Baxil [bakh-HEEL'], n. - An exercise in (non-)human psychology

[Recent Entries][Archive][Friends][User Info]

My Sites [Tomorrowlands] [The TTU Wiki] [Photos]
View My LJ [By Tag]

December 11th, 2007
12:52 am
[User Picture]

[Link]

Previous Entry Add to Memories Tell a Friend Next Entry
An exercise in (non-)human psychology
Two coworkers of mine -- who I will leave nameless to protect the innocent -- cannot settle a raging debate, and they have turned to me for an impartial third-party opinion. In turn, I turn to you, people of the Internets. Can you take a few seconds and help me put this to rest for them?

Poll #1104182 A bitter sweets debate
Open to: All, results viewable to: All

1. You see an open box of assorted filled chocolates in a public area at work. They were left by one of your coworkers and are meant to be shared. The chocolates are unlabeled; there is no key indicating what's inside them.

View Answers

I take a chocolate.
60 (75.9%)

I don't take a chocolate.
19 (24.1%)

2. All of the conditions of question #1, *PLUS*: Someone has smashed open all of the chocolates. The damage is very prominent. However, the pieces have all stayed separate; the mess factor is negligible; and you can now see what they're filled with.

View Answers

I take a chocolate.
34 (43.0%)

I don't take a chocolate.
45 (57.0%)

3. All of the conditions of question #2, PLUS: Written on the box in large letters are the words "SAFE TO EAT. YUM YUM!"

View Answers

I take a chocolate.
18 (22.8%)

I don't take a chocolate.
61 (77.2%)

4. All of the conditions of question #3, PLUS: A trustworthy coworker says the chocolates were smashed open in a sanitary fashion, without being touched by human hands.

View Answers

I take a chocolate.
56 (70.9%)

I don't take a chocolate.
23 (29.1%)

5. All of the conditions of question #4, PLUS: You can see that at least one of the chocolates has a filling you really like.

View Answers

I take a chocolate.
61 (77.2%)

I don't take a chocolate.
18 (22.8%)

6. If the box from question #4 (all damaged but ID'd; breakage was sanitary) and the box from question #1 (pristine mystery chocolates) were on the table side by side, which would you choose?

View Answers

A pristine chocolate with an unknown, random filling.
44 (61.1%)

A smashed-up chocolate with a known filling.
28 (38.9%)



Explain yourself in comments, if you'd like -- especially if your reasons for the decision are unexpected. For example, I only went for them once they were broken -- but for the undoubtedly strange reason that I expected nobody else would, and I didn't want them to go to waste!

Current Location: ~/brainstorm
Current Music: Tom Lehrer, "National Brotherhood Week"
Tags: ,

(Leave a comment)

Comments
 
[User Picture]
From:[info]dewhitton
Date:December 11th, 2007 09:13 am (UTC)
(Link)
I went for the broken ones because... CHOCOLATE! I like the surprise of unbroken chocolates, but if I could see peppermint amongst the broken ones then I'd have that.

Broken chocolates that have been "tested?" Not so much.
[User Picture]
From:[info]kinkyturtle
Date:December 11th, 2007 10:09 am (UTC)
(Link)
My only question is why didn't whoever cut them neatly open with a knife? Doesn't he think presentation counts for ANYTHING?
From:premchai21
Date:December 11th, 2007 10:34 am (UTC)
(Link)

This is assuming that the chocolates are from a trustworthy source to begin with, of course. If the source is dubious, then the intact ones and the broken ones might both have some kind of nasties hiding in them (cue Monty Python references, track 12, marker 3 or possibly marker 4). This is also assuming that the environment does not include coworkers with access to the chocolates whom I do not trust with write access to anything that will be ingested. If either of those conditions don't hold, I take no chocolates regardless.

[User Picture]
From:[info]nicked_metal
Date:December 11th, 2007 11:28 am (UTC)
(Link)
Question 3 activates my paranoia, and is the only time when I wouldn't take a chocolate. Question 6 I didn't answer because there are some important unknown variables, being the extent to which I prefer any of the identifiable flavours (if there's one flavour that is a clear winner, I'll select that out of the IDed group), and the ratio of flavours I really don't like vs flavours that I like among the IDed chocolates (since that ratio is likely to hold true for the undamaged chocolate).
[User Picture]
From:[info]kadyg
Date:December 11th, 2007 11:39 am (UTC)
(Link)
[info]kinkyturtle asked the question I was going to: Since when is blunt force an acceptable way to split candy? if you're going to go through all the trouble of "opening" the chocolates without touching them, do it in a neat manner. God gave us knives for just this situation.

