How I Made 50 Friends In One Month

http://30vanquish.com/how-i-made-50-friends-in-one-month/

by lionhearted • 15 years ago

55 26 15 years ago

wccrawford• 15 years ago

Guess it depends on your definition of 'friend' then, because by my standards, that would have been '4 friends' and not '50 friends'. '50 acquaintances' now, that I'd agree with.

That isn't to say this isn't a valuable tactic. Making 4 good friends is nothing to scoff at.

jamesteow• 15 years ago

"During March 2010, I sent messages to around 400 people."

If I had to spend that much time writing messages, I'd rather just volunteer my time at a non-profit, join a club, or attend some sort of meetup.com meetup to get to know people in my neighbourhood and/or within my city.

nostrademons2• 15 years ago

Finding the right non-profit, club or meetup then takes the role of the first level of filtering.

When you join an organization based around something, you can be pretty sure that most of its members will share at least that common interest with you. But how do you find the organization in the first place?

If you're anything like me, you probably end up trying out a bunch of potential hobbies before you find one you stick with. When I was in grade school, I tried gymnastics, figure skating, soccer, basketball, violin, clarinet, viola, guitar, math team, Magic: the Gathering, Starcraft, a brief flirtation with policy debate, and probably several hobbies I can't remember now. The only ones I really stuck with and made friends through were violin, guitar, and M:tG. When I was in college, I tried orchestra, the Arts theme house, Taiko, whitewater kayaking, bridge, sailing, theater, improv comedy, Woodsy club, etc. The ones I stuck with were orchestra and sailing.

It's easier to do it this way if you're afraid of rejection, because you're rejecting an activity instead of rejecting (or being rejected by) a person. But it's no less time-consuming. You have to reject fewer entities, but it takes you longer to decide that you don't actually want to pursue that line, so it ends up being pretty much a wash.

30vanquish12• 15 years ago

It's the same amount of filtering like the other reply.

It comes down to wanting social interactions without having to go through that small talk stuff that most people need to go through in real life.

I also do volunteer my time as well. Although I do understand concern for making the best use of one's time. I only messaged people whom I felt there was potential.

The same filtering applies though because you can attend things where there aren't many people you could relate to or you can only relate with that one particular interest and nothing else.

30vanquish12• 15 years ago

Friend to me is where two people can have rapport about one or more subjects. If I talk to someone about basketball and only basketball, then that's a friend to me.

Good comment in bringing up that everyone has their own interpretation and standards to what a friend is.

nostrademons2• 15 years ago

Interestingly, I've found these percentages seem to hold true in a variety of other social situations as well. Online dating, for instance - I find I get responses to about 30% of initial messages, but 2/3 of those are just being polite and never strike up a conversation, so I end up with RL dates with about 10% of initial prospects. Haven't met one yet that I felt a real connection to, but I've only been on 8 dates so far, so 1% would imply I've got a few to go.

Or college. I figure I knew (had some interaction with, could name & recognize by sight) perhaps 300 people at my college. Maybe 30 of them I'd call "friends" - I could sit down with them at the dining hall without feeling awkward and chit-chat about classes or hobbies or interests or society and politics. Only about 2 or 3 of them did I really feel close enough to to stay in touch with them after college, once our common interests had ended.

30vanquish12• 15 years ago

Great insight on this. It tends to hold true for many social aspects. It's something that I take into account when I get rejected or the talk can't go beyond any certain subject/topic because it's nothing personal. The certain wavelength or timing when you met causes the talk to never reach that long-lasting depth.

hammock• 15 years ago

This got me thinking. One thing which applies in the real world but not online is PROXIMITY.

Most of the time when you live with someone, work with someone, or just spend a lot of time around someone, you are MUCH more likely to become friends that you otherwise would.

I have not found this to be true online. Just because you spend a lot of time in a particular forum doesnt mean you are more likely to develop friendships with those people- only the people who match your viewpoints etc.

Then again I wouldnt say Ive ever formed anything coming close to a "close friendship" with anyone I solely interact with online, so I'd be curious to know what others think about this.

Hisoka• 15 years ago

I think when people are around each other, there's a lot of future at stake. You don't want to mess up, and cause any drama 'cause it can bite you in the future. When you stop being around with that person, whether it's because you moved, or quit jobs, etc, you stop caring so much about nurturing that relationship.

