like minded friends or not care about what people think (similar to the open section of the Art of Living: status is outside my control).

    Anyone else felt similarly?

    Posted 11 months ago #
  2. Christopherjart

    Journeyman
    Joined: Apr '12
    Posts: 191

    ask for a separate check from the start of the meal. There is no need to have to sort through the bill that way.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  3. Spartan_Warrior

    Master
    Joined: Dec '11
    Posts: 500

    Karim, sounds like a missed opportunity. As soon as that decision was made I would have said, "Oh, in that case, let me add a few desserts to my order, a few bottles of wine, couple doggie bag orders for tomorrow..." ;)

    I think they would get the point and see the unfairness for themselves. If not, even better! Then I get to be the one subsidized.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  4. Ego

    Master
    Joined: Nov '11
    Posts: 747

    We reserve this type of group meal for two or three special occasions a year and go with the understanding that we'll be splitting the bill evenly regardless of what we actually ate.

    It seems as we get older we're getting invited more and more. We've had some uncomfortable situations where we've said, "No thank you" to invitations but tried to avoid explaining why. Frugality, it seems, is the ultimate insult. It's like saying, "Spending time with you just isn't worth the cost". To people who eat out this way all the time it is a real slap in the face.

    Oh well. So be it.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  5. Dropbar

    Novice
    Joined: May '12
    Posts: 12

    What I do to be frugal while not becoming cheap:

    1. For myself: I apply frugality in my personal habits. But every year I anonymously give away %2 of my savings in charity.
    2. For others: To avoid becoming a cheapskate, I put a recurring reminder in my calendar to give a $30 to $50 (minimum) gift each month to a friend or family member I care about. Nothing (and I mean nothing) helps one's faults seem inconsequential in the eyes of others than gift giving.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  6. jacob

    Expert
    Joined: Jul '10
    Posts: 3,297

    Wheaton scale!

    If we retain the distinction that frugal = (getting the most value for the money) and cheap = (paying the least possible), the problem is most easily resolved by explaining to those who considers one cheap that one simply don't value the experience as much as they do.

    Thus it simply comes down to the impossible task of explaining why one's values are not close to average. For example, in terms of going to restaurants and bars, I have explained my dislike of them as being on par to going to the dentist. (This is more easily explained to an introvert than an extrovert.)

    Posted 11 months ago #
  7. tylerrr

    Journeyman
    Joined: Dec '11
    Posts: 200

    I cannot stand eating out with people and the restaurant brings one check. Pisses me off to no end....

    I ALWAYS immediately ask for separate checks at the beginning. I don't care if the waiter doesn't like it. I'm not paying for other mindless people who don't value anything.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  8. akratic

    Master
    Joined: Jul '10
    Posts: 480

    Around 10% of my expenses go down this black hole. I get out of these situations when I can, and when I can't, I just suck it up and pay, or even over-pay.

    It's kind of like taxes. In my perfect world, I wouldn't have to pay so much in taxes, but I can't really control this, so I just save more money to offset the cost.

    With taxes at least I actually get something though (police, roads, libraries, safety, etc) whereas often I'd have been happier if I could have missed the expensive social event entirely, even ignoring the expense.

    I feel your pain.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  9. J_

    Master
    Joined: Nov '11
    Posts: 353

    One of the things I value most of the forums is, to learn from the discussions.

    In akratic's answer to the question I see the wisdom I was looking after. I will try to remember it by heart: "Its kind of like taxes....."

    So much better than become grumpy.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  10. Scott 2

    Journeyman
    Joined: Feb '12
    Posts: 189

    If you are over 30, the check gets split evenly. Fighting it does not go over well.

    When I can, I'll offer to organize the group meal. Then I pick a fast casual place (pay when we order) or someplace with a lunch deal. A pizza place by me does salad, pizza, and a drink for $11 including tip. Rarely somebody will make a substitution or order an appetizer, but at places like that, it might only add a dollar or two to my bill.

    The other thing I've used well is a transition to "entertaining". It's a little more work, but people are usually happy to come over for a meal or snacks (early afternoon get together). Whatever you would have spent eating out, you can probably feed the whole group for the same money. The added bonus is reciprocated meals in the future.