Scenario 3 made me all kinds of paranoid and gave me visions of chocolates served up by Sicilians with immunity to iocane powder. In scenario 6, I would take a pristine, random chocolate since the only filling I really hate is cherry cordial and those are pretty easy to spot - usually.
From:premchai21
Date:December 11th, 2007 11:54 am (UTC)
(Link)

I also find it vaguely amusing that your answer would probably be "no to all".

[User Picture]
From:[info]panzerwalt
Date:December 11th, 2007 11:56 am (UTC)
(Link)
unlikely to take one unless directly offered by the box owner.
[User Picture]
From:[info]momentrabbit
Date:December 11th, 2007 12:32 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Glee! I get to skew the expected results! :D I reject all chocolates, until the last questions where I must choose between an 'opened' or 'closed' chocolate; then I choose opened.

a) The 'untouched' chocolates may well have been tampered with, as easily as the 'untouched'; but that's not really a concern. I'm a trusting sort. (ha!) And I do like chocolate. More of a driving factor in my behaviour is;
b) I'm diabetic. A dark chocolate truffle center, or a nut cluster, will be better for me than, say, a mouthful of liquid caramel. (Not much better, but you know, it all counts...)
[User Picture]
From:[info]lienne
Date:December 11th, 2007 12:44 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I go for the chocolate in every scenario, because chocolate is yummy. (Although I was slightly suspicious of the SAFE TO EAT, YUM YUM sign, because I've been reading a lot of Terry Pratchett and as a result am rather cynical regarding the trustworthiness of cheerful signs like that.)

I took the pristine chocolate on the last one because my mind stubbornly maintains that if a chocolate is smashed-up, there's less of it - chocolate dust all over the place and so on - and therefore I'm getting more value for the money I'm not paying for the pristine one. I realize this is utterly nonsensical, but there you go.

Edit: I can't spell utterly.

Edited at 2007-12-11 12:45 pm (UTC)
[User Picture]
From:[info]tyshadragon
Date:December 11th, 2007 01:22 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I can't eat chocolate due to allergy, so no choc munchies for me.
[User Picture]
From:[info]zuki_san
Date:December 11th, 2007 02:08 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I have scavenger tendencies, and especially love chocolate. The "Yum Yum" sign makes me suspicious. I would hesitate longer to take smashed chocolates, but eventually give in. Aesthetics indicate that I'd go for the unsmashed over smashed, but probably end up eating from both boxes.

...what is the context behind this raging debate, is what I'd really like to know.
[User Picture]
From:[info]zuki_san
Date:December 11th, 2007 02:13 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Also, I kind of like the idea of not knowing what I'd get.
[User Picture]
From:[info]natetg
Date:December 11th, 2007 02:12 pm (UTC)

Welcome to Kindergarten?

(Link)
There's this odd theme here of heavy-handedness. Rather than open the chocolates with a knife (already mentioned) or provide a chocolate key (most companies encode the filling using shape) someone apparently used a special set of candy-smashing mortars.

Then, rather than 'Please, Take One' or something similar, we have the paranoia inducing 'Safe to Eat. Yum Yum', which induces paranoia, and doesn't really indicate that the chocolates are for general consumption.

I wonder if Alice would have eaten the cupcake if it were smashed.
[User Picture]
From:[info]joysweeper
Date:December 11th, 2007 02:52 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I would take one - hells, I would probably take more than one to hide away for later - for every one but no. 3. Because "SAFE TO EAT. YUM YUM!" triggers "It's a TRAP" in my head. Mitigated if someone actually says that it's fine. *rolls eyes*
[User Picture]
From:[info]lemurling
Date:December 11th, 2007 03:59 pm (UTC)
(Link)
It is commonly accepted in my workplace that people bring things in and leave them around, and then we eat them. The smashed chocolate to me was just one of those things that happens sometimes, oops, I stepped on the box, or whatever, no big deal. If it wasn't safe to eat, it wouldn't be left out. The sign just struck me as funny, not paranoia inducing, I have several coworkers who might put a sign up like that. But in the end, I'd prefer to eat one I didn't know the filling of, just for the mystery of it. Of course, I'd happily eat the broken ones too, when the unbroken ones are gone.
[User Picture]
From:[info]charles
Date:December 12th, 2007 06:11 am (UTC)
(Link)
+1
[User Picture]
From:[info]baronlaw
Date:December 11th, 2007 04:26 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I have actually memorized which chocolates from various makers have the fillings I like. Assuming one of those was available from the pristine, untouched box I would take one. I would not take any from the smashed chocolates.
[User Picture]
From:[info]necama
Date:December 11th, 2007 05:08 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Considering my very violent alergy to almonds, I can't just take a random chocolate. If you forced me to choose, one which has been smashed open so I can see what's in it.
[User Picture]
From:[info]dragonzuela
Date:December 11th, 2007 05:33 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I'd prefer the pristine to the smashed, because I've never encountered a filled chocolate that I didn't like well enough to continue eating once I'd taken the first bite. And sight is not a perfect predictor for what the fillings taste like, so I'd rather have a random mystery chocolate than think I was getting my favorite and end up disappointed.
[User Picture]
From:[info]r_caton
Date:December 11th, 2007 05:34 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Question 6: I take one from each (for comparison and quality assessment of course)

