Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes

No

I can even switch which hands I'm doing each task with.

I decline to answer

[Autistic Vulture]

As I said, I do not agree with Jeph that asking someone for their phone number is something that should be never done. However, what is rarely discussed in these scenarios is the nuance involved. I don't think you should always talk to someone if you like them. There are contexts here. Somebody might have just broken up with another person and not be interested in a relationship. They might have trauma. If you don't know them that well, you might have no idea what is going on in their lives that make that conversation difficult before you start it, with them unprepared.

Speaking here as an autistic guy who grew up in a small town...

...I've never asked a woman for her phone number.  Part of that is growing up in a small town; you didn't need to ask for numbers because they could (usually) be easily found in a 2-3 page section of the provincial phone directory, and memorizing was easy because you only needed to know the last four digits (up until the mid-80s, that was all that was dialed; after that, you still only needed the four digits because everyone had the same exchange).  Everyone knew (approximately) where everyone else lived, so finding the right name out of a list of (at most) 4-5 identical surnames caused no difficulty whatsoever.

And thus asking for a phone number just wasn't done.  So, to this day, I don't do it because it doesn't occur to me.

Clinton did it right.  Giving your number to someone causes much less awkwardness than asking for a number.  The pursued person thus doesn't have to give a response at that time, and everyone can be on their way with much less tension in the air.

[sitnspin]

Clinton did it right.  Giving your number to someone causes much less awkwardness than asking for a number.  The pursued person thus doesn't have to give a response at that time, and everyone can be on their way with much less tension in the air.

This right here. You make an offer, it is on them to use it or not. You are offering them something rather than making a request of them. That is how you demonstrate your interest in someone and establish a modicum of trust.

[Zebediah]

Possibly a significant point in this debate: Jeph said you shouldn’t ask strangers for their phone numbers. He did not say you shouldn’t ask anyone for their phone number.

[los_alamos_bomb]

. However, what is rarely discussed in these scenarios is the nuance involved. I don't think you should always talk to someone if you like them. There are contexts here.

And it's not like that's the only kind of context. Is a woman walking in the park in casual clothes with a friend really cruising for ass?

Of course Brun's not necessarily cruising for ass; then again, neither is the guy who asked her out.  He was polite and lovely, and we have every reason to believe that he thinks Brun has a good energy, as he pretty openly states that he values his dog's judge of character.  And yes, of course there is context to when you should try and deepen your contact with someone.  Context absolutely matters.  But good lord, if this isn't the right context, when is?  They just had a totally harmless interaction in a public place, the ice is already broken, he saw something in her that he liked... That's the perfect time to be up front about the fact that you're interested in someone.

Spoken like someone who has never had a dude threaten you because you said no to him.

I'm sorry that you've had that experience.  Men like that are awful and I would never advocate on their behalf.  But the solution cannot be "just don't ask people out."  The gears of dating grind to a halt that way.

Asking for them number of someone you just met, especially one you have barely interacted with (like this instance) is rude and presumptuous.

It would only be presumptuous if it was a demand.  As a simple request, I don't see it.  Also, how is he supposed to interact with Brun more if he's not allowed to ask for more interaction?  I shudder to think about a world where we can only get to know people that we're already in contact with for other reasons (e.g. coworkers or classmates).

Possibly a significant point in this debate: Jeph said you shouldn’t ask strangers for their phone numbers. He did not say you shouldn’t ask anyone for their phone number.

Except that contact info is often necessary if you want to turn a stranger into not-a-stranger.  That puts a Catch-22 onto huge swaths of relationships.

It boggles my mind how we, as open-minded, free-thinking, socially-enlightened people, can claim over and over that 'clear communication is key' for any relationship, and then in the next breath slam shut gate after gate on clear and open communication.  "I like you, do you like me," is about as simple as these things get.  Why are we so afraid of saying it out loud?

[Thrillho]

I'll come back and reply in more detail later, but earlier in your reply asking what we're afraid of, you replied to spin telling us one example of what people are afraid of.

[Tova]

Clinton did it right.  Giving your number to someone causes much less awkwardness than asking for a number.  The pursued person thus doesn't have to give a response at that time, and everyone can be on their way with much less tension in the air.

This right here. You make an offer, it is on them to use it or not. You are offering them something rather than making a request of them. That is how you demonstrate your interest in someone and establish a modicum of trust.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am not one to try to exchange phone numbers in these kinds of situations, but I have to ask. Is giving your number to someone really less likely to cause awkwardness than asking for theirs? I would have thought that handing your phone number over could also be awkward.