    Nobody ever complains "I didn't get to spend enough money..."

    Posted 11 months ago #
  11. zarathustra

    Apprentice
    Joined: Apr '12
    Posts: 60

    I get the frustration of "even splitting" . . . I rarely go out to eat in this sort of situation (groups). I say no or meet up with them later at a bar for after dinner drinks. Other than that, it ends up being one of two VERY different scenarios:

    (1) I go out with bunch of guys from work that refuse to let me pay for anything which makes me feel a little uncomfortable and also means I won't order as much as I would if I were paying for myself. I try to suggest cheaper alternatives like drinking at my place or whatnot, but they prefer living large and part of that is having a pretty girl with them. *rolls eyes* sometimes it feels like i'm the male equivalent of a louis vuitton bag. i am mostly kidding.

    (2) I am going out with my 2-3 closest friends and I usually pay for all of it as a surprise at the end. I make a lot more than them and genuinely enjoy treating them. Since it is so rare we see eachother and I enjoy doing it so much, it isn't an issue and also removes any bad feelings about how others determine to split things or financial discomfort.

    This may seem non-ERE, but it's how I do it.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  12. jacob

    Expert
    Joined: Jul '10
    Posts: 3,297

    One recurring discussion between DW and I is in trying to find a solution to

    1) Going to a party full well knowing that we're most likely not going to enjoy it [because we both prefer quiet and more intimate settings that involve snacks, games, and talking rather than dancing, music, mingling, and drinking].
    2) Not going to a party knowing that it'll decrease out likelihood of getting invited again.

    I guess we're continuously picking the irrational second choice in order to get reinvited to something we probably won't enjoy.

    The alternative solution is to invite people to our "home turf" e.g. snacks and games, but we lack the initiative because often reading a book sounds just as good.

    Homebodies here!

    Posted 11 months ago #
  13. aussierogue

    Master
    Joined: Nov '11
    Posts: 341

    @jacob - i agree...but have found that having people over can also be quite expensive. I always feel i need to supply alcohol..

    actually just had a nice ere alcohol thing happen. My father inlaw took possession of a 70 year old barrel of fortified wine (port) and he is now bottling it. He doesnt drink port and sofar i have 10 bottles. and the good news is that port is the new shiraz (around here anywayz) and this drop tastes bloody nice.

    @akratic - yep totally agree. As a furgal we need to factor in 'social conventions' as we factor in tax. DW and I have been invited to a really expensive degastation type eatery here in melbourne. 130 bucks for a 9 course meal per person and thats without wine. So all up our night out will cost for the two of us probably 400 bucks. I feel sick thinking about it. All the calculations just dont add up in my mind and i actually think its all just a pretenscious wank fest. I am not even overly enamoured with the company for the night.

    Having said that DW really wants to go. We had a win money wise with my recent trip to singapore so i figure 'money comes and money goes' so just roll with it for the time being.

    Needless to say i have taken the opportunity to condition the wife for further frugality. "dear you realise that we cannot afford 400 bucks on a pretentious meal so if we go we need to tighten our belts for the rest of the month....".

    Posted 11 months ago #
  14. jennypenny

    Expert
    Joined: Jul '11
    Posts: 1,338

    We were with extended family this weekend, and they all wanted to go to a hotel bar after a wedding on Saturday. We haven't all been in one room in maybe 30 years, so DH and I decided to just roll with it since it was an unusual occasion. After many rounds (I passed on about half of them) the bill came and it was more than my mortgage payment! In the end, the *elder statesmen* in my family decided to pay and treat the rest of us but it still made me crazy to think we'd run up such a bill. I could feed my family for 3 months with that much money.

    edit: I think it's funny that this thread is running simultaneously with the thread about being too judgemental.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  15. Dragline

    Master
    Joined: Aug '11
    Posts: 959

    Look, kids. You know what you are getting into if you go to these dinners, events, etc. Either roll with it or don't go. These "group" things fall into the category of things that you cannot control.

