Maybe I misinterpreted the "[Heck] Yes or No" idea, but to me it sounded an awfully lot like if you don't want to jump in bed within five minutes, then it's a "No", or if you don't want to talk and date within five minutes the answer will also be "No".
But if it is instead applied to if the other person is not willing to flirt with me, or perhaps only does it occasionally when nothing more interesting is around, then it is a "No" for me too. It could applied to that, but nothing in the description says it can be. It's just about speeding up the process and I don't think that is very healthy. For me this leads to superficial decisions. Even if society thinks that time is the most important thing, and we always need to be efficient and use time efficiently, I refuse to apply this to relationships. Forming a relationship isn't (and shouldn't) be about time-management and be handled like some commercial project which already should be done before it is even started. The same goes for my hobbies. I refuse to apply time-management techniques on those as well. They are and should be pleasurable activities without time constraints.
I think the "law" works especially well on dating sites, like OKC. If I write to someone who does not reply, that's clearly a "no". If I write to someone who writes back and then, after an exchange of a few notes, she stops writing . . . I should take that as a "no", too, and just let go of it.
If she isn't already intrigued or interested enough to maintain communication, nothing I can write is likely to change that.
At that stage, it's a long way from being about hopping in the sack or about marriage or even about dating. The question is put to the other person: "Am I interesting enough to you that you'll write back?"
If her answer is "meh", then I should hear that as a "no" and give my attention to other things of importance in my life.
If guys on OKC would follow the "law" from the first, OKC would be a lot less creeptastic than it is for women.
At the same time, I can ask of myself, "Is this person interesting or intriguing enough to engage in an email conversation, regardless of where it might lead?"
I've met many women that way regarding whom my answer would be "meh." I should let those go, and move on.
But, then, I just met someone on OKC of whom I answer "yes! and yes! and yes!"
(Sorry, I can't help but think of Molly Bloom - from
Ulysses - here.)
She seems to respond the same way to me, writing back with enthusiasm.
Or, she did. I haven't heard from her in a while, though I'll wait and see. She may just be very busy this week.
