• IzzyScissor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

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

    The other person selects one out of the three.

    Alternate.

    • GraniteM@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      We do 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.

    • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      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?

      • Ledivin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

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

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        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” / “<streaming service>” / “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.

    • Sturgist@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

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