30vanquish12• 15 years ago

You've brought up good points. More and more exposure when it comes to work and school can benefit real life relationships as well.

However, when I've met people online, I don't connect with them really well until the 2nd attempt. (I give people 2 chances).

When you're in real life and it's just a stranger that passes by, you never get that potential second chance.

wallflower2• 15 years ago

For the real world, focus on the Three C's:

"Conversation-friendliness: Your main tool of contact and communication is your voice. So ask yourself whether a particular venue is suitable for carrying on a conversation. Quieter places are generally better. Loud clubs and bars generally are not, but sometimes their quieter patios or balconies can work. Bookstores and coffee shops are much better.

Community: There is pre-existing rapport when some common thread of interest connects a group together. The more specific the thread and the greater effort people have made to come to the venue, the stronger the rapport, and the easier time you will have making contact. Talking to people watching a game at a bar is likely to be a fleeting interaction, whereas the people you meet at a conference in Buenos Aires on emperor penguins may become lifelong friends.

Continuity: Stationary people are easier to meet than those in motion. The longer people tend to stay at a given venue, the easier it is to meet them. Continuity can also develop over longer periods of time. There is built-in familiarity with someone whom you see three times a week at the gym which makes it easier to meet her."

http://taoofdating.com/sample1.php

30vanquish12• 15 years ago

When it comes to real life, I second the last point because people in motion are much tougher to approach than someone who is sitting and stationary.

Community does let you get past the rapport issue more quickly. But besides that one interest, how do you go farther?

I also agree that quieter places are better so you don't have environmental interference.

wallflower2• 15 years ago

> But besides that one interest, how do you go farther?

It really comes down to taking the initiative. The goal when you first meet someone you like (aside from the rare person you meet on a plane and connect with and share life stories) could be (sometimes you might not meet them again) to meet them again. Don't try to "date" them (friends or potential lovers) on the first meeting - the whole goal is to get the contact information to meet again, somewhere else, ideally doing something the other person likes. Just find out what the other person likes to do and invite them to go do it - 'I love art - and watching people enjoy art - I'd like to meet up and go with you to the X exhibit and the museum' - (the key word here is 'I'd like' phrasing - not 'Do you want to?' - express your preference, take the lead...)

I've met a fair number of the people who matter in my life through taking the initiative and talking to strangers. But, to be clear, it was not a first degree contact - it was meeting them through the person I initially met.

The problem with Google+ Circles, is that it does not allow overlap. In real life, the interesting connections occur when you overlap circles (e.g. throw a party and your improv friends meet your Salsa dancing friends). Throwing a party is one of the most effective ways to improve your social life. Indeed, taking the lead on anything is powerful. Going to an event solo may make you feel like a pariah but going with two other people - you're golden.

The ideal is the self-perpetuating party - e.g. you throw enough regular parties that you get invited to outings constantly. Doesn't have to be a Saturday night blow-out, something like a Tuesday night potluck for three or four friends, once or twice a month, will really grow your social circles.

And, most importantly, to end my soapbox (thanks for asking), just be yourself. If you are quiet and shy, don't try to be Tom Cruise 'Show me the money'. Be yourself. As much as I wanted to be the life of the party, I'm relatively happy knowing a lot of people from various worlds and circles. When I hang out with people, its usually not very regularly and usually with their good friends (and I'm the odd one out).

But the universe rewards bold action.

olalonde2• 15 years ago

This is just kind of creepy, isn't it?

30vanquish12• 15 years ago

How would it be creepy? It's just like any friend you would make. You have to start by talking to a stranger.

If you want to do it in a formal manner like a classroom, a workplace, a meetup, then that's cool.

I simply don't want to limit myself to just that.

olalonde2• 15 years ago

Well, after reading what your blog is all about I can see why you did that. That being said, your strategy is based on "throwing against the wall to see what sticks" and I think there are much more efficient ways to make friends for common mortals ;) One of them is to target people you want to be friends with before approaching them (through meetups, common friends, etc.). I can say for sure that I probably wouldn't want to stay your friend after reading your blog just as I'm sure women don't want to be with guys who have their own "pick up artist" blog.

erikb• 15 years ago

I would suggest you really learn to know some real people. And "really" really means "real life". There are things about communcation (non-verbal for example) that you can not have over the internet. Also a relationship will never reach the depth of a comparable real life relationship, if you never see the other person.