My impression was that this guy handled it pretty well. What could have been very uncomfortable would have been if he'd reacted in any way negatively to the refusal, but he accepted it with perfectly good grace.

And Brun was not uncomfortable at all. You may point out that not all people would have been like that, but maybe this guy actually correctly figured that she would be the type not to be bothered by it. It's possible.

I would bet that for every person out there who is a bit uncomfortable with someone making an advance like that, there is another who wishes people would be a bit more willing to be more forward.

[Reaver]

Really, Jeph? Really?

"Don't ask Strangers for their number! It could...gasp!...make them feel uncomfortable! And the last thing we can expect grown, adult people to deal with is...feeling uncomfortable!"

Thank you!  I almost never post to these forums, but Jeph's declaration against asking for phone numbers is just awful enough to draw me in.  You should definitely be willing to take no for an answer (graciously), but the idea that we can't pursue or even inquire about people we find interesting is just insanity.  If bonds are to be built, someone has to take a chance, or we all just end up huddling in our own caves alone.

If you're one of those people who takes a lot of social cues from QC, please hear me when I say this: Jeph sometimes really gets wound around his own axle about his own hangups, which are often highly skewed from the standards of normal social interaction.  On this issue, he is just plain wrong. If you like someone, talk to them.  If you want to see them again, say so, ask for their number, ask them out.  Be kind, be gentle, be gracious in rejection, but for the love of god don't isolate yourself even further in this already isolated world because you're terrified that you might for ten seconds make someone slightly uncomfortable.

Spoken like someone who has never had a dude threaten you because you said no to him.

Asking for them number of someone you just met, especially one you have barely interacted with (like this instance) is rude and presumptuous.

Just mho.

It's also ungodly rude to tell someone "I didn't say you can leave, you have to stay so I can pet your dog"

Guy was a jerk for not having his dog on leash, he acknowledged that and apologized, Brun proceeded to be ruder than him by informing him SHE never said he could leave, and then lectured him yet again after a polite request, that was easily accepted as a no.


I just don't care for the attitude of "If main character is rude/problematic it's absolutely fine, if other character does it, WOW HOW RUDE"

[Autistic Vulture]

Clinton did it right.  Giving your number to someone causes much less awkwardness than asking for a number.  The pursued person thus doesn't have to give a response at that time, and everyone can be on their way with much less tension in the air.

This right here. You make an offer, it is on them to use it or not. You are offering them something rather than making a request of them. That is how you demonstrate your interest in someone and establish a modicum of trust.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am not one to try to exchange phone numbers in these kinds of situations, but I have to ask. Is giving your number to someone really less likely to cause awkwardness than asking for theirs? I would have thought that handing your phone number over could also be awkward.

My impression was that this guy handled it pretty well. What could have been very uncomfortable would have been if he'd reacted in any way negatively to the refusal, but he accepted it with perfectly good grace.

Sure, he handled it well.  That doesn't always happen IRL.  There are certain people that will harass the object of their interest if they don't get the number, or will react with anger, etc.  Giving the number makes these outcomes much less likely.

[chris73]

It's also ungodly rude to tell someone "I didn't say you can leave, you have to stay so I can pet your dog"

Guy was a jerk for not having his dog on leash, he acknowledged that and apologized, Brun proceeded to be ruder than him by informing him SHE never said he could leave, and then lectured him yet again after a polite request, that was easily accepted as a no.

I just don't care for the attitude of "If main character is rude/problematic it's absolutely fine, if other character does it, WOW HOW RUDE"

Thank you for this, its what I wanted to say. To me she lectured him for longer than was needed, then proceeded to do something that could be taken as flirting (or being forgiven) ie stay so I can pet your dog.

He picks up on that and asks, politely, if he can have her number which she refuses (no problems there) and the last thing she says to him is again another rebuke (keep the dog on the leash)

But yeah hes the one in the wrong

[Tova]

Okay, so I can buy that it would have been more polite/less potentially discomfit-inducing for dog guy to give his number rather than ask for Brun's.

And it would have been more polite for Brun to stop lecturing once dog guy acknowledge his wrong-doing.

All fair points, but can we maybe keep things in their proper perspective rather than outright label one side or the other as RUDE or IN THE WRONG?

[shanejayell]

Or just drop it & move on.

New comic's up, new thread is calling.