    BTW, there is an 80/20 rule at work here -- if you are 80% frugal and 20% normal/profligate you can probably deal with most groups of "friends" should you choose to keep them.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  16. aussierogue

    Master
    Joined: Nov '11
    Posts: 341

    I love it when someones pulls out the 80/20 rule...

    Its a ripper..and solves most of the worlds riddles.

    I think a blog called 80/20 might just work...the 80/20 guy!

    Posted 11 months ago #
  17. m741

    Master
    Joined: Jan '11
    Posts: 733

    On the original topic, people have varying definitions of cheap and frugal. As always, I've seen very few things in the ERE forum characterized as cheap. Whereas on other self-identifying frugal communities, a lot of things I don't find offensive at all are characterized as "cheap."

    To me, "cheap" means being either dishonest in order to save money, or really discomforting people just to save a dollar or two. So for instance, taking a whole ton of ketchup packets when buying fast food, or taking a roll of paper towels from a public restroom, qualify as cheap. They're dishonest. On the other hand, re-using old soda bottles as water bottles, or picking up some furniture from Craigslist rather than the store, is "frugal". But on other communities, it seems that people use Jacob's favorite, the Wheaton scale, where people two levels more frugal are automatically "cheap." For instance, many people seem to consider virtually all the tips in the Tightwad Gazette as "cheap".

    On the topic of dinners, Most of the time I assume people are going dutch; this seems more common for people in my social circle than splitting evenly. Of course, this has its own problems. If there are 4 or more people, someone will *always* underpay, not figuring in their tax+tip, and someone else will have to cover for them. (This qualifies as cheap, if you're taking notes).

    If I feel there might be some ambiguity, I will usually request a separate check. But some restaurants don't accommodate this. Also work-related dinners are usually, but not always, sponsored. If someone is visiting from another city, they'll usually be able to put a team dinner on their corporate credit card. So it's trickier to know in advance what to do there.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  18. Dragline

    Master
    Joined: Aug '11
    Posts: 959

    @aussierogue -- its my personal belief that most of the tough choices -- i.e., meaningful events -- are governed by power laws; like the weather, earthquakes, financial markets and wealth distributions. The 80/20 rule is a derivation of this from the Italian economist, Pareto, who observed it as an historical fact of wealth distribution in stable societies.

    But I think it applies more broadly to most facets of life, and correlates to Emerson's statement that "a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." In this context it means that if you choose to put yourself in a situation that involves frivolous spending, then accept it and do the spending. You won't die if you are not 100% frugal all of the time, and your foolish consistency may deprive you of valuable relationships and other such intangible things.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  19. jacob

    Expert
    Joined: Jul '10
    Posts: 3,297

    @Dragline - "its my personal belief that most of the tough choices -- i.e., meaningful events -- are governed by power laws;"

    Why? Power laws are scale invariant, which is another way of saying that the law cares only about __relative__ rarity.

    Does this mean we're [mostly] beyond absolute rarity for all tough choices these days?

    Posted 11 months ago #
  20. jennypenny

    Expert
    Joined: Jul '11
    Posts: 1,338

    >>But I think it applies more broadly to most facets of life, and correlates to Emerson's statement that "a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."

    I'll agree that you have to know when to break the rules. (in my case we weren't really paying for 2K in alcohol but for the once-in-a-lifetime chance of all being together at something other than a funeral) It's good advice for more than just spending. Knowing when to skip a workout, have a few drinks, let your kids stay up late, eat something decadent, or spend money on a bucket-list experience is important to your mental health.

    Maybe the issue isn't frugal v. cheap, but being too rigid.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  21. Dragline

    Master
    Joined: Aug '11
    Posts: 959

    @jacob -- no, what I am saying is more simplistic. Most days/events in our lives are not all that meaningful in the greater scheme of things -- indeed, we don't even remember them. It is the relatively rare "memorable" days when someone is born, dies, is married, wins a big prize or completes a big project, has a stroke or an accident, loses their house in a fire, etc. that have a disproportional impact. On an intermediate scale might be annual family get-togethers, other reunions and graduations.

