Hacker News Reader

Comment by cj | Hacker News Reader

All good tactics!

I especially like the tactic of validating the person you’re talking to in order to communicate that you’re interested in what they’re saying.

E.g. “That’s a really good point” or “That’s really interesting” or “I really like that thought”. And if someone tells a mediocre joke but you want to continue engaging, simply saying “That’s really funny” is a good substitute when the joke isn’t funny enough to actually laugh!

If your sole goal is to make the other person feel like they’re having a great conversation with you, the simplest advice is to make sure they’re talking at least 1.5x as much as you. When someone does the majority of the talking, that person more often walks away feeling like they had a great conversation.

View on HN

> make sure they’re talking at least 1.5x as much as you

I completely agree, but be aware this can backfire. My wife said that on our first date, she felt she was at a job interview. I asked so many questions in order to keep her talking about herself (people love to talk about themselves). I guess it worked because we got married, but still, she did not feel entirely comfortable about that first date.

Maybe that’s why this article says keep it at 50/50, not 1.5x.

Is your username related to that story?

Great points.

I’m not sure about saying ‘that’s really funny’ when someone tells a crap joke though. At least where I live in the UK, that comment would come off as insincere and be quite distancing - better to just smile or tease them gently

> tease them gently

Depending on the tone used, saying ‘that’s really funny’ could very easily be turned into a gentle tease

> I especially like the tactic of validating the person you’re talking to in order to communicate that you’re interested in what they’re saying.

This works in many situations and not just the type you describe. For example, if someone comes to you very upset, it's best to also be upset but at a slightly lower level. Then, you can walk the person down. It's much more effective than remaining completely calm.

It's been awhile since I read it, but I believe it was in How to Win Friends and Influence People that said, generally whoever speaks the most in a conversation will feel as though it was a good conversation.

Oddly enough for me, because I tend to over analyze every interaction, I consider it a terrible conversation if I ended up speaking too much.

I've seen this described as "active listening". But it may appear disingenious. It's really easy to fake "I like that" without having any actual interest in the topic. What's much more sincere is showing that you're paying attention by actually engaging with what was said. "So we went up there." "To the mountain, right?" "Yeah, we went to the mountain and..."

I don't know. I feel a good conversation should be more equal: are the views of your conversation partner 1.5 times more important than your own?

I already know what I know. The other person knows things I don't know. 1.5 is excessive unless they're incredibly interesting, but if someone's worth talking with, what they have to say is more valuable than what I have to say because it's potentially new information to me.

It's probably better to frame them as things to be aware of and not treat them as tactics.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com