[sitnspin]

It's also ungodly rude to tell someone "I didn't say you can leave, you have to stay so I can pet your dog"

Guy was a jerk for not having his dog on leash, he acknowledged that and apologized, Brun proceeded to be ruder than him by informing him SHE never said he could leave, and then lectured him yet again after a polite request, that was easily accepted as a no.


I just don't care for the attitude of "If main character is rude/problematic it's absolutely fine, if other character does it, WOW HOW RUDE"

Here's a weird idea: maybe they  both were wrong. Shocking thought, I know.

[Tova]

They're not both wrong, whatever that is supposed to mean, they're just your average flawed human beings doing their best, and no I will not let this go.

[sitnspin]

Those are not mutually exclusive concepts.

[Gyrre]

They're not both wrong, whatever that is supposed to mean, they're just your average flawed human beings doing their best, and no I will not let this go.

sitnspin may have been referring to the oft neglected concept of shared blame.

[sitnspin]

Both made sub-optimal social interaction choices.

Being rude or wrong doesn't inherently make one a bad person, which seems to be the two ideas you are conflating.

[Tova]

Those are not mutually exclusive concepts.

I never said they were mutually exclusive.

They were neither rude nor wrong. Whatever "wrong" means in this context.

[Tova]

We're all big believers in here, aren't we, that the feelings of the recipient of a behavior are more important than the intent behind it. Right?

Well, Brun and the dog guy are both perfectly fine. Neither of them have been even remotely hurt by this exchange. I imagine they'd both be puzzled by the fuss being raised here.

The suggestion that, for example, it's more polite to give your phone number is a perfectly reasonable one, but that doesn't mean that anything less polite than that is rude.

"Sub-optimal" and "rude" are not synonymous.

[sitnspin]

I am beginning to suspect the disagreement here primarily comes down to how much respective emotional weight we place on the word "rude". You seem to place much more on it than I do, so I will bow out.

[Tova]

Yes, I do think that "rude" is a serious charge. Are you in the habit of leveling it at people who behave "sub-optimally?" Are you then surprised when they are offended or upset?

[Thrillho]

The thing is the bones of the last bit of your argument there don't necessarily work.

The fact that harm was no caused does not mean that it is not potentially harm causing behaviour, regardless of what we're talking about.

[Perfectly Reasonable]

It's not like Brün will never see him again. He and Rupert are probably in the park on a pretty regular basis.

[los_alamos_bomb]

I just don't care for the attitude of "If main character is rude/problematic it's absolutely fine, if other character does it, WOW HOW RUDE"

Exactly right.  This sort of thing actually stopped me from reading QC for about a full year, earlier in its run.  Jeph has a lot of demons about virtue signaling and double-standards of justice that infect a lot of his writing, and it's been super troubling to me at times.  Brun's overwhelming rudeness in the Rupert strips is one mild example, but what drove me away from QC for a long time was Faye being outright physically abusive to Marty for a long time, something for which she sees zero consequences.  It's like the more anxious or anti-social or sparkle pony-ish a character is, more Jeph (and many people on this forum) feel its ok for them to get a justice boner while their victims play strawman for the audience.  It's at times extremely frustrating to read.

[Thrillho]

Global Moderator Comment

Discourse about the physical violence stages of Marten's relationship with Faye is extensive. If you're looking for more detailed discussion on that, I might recommend starting another thread, because I think any real discussion about it in another would involve necroposting and it is not relevant to this specific thread. I would also advise it might shaky ground to use terminology like 'virtue signalling' in this space but that can definitely be up for discussion in the Discuss sub forum if you would like.

As a mere user of the forum I would find such a thread enriching to participate in.
I too would take issue with Jeph using the characters as sock puppets generally, and can't think of specific examples where I noticed that but I largely give QC a pass anyway because it so often lines up with my own values, so I definitely do that as a consumer of the comics.
As someone who discusses the comics on here though, I have personally never employed a 'the character is right because they are the protagonist'-type argument, nor can I remember anyone deploying that, including but not limited to this thread, so I'm not sure where you're getting that.

[Is it cold in here?]

I will point out that just because a character does something that doesn't mean Jeph thinks it's good. A lot of the humor comes from characters doing inappropriate things.

[Tova]

The thing is the bones of the last bit of your argument there don't necessarily work.

The fact that harm was no caused does not mean that it is not potentially harm causing behaviour, regardless of what we're talking about.

By "potentially harm causing", do you mean that someone else in Brun's place would have been harmed and thus it was rude, or that it had the potential to lead to harmful behaviour?