    So I'm basically agreeing with Jenny -- when you are presented with a "memorable" event, its worth recognizing it and behaving differently than what you might otherwise do on a day-to-day basis.

    I would think that each person's function would look different depending on how they plan (or fail to plan) and conduct their lives. Zimbardo/Boyds "Time Paradox" research is related to this. See http://www.thetimeparadox.com/ or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUYU6KBdcHA for the entertaining animation.

    Most people here are future-oriented and are good planners who strive to minimize negative meaningful events. Our challenge may be to make sure we're not squelching the positive ones as well by overly automating ourselves or demanding consistency for consistency's sake alone.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  22. Scott 2

    Journeyman
    Joined: Feb '12
    Posts: 189

    "Our challenge may be to make sure we're not squelching the positive ones as well by overly automating ourselves or demanding consistency for consistency's sake alone. "

    This, is one of the hardest parts of living frugally. When combined with the introverted nature of many here, it can lead to sitting alone counting your money. It is a mistake I am prone to.

    I try to fight it. This year I started 2 hobbies, which over the course of the year, will cost me about $2k. They ensure I socialize with high quality people in a non-work setting 3-4x a week. Not cheap, but IMO, a frugal investment in my mental health and social network.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  23. jb

    Novice
    Joined: Sep '11
    Posts: 11

    Whether you see the particular situation as levying a tax or as a form of social investment may depend on whether you are introverted or extroverted I suppose. Personally I find eating and drinking with others to be a great (and worthwhile) pleasure and splitting the bill is a more or less graceful way to ensure the meal concludes in good humour.

    If you find yourself concerned about the relatively small premium you are paying vs the menu price of your meal I doubt you should be attending these jamborees.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  24. karim

    Apprentice
    Joined: Oct '11
    Posts: 47

    Agree with most of the posts. I ended up splitting the bill without a peep on my end and accepted that fact for future meals.

    I would agree with the idea that you shouldn't cut out something that add value to your life (this was one of the points that jumped out at me in Engineering your Retirement--whether it be a cup of coffee from Starbucks or having dinner with friends).

    And I think this is an important way to live your life, seek things that give you value. For some it might eating out (as jb pointed out) for others if might be reading a book instead (as jacob prefers).

    On a more philosophical/grander scheme of things, the main point was being frugal and not cheap. I see the point that your frugal ways may appear cheap to others (given the Wheaton scale). But what I've realized is that the key seems to be to be frugal in your lifestyle and at the same time generous with others (whether it is with time or money).

    Posted 11 months ago #
  25. J_

    Master
    Joined: Nov '11
    Posts: 353

    @Karim: well concluded, thanks

    Posted 11 months ago #
  26. LiquidSapphire

    Master
    Joined: Jul '11
    Posts: 434

    I stumbled upon this article that address this issue:

    http://www.realsimple.com/work-life/money/etiquette/11-money-etiquette-issues-solved-10000001660067/page2.html

    Splitting the Bill

    Problem: The check arrives, and while you had a salad, everyone else had steak.

    Solution: If there's just a few dollars' difference, consider splitting the bill evenly. If you're really in a money crunch―or the house wine you had doesn't exactly compare with the three $100 bottles the rest of the group shared―just say up front, "We're all paying for our own meals and drinks, right?" Make it plain and simple. If it's a large group, you can also ask your server for a separate check when you order. Most restaurants have software systems that can easily print multiple checks. If you don't get a separate check and one of the pricey wine drinkers moves to split the bill evenly, it's OK to be pleasantly assertive, says Post: "Try, 'Hey, guys, I figure $30 will cover my meal, glass of wine, tax, and tip. Can I throw that in and let you split the rest?'" Your message is clear ("I owe less"), but it's not the least bit confrontational.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  27. Radamisto

    Novice
    Joined: Oct '11
    Posts: 15

    Just stop caring what people think. I don't think I ever cared to be honest...

    Posted 11 months ago #
  28. aussierogue

    Master
    Joined: Nov '11
    Posts: 341

    @radamisto

    i understand the sentiment but i dont think its achievable unless you have some kind of personality disorder. People do give us feedback good and bad and this is healthy. We take our social ques from others from the moment we are born.

