Hacker News Reader

Comment by the_snooze | Hacker News Reader

Extending an invitation is indeed a kindness. But repeatedly declining them signals that the invitations are unwelcome and unvalued. It's really that simple. Relationships aren't one-sided.

View on HN

Coincidentally, I just had a conversation with my wife about this. She likes doing girls-night with her friends, but she gets frustrated that nobody else prompts it. They always say yes, and they always have a good time, but she complains that it’s always her doing the inviting, and that it’s one-sided.

To me, a relationship doesn’t need two people to maintain and keep it going: it only really needs one, so be that one person!

I realize people are busy and have their own lives, but I still call, I still ask how they are, I still ask what they’ve been up to. Gestures like these are tiny, tiny investments that pay off in the form of a rich, robust social life.

Nobody has ever told me stop reaching out, stop trying, but if they did, of course I would.

We're talking about different things here. In the linked article, Anna never accepts the invitation, nor does she propose alternatives. It's OK for someone to intiate contact more often than others, as long as the counterparty actually accepts the invitation every so often (or picks up the phone or chats or responds positively). That's not the case with Anna, who repeatedly says "nah" in the face of consistent kindness and consideration.

> as long as the counterparty actually accepts the invitation every so often

Per the article, the collegiate counterparty did accept other invitations:

  We ended up hanging out quite a bit during those early months.

The social ritual in the article's title was specifically about party invitations:

  “Why do you keep inviting Anna out when she’ll just say no?”

  “I know she’s always going to say no, but that’s not the point. I invite her out so she’ll always feel included in the group.”

If it's indeed specifically about party invites and not other things, then you're right and I misread it. I wish the author were more explicit about that beyond just a fleeting line at the beginning "We ended up hanging out quite a bit during those early months."

My read was that Anna never acted like she's actually part the group because she's only ever shown repeatedly declining invitations.

Another comment relevant to partying:

  definitely a goody-two-shoes

In my experience, it takes two people, but they're not necessarily playing the same role. Social circles are maintained amongst pretty much any group that has at least one person who is willing to take the initiative to invite people to things, and at least one person who almost always says "yes" to invitations.

I tend to take a relatively Stirnerite view of it: As long as I'm getting more enjoyment out of hanging out with someone than the effort of inviting them, I'll keep inviting them even if they never proactively invite me to do stuff, because it's still in my self-interest. If someone always says "Hell yeah", or at least "Can't do it that day, how about this other day", then the negatives of slight inconvenience of planning are wildly dwarfed by the positive of hanging out with this person I like to hang out with. If they say no frequently, then I'm experiencing far more negatives (beyond the linear scaling of energy to invite per frequency of meetups, rejection is a big demotivator).

> But repeatedly declining them signals that the invitations are unwelcome and unvalued

Or they just can't make it each time.

> It's really that simple.

Simple, yet wrong.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com