Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Are We Living In the Golden Age of Bailing? (nytimes.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report that makes a case of us living in an era where bailing has become just too common: It's clear we're living in a golden age of bailing. All across America people are deciding on Monday that it would be really fantastic to go grab a drink with X on Thursday. But then when Thursday actually rolls around they realize it would actually be more fantastic to go home, flop on the bed and watch Carpool Karaoke videos. So they send the bailing text or email: "So sorry! I'm gonna have to flake on drinks tonight. Overwhelmed. My grandmother just got bubonic plague..." Bailing is one of the defining acts of the current moment because it stands at the nexus of so many larger trends: the ambiguity of modern social relationships, the fraying of commitments (paywalled), what my friend Hayley Darden calls the ethic of flexibility ushered in by smartphone apps -- not to mention the decline of civilization, the collapse of morality and the ruination of all we hold dear. [...] Technology makes it all so easy. You just pull out your phone and bailing on a rendezvous is as easy as canceling an Uber driver. There are different categories of bailing. There is canceling on friends. This seems to follow a bail curve pattern. People feel free to bail on close friends, because they will understand, and on distant friends, because they don't matter so much, but they are less inclined to bail on medium-tier or fragile friends. Then there is professional bailing. This tends to have a hierarchical structure. A high-status person will frequently bail on a lower-status colleague, but if an intern bails on a senior executive, it is a sign of serious disrespect. What do you folks think?
What do I think?
I think Slashdot is posting articles from David Brooks, one of the world's worst columnists, on Brooks being annoyed nobody wants to hang out with him any more.
That's what I think.
What next? Tom Friedman on how we'll find out if the next iPhone is a success in the next six months, and what his cabbie thinks about that?
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
But in this case, the answer is yes.
This is not news for nerds, stuff that matters.
It's not that I want to flop on the couch, it's that I have over-committed my resources.
Also, why do we need to make plans to do anything these days? Why can't we just grab drinks whenever. Or go for a hike when the moment strikes us. Want to go fishing Saturday? call me before 10pm the night before, I really don't need a lot of notice to prepare. But if you want to set up a big fishing expedition 2 weeks in advance, well a lot can happen then. I can't say for certain how I will even feel 2 weeks from now.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
WTF? Bailing doesn't mean not showing up. It means leaving. Flaking means not showing up. The example in TFS even includes the example "gonna have to flake", it's not "gonna have to bail". If you're at the event, and you get a phone call from your bra, then you gotta bail, right?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I think this post is terrible, I don't come here to read this type of worthless crap.
Bail on me once, shame on me. Bail on me twice, I won't acknowledge your existence anymore. Its simple fucking respect, if you make an arrangement, follow through. We're people, not stupid social media endpoints.
"Bailing" is not a thing, personal responsibility and accountability are things. "Bailing" is a symptom. Computers have made us less accountable for our acts, and less responsible. The only aspect I would say is "new", is that these traits are promoted as good and righteous. Not by everyone, but have you ever "worked" in Silicon Valley? Have you ever attempted to debate UBI on this site?
In the Military we called it slacking, and if you are a slacker in one area you will be a slacker in another. Basic human nature and psychology.
Slackers have always been around. The only difference between today and 50 years ago is that slackers are being promoted as the new "norm".
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Yes means maybe. Maybe means no. No means "I don't like you."
"Are We Living In the Golden Age of Bailing?"
No, clearly we're Living In the Golden Age of Slashdot, represented by showers. Clearly someone's taken a piss all over the concept of Stuff that Matters.
I'd comment further, but I'm gonna bail instead...
People have always made tentative plans and when more important things in life come up, plans get changed.
Not everything is new just because you are doing it on/over/under/next to a computer.
Speaking as an old person, that's was generally not true. In the past failing to show was a big deal.
If plans to meet/have dinner/ see a show were made, it could not be blown off due to "more important things" unless it were an emergency.
In the past, it was only a tentative plan if it was stated to be a maybe, and on the day of the meet, it was no longer tentative. That's because changing plans was difficult for the other people because they could not easily contact other people as is possible today.