    Best imo to try and workshop the issues rather that pretend you are infallable.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  29. DC Waffler

    Novice
    Joined: Dec '10
    Posts: 22

    When I was in my twenties, I was part of a pretty tight-knit group that went out every weekend. We usually bought dishes that were within a couple dollars of each other. One week, someone might have a glass of wine, and another week someone else might have dessert. It evened out, we split everything, and I had no problems with it.

    In my thirties, I moved out of state, and socialized with a bigger group of people in which I was close to only a few members. I went out most weekends, but the group composition was fluid from week to week. People I didn't know very well would eat and just leave without paying, the remaining people would be asked to split the entire bill, and things never seemed to even out. I felt resentful.

    After a while, I stopped eating out with them. It's kind of sad not to have a standing social event every week. I eat out more rarely now. But when I eat out with people who care about me, we fight because we want to be the paying the check. If I'm not close enough to you to tell you to pay for your own food, then I'm not close enough to be your sugar mommy.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  30. abzu

    Novice
    Joined: Apr '12
    Posts: 16

    As my father always says, "moderation in all things, including moderation."

    Posted 11 months ago #
  31. Ego

    Master
    Joined: Nov '11
    Posts: 747

    Moderation is the process of eliminating or lessening extremes. It is motion toward the average.

    Since the average American is overweight (50% will be obese by 2030), indebted ($16K per household on average) and addicted to at least two of the following:

    Caffeine, pornography, internet use, drugs, alcohol, sex, smoking, gambling, tanning, eating, hoarding, video games, shopping, working, television, smartphones and cosmetic surgery.

    We should be running as fast as we can AWAY from average. We should rarely be doing things in moderation. In order to be exceptional at anything we must, by definition, go to extreme.

    Hence, Early Retirement Extreme.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  32. jzt83

    Journeyman
    Joined: Jun '11
    Posts: 146

    When pursuing moderation, I think of being moderate according to my own definition of moderation that has little bearing on what the average person does.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  33. mikeBOS

    Master
    Joined: Nov '10
    Posts: 554

    "Moderation has been called a virtue to limit the ambition of great men, and to console mediocre people over their lack of fortune and merit."

    - La Rochefoucauld

    Posted 11 months ago #
  34. jzt83

    Journeyman
    Joined: Jun '11
    Posts: 146

    I wouldn't classify the averages of society as being moderate. Again, I do no equate the averages of society with moderation. Gorging on junk food is not being moderate with one's diet. Being sedentary is not being moderate about physical activity. Eating a balanced diet that best suits one's genes and overall health goals is being moderate. Exercising an hour or so a day allowing one's heart rate to be sustained at age minus 220 bpm without overexerting one's self to the point of harm is being moderate.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  35. Ego

    Master
    Joined: Nov '11
    Posts: 747

    It is interesting how words mean different things to different people. jzt83, your view of moderation is certainly healthy.

    Dictionary.com defines moderation as "avoidance of extremes or excesses," and defines the word extreme as, "of a character or kind farthest removed from the ordinary or average."

    So most people define moderation as moving toward average and away from extreme. But what is average? How do we define it? That's the crux of the argument.

    Many of us may know someone who eats every meal out at a restaurant. We also may know someone who never, ever, ever goes to a restaurant. Those two ends of the spectrum would then define our own personal extremes. Our brains naturally triangulates between the two extremes to define moderate.

    One of the greatest problems we face today as a society is the fact that we are constantly redefining the extremes further outward. What was once a medium sized soda is now smaller than the smallest available option. We watch the biggest loser and the moderate contestant weighs 320 pounds.

    The way you handle it is healthy. You refuse to allow others to define moderate for you. Unfortunately, everyone else does not do the same.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  36. Dragline

    Master
    Joined: Aug '11
    Posts: 959

    @Ego There is an interesting discussion related to this concept (relativity of choice preferences) in Dan Ariely's "Predictably Irrational". He posits and proves with various experiments that humans are so prone to comparing and choosing from what is in front of them that their choices are often made based on the other alternatives.