Because I argue that the first is not the case, and the second is awfully broad.

[Tova]

Okay, I have a further question.

Is "rude" just subjective? Or can there be objective rudeness?

[Thrillho]

Rude is absolutely subjective.

[Tova]

Okay. I won't argue any further with your subjective viewpoint. I think we understand each others' points of view.

[jesslc]

Kind of late to the discussion but as a woman reading this thread, I can't help wondering if those thinking Jeph is wrong for saying "Don't ask strangers for their number" are men...

Because based on my life experiences as a woman, I completely agree with Jeph's comment and with these posts:
 

Clinton did it right.  Giving your number to someone causes much less awkwardness than asking for a number.  The pursued person thus doesn't have to give a response at that time, and everyone can be on their way with much less tension in the air.

This right here. You make an offer, it is on them to use it or not. You are offering them something rather than making a request of them. That is how you demonstrate your interest in someone and establish a modicum of trust.

I don't speak for all women. Possibly some of them are fine with strangers asking for their number. Personally I would love it if I was never asked for my number by a stranger ever again. And yes - I do mean 100% love it, with no regrets what-so-ever.

If society changed in this way that I'd like it to, that doesn't mean I'd never date ever again - people could still give me their number, or I could give them mine, or they could wait until we're at least acquaintances before asking, and so on... It would just mean I'd avoid a number of fairly unpleasant interactions.

The last person to express interest in dating me gave me his number and facebook details on a piece of paper. That was great and I totally recommend it. Since the interest was mutual, I sms-ed him pretty much immediately so that he had my number too. (He was also a long time acquaintance, so Jeph's "don't ask strangers for their number" advice doesn't apply anyway. Still, I preferred it this way.)

I can't help wondering if it's an unwillingness to give up control (and/or the chance to badger someone into giving out their number when they'd rather not) that makes some people so resistant to switching to giving out their number instead of asking for the other person's number. If the ideal goal is to date someone where there's mutual interest, then surely the approach detailed in the last paragraph is the best approach... But perhaps that's not the goal for these people who claim they "just have to be allowed to ask for a stranger's number or dating will grind to a halt". Because it won't. But for some reason some people keep on believing it will.

---

Also I totally agree that Brun was very rude to tell Rupert's owner he had to stay and let her pet Rupert after she stopped lecturing him on the need to keep his dog on a leash. That doesn't change what I said above though. I'd still have 100% no regrets if the idea that it's okay to ask a stranger for their number died out forever today.

[Tova]

In spite of my earlier belligerence, I will say that I don't think I've ever asked for a phone number. And I certainly won't now. I honestly had no idea that it was still a thing (as I think I mentioned earlier).

But I'm not sure I've given a phone number either. I have given Facebook details, which admittedly is easy for me because my name's spelling is unusual. I think that is preferable, because checking a Facebook profile is not as big a deal as phoning a number, I would think.

[sitnspin]

People still use Facebook? I haven't had an account in years.

[Theta9]

People still use Facebook? I haven't had an account in years.

It refuses to die.

[oddtail]

People still use Facebook? I haven't had an account in years.

Is there something that replaced it, or threatened to replace it, in terms of staying somewhat connected to people you mostly know online, or to casual friends you don't really interact with day-to-day?

Because that's how I use my FB. I resisted using it for years, but it was really the most convenient way to know what was up with some groups of my friends. Including people who are not really online in any capacity outside of Facebook. I mean, it's not like I'm gonna text everyone I know once a month and ask "so... what's up?".

[sitnspin]

honestly, if you're not someone i interact with directly on the regular, i'm not really interested in staying connected. twitter for online people and texting for people i know in real life works fine for me.

[cesium133]

I try to minimize my exposure to Facebook (the Facebook news feed is a cancer on the internet). I have several friends who insist on using Facebook Messenger as a substitute for texting, though, so I have Pidgin set up on my laptop for that. That way, I don't have to go to the site for it. If I have to go to the site for it, mbasic.facebook.com is a semi-tolerable version: simple interface, no scripts, minimal ads.

[Gyrre]

People still use Facebook? I haven't had an account in years.

It refuses to die.

Zuckerberg is currently briarpatching in regards to social media regulations (which would ultimately cement the current ones) last I had heard.

I pretty much only use it because that's what my extended family uses to plan reunions now.