If a person said they were going to meet you somewhere, it was pretty much guaranteed they would show barring something serious happening. There's two reasons for that. One is that before cell phone/texting, it was very difficult to contact your friends if they weren't at home or work. So if you stood him/her/them up, they would be sitting for a long time waiting for you, and likely worried that something bad did happen.
For that reason, if you did not show and had not an actual emergency (i.e. something involving loss of blood), this was considered a moral failing. Everyone would soon know about it, and if it happened too many times you were likely to get ostracized. If you had a business relationship, they would seriously question whether you could be trusted at anything.
The rise of bailing is not all that bad
What is different now is that thanks to cell phones, you can easily contact the other people at any time to let them know you won't be there and they can go on without you. Or, an even bigger deal, they easily make other plans thanks to their being able to quickly contact other people.
And thanks to texting, you can do it without even having the embarrassment of lying to their face. Modern phones bring a great deal of flexibility to our lives.
If people prefer to spend their time watching crappy TV, rather than spending time with you, that just says that you're not very interesting.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have better things to do than hang around here
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
"What do you folks think?"
That if this is your problem then you don't have any real friends.
Seriously. Reevaluate your relationships with people if this is what they're doing to you.
Betteridge's law is one of those really stupid ideas that makes no sense. That explains why the users here keep trotting it out. Most readers on this site are pretty stupid. What if the headline read, "was Hitler wrong to exterminate the Jews?" Would you answer no to that? My god the people here are stupid, just like Betteridge.
Actually it's a corollary of good writing practices, in the context of newspaper journalism.
Headlines need to be as short as possible, so if you're waisting letters on a question word it better be because your article explains why the answer is "no" as otehrwise any editor with half the title would have cut it down to the shorter declarative statement, or tossed the article in the trash if all it does is restate the headline in paragraph form.
For example:
"Will Earth Explode Tomorrow?"
"Earth to Explode Tomorrow"
I find myself "bailing" on events I was high pressured into in person, often held semi-captive, but then divesting myself of it when I had freedom again. Often, for example, people assume that you do not like them if you do not agree to their request. That's rarely true. It's more convenient to agree to go, then not go. There are limits of course, if someone is spending money on the event or going out of their way I will be blunt (ex. weddings) but thats about it.
The only trend in society that may be destructive to in-person relationships is that there is *always* plenty to do. Meat-space meetings with friends are pretty confining and limited in scope, rarely with any expected gain. I also imagine there was a day when one might be so bored that one didn't bail, that even a dubious meeting might be preferable to sitting on your couch watching The Jeffersons. But that day is well in the rear-view.
In reality I do not want, nor do I ever seek social events of any kind, everything I want or need is in my house at my keyboard, with the exception of time. That I never have in the quantity I would like. If I accept such an invitation I'm almost certain to bail but felt like I had to accept due to some real or imagined pressure on me. I will never do the inviting, and if I do you can be sure I won't bail on YOU, that really is rude. I have had people arrange large get-togethers from diverse social groups who bail, leaving those groups confused and stuck with each other...that's just a dick move.
Surrender your phones before any social gathering and its obvious what the problem really is. No one knows how to act in a group anymore.
...is that slashdot is officially dead, as there is no more news for nerds nor stuff that matters. I find it unbelievable that we now have "articles" that are nothing more than someone whining about no one wanting to hang out with them. I can't even call this fake news. SAD.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
I'm totally gonna comment on this article in a few minutes
...
...
oh sorry, can't get to it after all, cool? raincheck for sure thou...
If plans to meet/have dinner/ see a show were made, it could not be blown off due to "more important things" unless it were an emergency.
I think you and the GP are talking about different things. Having dinner, seeing a show etc are things that involve effort and expense. People who bail on such an event quickly find themselves isolated from their former friends.
On the other hand, attending a party, meeting for brunch in the city, or just chilling in an afternoon, well that hasn't seemed to change. We could blow that off in the past, and we can blow that off now. Even a simple "meeting" is dependent on the details. If you meet in a group it's quite acceptable for a person to not show up. If you meet 1 on 1 then it is not.