this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2025

943 points (99.2% liked)

People Twitter

whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works

10,295 readers

7,292 active

663 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

Mark NSFW content.
No doxxing people.
Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
No international politcs
Be excellent to each other.
Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major celebrity, figure or any politician. If you replace the "x" at their site with xcancel (so it beomes xcancel.com), and you're not on mobile, it will save video. https://web.archive.org/save is another great option. Archive.is is no longer recommended because they remove/alter content.
If a tweet (or similar) makes a statement of fact, either mark it as "satire" in the body or provide the original source link backing up the statement

founded 3 years ago

moderators

SendMeYourTaTas@sh.itjust.works

pelespirit@sh.itjust.works

This actually seems genius but it might be the muscle relaxers (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 9 months ago by Stamets@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works

116 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] IzzyScissor@lemmy.world 20 points 9 months ago (3 children)

One person picks three (movies, restaurants, events, etc.) that they would be happy with.

The other person selects one out of the three.

Alternate.

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] Sturgist@lemmy.ca 21 points 9 months ago (1 child)

We tried that. My wife said my hours of research into restaurants was "low effort" so now she picks three and I choose

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago

You pick by aggregating multiple factors and weight them by probability.

She picks by vibe.

parent

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

We do one more layer, so it's called 5-3-1.

Person A picks five options.

Person B eliminates two of them.

Person A selects one of the three remaining.

We alternate who gets to pick the five.

parent

[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

The problem is the catalog is functionally infinite. How can you feel like you're making a good decision if you don't exhaust a category?

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] Ledivin@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

You don't have to make a good decision. It's 20-90 minutes of your life, not a fucking career.

parent

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago (1 child)

The problem is the catalog is functionally infinite.

It narrows down significantly by region, for restaurants, and by time frame, for events.

Movies as a bit trickier, but you can ballpark that by genre and maybe "new releases" / "" / "criterion collection"

If you've got a big enough pool, you'll get plenty of crossover. "You just matched with a person who wants to go to a Knicks game, watch a horror movie, and dine out at Sopo Korean Eats" is going to get plenty of hits in Manhattan.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 1 point 9 months ago* (1 child)

I thought we are just matching with a spouse or sig other on what to watch next?

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago (1 child)

Ah, I thought it was a dating thing

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 1 point 9 months ago

It probably works either way, but I want the local version.

My wife and I read like 4 baby name lists out loud in the car for our second kid but had much better luck with an app we found that had like 4k names, each person reads and swipes, and it shows you the ones you agree on.

Maybe it's a hammer and nail thing but it sounds good to me for choosing the shared "to watch" list.

parent