News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I see. So I can understand your original reply as something in the neighborhood of "I don't believe that people are tipping more"? rather than a denial of Nudge theory?
Indeed, I don't have evidence. Let me withdraw any claim that people are tipping more, not only because I can't support it with data, but also because that's irrelevant to my point.
Nudge Theory is about nudging people by changing the choice of least resistance. The dark side of that is presenting people with an option to tip in a situation where they can be judged for refusing. Whether they actually tip more or not, this is literally taxing on the nervous system and is just another way of using bugs in the human brain against humans. It is presenting another resentment-stirring obstacle in their path.
In addition, and somewhat beside the point, I'd be shocked if people weren't actually tipping in those situations. Worse, and more troubling, I'd be shocked if they weren't consequently tipping less to wait staff who truly need it and were being tipped more before this trend started happening. I have no evidence, but I see a clear and plausible mechanism.
That's it.
Two different people
I'm the one who said nudge theory is bs because studies show the theory isn't valid.
The other person, who was right, points out that you can't use unrelated circumstantial data to back up your point
Serves me right for replying before I was entirely awake. I didn't notice that that wasn't you.