I may return to obtain a good statistical sample.
From:[info]r_monoxide
Date:December 11th, 2007 05:50 pm (UTC)
(Link)
with all my food allergies I'm really better off not taking any random chocolate unless I can read the ingredients list.
From:[info]antwondotcom
Date:December 11th, 2007 05:51 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I'm glad that I'm not the only one for whom "SAFE TO EAT. YUM YUM!" is creepiness-inducing enough to be off-putting. 'Cuz the rest of the time, I'm taking the damn chocolate, presentation be damned - who am I to turn down free communal snack goods?

Definitely going for the unknown chocolate in #6, though - presentation aside, I just prefer engaging in a tiny little chocolate lottery, in the vague hopes of finding some awesome filling I've never tried before. "Live for adventure" and all that rot.
[User Picture]
From:[info]elynne
Date:December 11th, 2007 06:24 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Won't eat 'em - gluten allergy.

If (by some miracle) the chocolates are certified gluten-free, but all other circumstances apply, my response to every scenario is exactly opposite: I would take a chocolate. Unbroken or smashed, note saying they're safe or co-worker vouching.

... I miss filled chocolates. :(
[User Picture]
From:[info]lysana
Date:December 11th, 2007 06:31 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Option 6 needs a third choice: compare the broken chocolates with the pristine ones and take a pristine one whose filling you know based on the similarities of the patterns in the chocolate. ;)
[User Picture]
From:[info]mr_silvers
Date:December 11th, 2007 06:41 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Don't take from the smashed pieces even with note and coworker telling, because people lie, just to make fun of you, or get even for something.
From:premchai21
Date:December 12th, 2007 03:55 am (UTC)
(Link)

I thought that's why it said "trustworthy coworker". If your coworkers would all lie to you about food safety for some random reason, that makes them untrustworthy in this context, no?

[User Picture]
From:[info]mr_silvers
Date:December 12th, 2007 08:46 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Assuming you actually trust anyone at work.

I do not trust anyone at all. Everyone has some personal gain and will sacrifice you in an instant to get it, or even from peer pressure, to play a joke at your expense, or just because they can.
From:premchai21
Date:December 13th, 2007 08:50 am (UTC)
(Link)

Well, yes, assuming that—that's why I recorded my assumptions to that effect above.

So does that make your answer to the combined object of the questions and my assumed assumptions "undefined; the premise has never occurred, so there is no data with which to predict my response" or "undefined; the premise is impossible by definition, so there is no structure in which to form a response"?

[User Picture]
From:[info]mr_silvers
Date:December 14th, 2007 02:14 am (UTC)
(Link)
The latter.
[User Picture]
From:[info]waywind
Date:December 11th, 2007 07:05 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I might cautiously try the chocolate in most of those cases, but I would be suspicious of it in all cases as well, since the chocolate was brought anonymously. I don't know who brought it there, and I don't know who smashed them open.

It's also because I read a story on a text file archive website a few years ago that would put a fear in people for chocolate from unknown sources that has been deposited in a workplace. It falls in the "Don't eat candy from strangers" category, even if you know all your co-workers.

A guy who'd just been fired had revenge by sneaking a box of convincing-looking chocolates into a party later that week. Although the chocolate on the outside was real, the filling inside wasn't nougat, it was his own feces.

It sounds like it's probably an urban legend, since it's sick enough, but I think I'd rather pass on having any of the chocolate. I can afford to go buy some chocolate instead.
[User Picture]
From:[info]paka
Date:December 11th, 2007 07:10 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I don't have allergies that'd really come into play, but I am trying to think from the perspective of nut or orange allergies. Both are really popular fillings. Who I am right now, hey, chocolate. But if I had allergies like some friends I'd want to know what was in the chocolate first.
[User Picture]
From:[info]cypherwulf
Date:December 11th, 2007 08:27 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Most filled chocolates are pretty disgusting, but there are a few I like that don't taste like chemicals. And besides, I eat food out of the dumpster regularly, and on occassion have eaten things that other people have touched or eaten part of (usually ripping off the part with bite marks). So I'm probably the last person to give a shit about cooties. People are too germ phobic if you ask me. Irony of it is that it's fucking up our immune systems and making us even weaker.
From:[info]lhexa
Date:December 11th, 2007 08:30 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Easy situations for me: I don't like gourmet chocolate.
[User Picture]
From:[info]klitaka
Date:December 11th, 2007 09:33 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I think that the guessing at what sorts of fillings said chocolates contain is half the fun of boxes of chocolates! The mystery is half the fun. Ones that are smashed are not nearly as fun--I'd much prefer to pick the unknown than something known. It's more likely that I'd not eat the smushed chocolates for a combination of reasons, not cleanliness or paranoia alone.

