You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

RomeoStevens comments on Military Rationalities and Irrationalities - Less Wrong Discussion

21 Post author: pscheyer 09 September 2013 11:48PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (58)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: RomeoStevens 10 September 2013 05:43:50AM 5 points [-]

Guys can make their wardrobe more uniform like by figuring out a few useful permutations in a brand/size that fits you and then getting various colors that go well together. This probably works less well for women, who are expected to differentiate more.

Comment author: maia 13 September 2013 02:40:09AM 4 points [-]

Meh. I've never felt that wardrobe variety is particularly expected of me. I suspect a similar approach would work well for women who just want to get clothing out of the way.

Comment author: Clarity 21 October 2015 04:13:48PM *  0 points [-]

My decision rule works like this:

Objective

To minimise attire decision fatigue

Outcomes

Get attire that:

  • maximises mobility, thermal comfort, decency and accessibility

  • minimises cost and components

Nike techfleece jumper + Chanel (yes, men's) dress pant + Nike Runners for casual wear and any kind of formal dress shoes cause they're all bad for your feet, bad for running, and not that great looking anyway + Uniqlo Collared shirt switched for a tshirt when sleeping and another tshirt to wear underneath to keep the sweat away, or a stripped down combination of that, appears to be the most versatile, minimal, comfortable, warm but mobile and professional mix I can find. I've convinced many people in my city to go with that combo somehow.