From that post it is pretty clear that you have nearly no experience with human beings (who consider writing to 400 people for no real reason creepy and call one-month-old-relationships not friendship) and also don't like to have. That itself is okay from my point of view. But it also means that you can not do anything connection related. You are just not the type of person for that. Don't take it too personal. I myself am not the want-to-know-everybody type. That's why I can easily recognise someone who has the same illusions I had when I was younger (and to some degree probably still have).

Another tip I want to give you just to help you not "burn your hands": If you make one relationship in 1 or 2 years that you can really call a friendship, then you are more successful in that job then most people! Your count at the moment is not 50, it is zero. You don't know how people are different if you really learn to know them, how many people are nice to you for a short term, but actually don't care about you and also how many people are out there who want to gain from your disadvantage. Be careful, please.

olliesaunders2• 15 years ago

Having friends on the internet to the exclusion of real life friends is certainly bad but meeting people on the internet does not preclude getting to know them in real life. Location isn’t even much of a barrier any more. I did a programming competition with a guy in Canada—I’m in the UK—and he invited me over there when I later publicly complained that my job was starting to suck on a forum. I went for 3 weeks and had an awesome time.

Even if you never meet any of the people you talk to on the internet in real life. So what? You still made a load of internet buddies. And there’s great value in having a little roster of people you can turn to for advice, guidance, and opinion. The system he’s using is already self-selecting for those who are open enough to be suitable for such things.

    From that post it is pretty clear that you have 
    nearly no experience with human beings

How is that clear? You can speculate, sure. But I just see someone motivated to make connection with people.

    who consider writing to 400 people for no real 
    reason creepy

Creepy for some. It depends how paranoid you are.

    and call one-month-old-relationships not friendship

He wouldn’t be the first blogger in the world prone to exaggeration.

    people are out there who want to gain from your
    disadvantage. Be careful, please.

Yes, there are scum bags, con artists, and assholes. We’ve all met them. But isolating yourself away from all people just because of those bad ones is not a good idea. The skill you need to work out who you like and who you don’t is what’s important and you can only learn that by practicing, which means exposing yourself to lots of new people. How else can you learn? Besides the author is doing things in a pretty safe way by getting to know people over the internet and with Skype first. FUD and attempts to build a fortress around yourself are actually dangerous.

Even if you don’t agree with me. I just prefer to live this way: I prefer to believe it’s better to connect with people; I prefer confidence to shy timidness; I prefer to look enthusiastic when meeting a new person over fearful judgment. All the other things eat away at me and turn me into a scared person. I hate that.

30vanquish12• 15 years ago

Thanks for the great insight.

With the help of skype, you can see body language, tone (non-verbal communication) almost as well as real life now.

Location isn't a barrier anymore and that's what makes the internet so powerful.

>The system he’s using is already self-selecting for those who are open enough to be suitable for such things.

I couldn't have said it any better.

Most of the 50 people I've talked I've connected with for at least six months.

The way I make messages online pretty much ignores small talk. I try to steer the conversation to that depth as quickly as possible. If someone is willing to tell you about their deep experiences (and it makes logic sense) then they're most likely authentic.

30vanquish12• 15 years ago

Hello Erik, Thanks for the constructive criticism.

I'm not here to please the people who think that writing to 400 people to make friends is creepy. Everyone makes friends and eventually you'll have to talk to 400 strangers whether or not it's formal/non-formal.

> But it also means that you can not do anything connection related.

Well that vision is a work in progress. I can't please everyone but I can extend my hand to everyone to give them the opportunity to connect. If they see it as creepy, their loss.

There's something called growth. If I can grow into connecting, great. If not, it's worth a shot to try anyways.

Those 4 people who are extremely close I've known for 1-4 years. You did make a good point about the 50 friends. However, like I said before, each person has their own interpretation of what a friend is. If it's a year, then it's a year for some. If you want to use the year requirement, then I'll say the 50 number drops to more like 15, not zero.

How I Made 50 Friends In One Month

Related Stories