Besides, if I knew all the flavors of the fillings, I'd probably just eat all the ones with strawberry fillings and never try the ones with rum or Marzipan fillings! I'd miss out on finding new things I like!
[User Picture]
From:[info]hafoc
Date:December 11th, 2007 11:36 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Smashed chocolates don't look good. Besides, I'm not eating anything that's been pre-screwed-around-with. If anyone's going to vandalize my food, I will do it myself.
From:[info]arkofeden
Date:December 12th, 2007 02:16 am (UTC)
(Link)
Regarding the ultimate question of mystery chocolate vs. known fillings, I think part of the appeal for me is trying to guess what kind of filling is in all the different shapes. Something in me keeps trying to connect the outer appearance of the piece to the inside in some kind of logical way, based on the "personality" of the exterior and interior (ex. a round, dark chocolate somehow seems more coconut than hazelnut, a square milk choco piece seems more hazelnut than strawberry cream, etc.), even though logic only works in a very few cases... Whole cherries sort of have to be inside round candies, for instance. Guessing and testing these theories is what usually makes me eat way too many chocolates in situations like this one. ^_^;

--E.G.
From:premchai21
Date:December 12th, 2007 03:59 am (UTC)
(Link)

Those are some interesting associations you have there. I associate dark chocolate with a rounded top with hazelnut cluster, and I tend to imagine square milk pieces as probably having some kind of cookie underneath. Coconut can also be round and dark, but also usually bumpy. Strawberry cream I would tend to associate with rounded cubes. Do you know whence you derive your chocolate associations? (I don't, in my case.)

From:[info]arkofeden
Date:December 13th, 2007 07:06 am (UTC)
(Link)
Ohhh, I actually have no idea either. It's possible that some of it might come from past experiences with certain types usually being filled with certain things (and that could be affected by the brands that are most common in my offices--Whitman's is pretty popular), but I think the system's largely based on attempts to penetrate the outer chocolate with psychic power alone. ;)

--E.G.
[User Picture]
From:[info]zon14
Date:December 12th, 2007 02:23 am (UTC)
(Link)
I said take one from every question where that applies. Guess I'm just too trusting that way. Heh.

Last question was a bit confusing though. Assuming the two boxes came from the same manufacturer, the smashed ones would provide a key to identify the intact ones. Even so, I'd take a smashed one anyway since I'm just thinking there's likely to be more of them left by the time I get there. Heh.
[User Picture]
From:[info]eredien
Date:December 12th, 2007 02:53 am (UTC)
(Link)
At my office there are often strange chocolates from faraway lands. I won't eat them unless I can verify that there is no lard in them; "SAFE TO EAT" might not mean the thing you think it does.
[User Picture]
From:[info]kistaro
Date:December 12th, 2007 08:07 am (UTC)
(Link)
Nothing terribly surprising in my answers, except this makes me actually want to create all six scenarios in six separate-but-equal kitchens at Microsoft (say, all break kitchens in building 26, both North and South sections) and use cameras to determine rate-of-removal. Not a simple "time at which 25% remains" (0% skews things by that one nasty flavor nobody likes- every chocolate box has one), but one that accounts for different usage patterns (okay, so they aren't so equal except in form factor- and the second-floor kitchens are competing with vending machines). All the kitchen counters already have security cameras trained on them, so all I'd have to do is negotiate the cooperation of our security staff...

And I'd compromise between cut/smashed. I'd cut them with one of the plastic knives available in the kitchen which, by the nature of an unpointy knife, should squish them fairly effectively.
[User Picture]
From:[info]packbat
Date:December 12th, 2007 01:21 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Like someone said above, I'd rather my food not come pre-vandalized, 'messy' or not. That said, delicious filling might overrule.

Also, on Q. [7/8]: Same boxes as from 6, but [damaged/pristine] chocolate box had significantly more candies remaining, what would you choose? Probably the one with more.
[User Picture]
From:[info]myles_otter
Date:December 12th, 2007 08:09 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I don't like chocolate.

However, in the last one where I am *forced* to take one, I prefer life's little surprises.
Tomorrowlands Powered by LiveJournal.com