    For example, when faced with the choice of buying the online version of the Economist for $59, the print version for $125 or both for $125, most people would choose "both" for $125. But if the middle choice is eliminated, a majority then chooses the $59 dollar option. The very existence of the "bad option", convinces people to buy something more expensive, even though no one ever picks the bad option. This is irrational behavior. And it is the norm.

    Marketers know this trick and often present less desirable options to make the one they want the consumer to pick look more attractive. So if a restaurant wants to sell an overpriced entree, a popular strategy is to put an even more over-priced item next to it.

    Absent conscious intervention, the human mind is prone to relative comparisons based on what is currently or commonly available. (This also is a manifestation of the "Thinking Fast" part of the mind model presented in "Thinking Fast and Slow".)

    Posted 11 months ago #
  37. m741

    Master
    Joined: Jan '11
    Posts: 733

    The 'average' is emphatically not moderate. It may be, in certain circumstances, but mostly I don't think it is. As the "Biggest Loser" example shows, with different populations 'moderation' takes on completely different meanings.

    I'm tempted to say that moderation should be based on an absolute metric, but of course for some things, we do look to an external reference. For eating or diet, I think moderation can be defined independent of population. If you're gaining weight, you're not eating in moderation; likewise, if you're undernourished and weak, you're not eating in moderation. But for cultural things like TV consumption, a person's definition of moderate can be skewed by who they're surrounded with. In a society where people watch 3 hours of TV every day, it might seem 'moderate' to watch 2 hours but few of us here would really consider that moderate or healthy.

    To me, if I start to think "this seems a little extreme," that's probably a sign to moderate my tendencies. For things that are bound to biology, I think moderation can be easily defined independent of cultural values.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  38. jennypenny

    Expert
    Joined: Jul '11
    Posts: 1,338

    >>for some things, we do look to an external reference

    I think this is ok, as long as you're deliberate and/or aware of your environment. That's why I visit boards like this regularly. On here, I feel like a slacker. In Stepford, I feel like Amy Dacyczyn. I'd rather aim for the middle here. (funny how many threads here--no matter what the original topic is--end up with a discussion of the *find your tribe* theme in some way :)

    Posted 11 months ago #
  39. Ego

    Master
    Joined: Nov '11
    Posts: 747

    @m741 The Biggest Loser, TV, eating and diet: This is a good nutshell example of the problem. Three hundred years ago the extreme end of the spectrum - the glutton - was defined using the person in the village who was fifteen pounds heavier than everyone else. Today we cast a much broader net to define extreme thanks to television and this machine I am using right now. The guy who is 100, 200, 300, even 400 pounds overweight has someone else to look toward and unconsciously think to themselves, "Well, at least I'm not as big as him/her."

    When we are consciously thinking about it, you and I agree that the average is not moderate. But for most people, much of this thinking is going on behind the scenes. They (we) are not really thinking - I mean really thinking - about it at all. As Dragline showed above, they are reacting automatically and often irrationally.

    @Dragline: Someone tested that Economist subscription offer and found it to be successful on the general population. They were able to lure otherwise rational people into making an irrational decision. What terrifies me is when this becomes more focused. We know profiles are being built about us as we type or use our devices. Soon they will be able to fine-tune and custom-make the manipulation so that it appeals directly to my psychological makeup, my state of mind at that moment and a host of other variables (hungry, sleepy, drunk, angry...) Not only will they be able to get me to do what they want, they will be able to manipulate me into believing that I am not being manipulated. What it means to make a choice, to make a decision, will soon be changing drastically.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  40. jennypenny

    Expert
    Joined: Jul '11
    Posts: 1,338

    @ego--I attended counseling with my son for a while this year(he was thoroughly convinced schoolwork was optional). This is exactly how the counselor taught me to handle things with DS. She taught me how to frame the choices, which choice to put in the middle, how to change them up so he didn't catch on, etc. For the most part it really does work, although he's figured out the game a bit and will ask for new choices before answering. It's a little scary how easy it is to manipulate people this way. I use the same method in a group I run now so we don't end up discussing endless possibilites instead of getting something done.

    Posted 11 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.