[Thrudd]

I hadn't heard the tern Briarpatching but Walled Gardens were something he was pushing for the "FREE" internet access for the impoverished areas like India.
Fortunately the government caught on, weren't influenced by contributions and killed it right off.
Sadly the EU bureaucrats, where some might have good intentions, have made a right awful mess of things trying to kick the Big US companies in the jewels and effectively locked local startups out.

Sadly the alternatives have died off and/or been consumed and the new ones are even more problematic - TikTok anyone? 
Everyone is a psychopathic data overlord wanting to make the most $$$ out of you no matter what the consequences.

[Is it cold in here?]

I just realized the tech industry is a perfect example of the saying "Everything begins as a movement, turns into a business, and ends as a racket".

[Gyrre]

I hadn't heard the tern Briarpatching but Walled Gardens were something he was pushing for the "FREE" internet access for the impoverished areas like India.
Fortunately the government caught on, weren't influenced by contributions and killed it right off.
Sadly the EU bureaucrats, where some might have good intentions, have made a right awful mess of things trying to kick the Big US companies in the jewels and effectively locked local startups out.

Sadly the alternatives have died off and/or been consumed and the new ones are even more problematic - TikTok anyone? 
Everyone is a psychopathic data overlord wanting to make the most $$$ out of you no matter what the consequences.

Criminy......

Briarpatching: A form of reverse psychology whose name is derived from one of the stories of Br'er Rabbit. The titular Br'er Rabbit emphatically pleads for Br'er Fox to do anything but throw him into the briar patch. Which Br'er Fox proceeds to do, thus allowing Br'er Rabbit to escape.
Effectively the no no anything but that trope.

[Subtext]

Kind of late to the discussion but as a woman reading this thread, I can't help wondering if those thinking Jeph is wrong for saying "Don't ask strangers for their number" are men...

Because based on my life experiences as a woman, I completely agree with Jeph's comment and with these posts:
 

Clinton did it right.  Giving your number to someone causes much less awkwardness than asking for a number.  The pursued person thus doesn't have to give a response at that time, and everyone can be on their way with much less tension in the air.

This right here. You make an offer, it is on them to use it or not. You are offering them something rather than making a request of them. That is how you demonstrate your interest in someone and establish a modicum of trust.

I can't help wondering if it's an unwillingness to give up control (and/or the chance to badger someone into giving out their number when they'd rather not) that makes some people so resistant to switching to giving out their number instead of asking for the other person's number. If the ideal goal is to date someone where there's mutual interest, then surely the approach detailed in the last paragraph is the best approach... But perhaps that's not the goal for these people who claim they "just have to be allowed to ask for a stranger's number or dating will grind to a halt". Because it won't. But for some reason some people keep on believing it will.

Well, I'd find it a lot more uncomfortable to offer my number to someone else or rather...I'd get uncomfortable if someone offer me theirs. I'd feel put on the spot...saying no to an offer comes off as a lot more rude than declining a request.
Also, accepting the offer and then never calling isn't particularly nice either. Keep in mind that it's already a big step for many many guys to even approach someone else. It's not so much an unwillingness to give up control  - you aren't in control to begin with as the person asked can always say no - but more an unwillingness to surrender to the mood of someone you barely know and can't judge when you're nervous to begin with. Many also already fully expect rejection, so getting a no might not be the best thing in the world but it's something you can prepare for. Waiting for the call that never comes...not so much.

Asking and getting declined is easier...it ends the interaction right there and then, nothing else to do. Plus...it does save some face if one gets declined after asking compared to offering the number...and getting turned down. The latter would look a tad more desperate.

I suppose it's obvious but I'm saying that as a guy by the way (and I did find your initial question a little rude btw).
On a personal note, I don't usually ask for a phone number. If possible, I try to arrange a meet up or just ask what's the best way to reach her. I can fully get someone being private about their phone number but being comfortable offering other ways of contacting them.

[TorporChambre]

Lately I've been having moments where it feels like my body is more a vehicle I happen to inhabit than a true extension of myself.

A notion has person as the psyche, his body as all the by psyche controlled; partly, his flesh (where apropos, whollier, chassis) is of his (i.e. extended) body---with property (lucid or illicit). (With such notion is measure: body fitness (psyche's); dysphoria bodine may be about low such fitness, may be about that body an other using. e.g. By loathed task, externity, sensible continuent, yondly farthens, whither directing, nigh imparticipating. Beware intruders et alia.)

In particular when I'm talking with people in the physical world, as I realize that when they communicate with me they're looking at this physical face which to them represents me.

Alien such factoring as referent an exherant is. My his face an alloy ideal (with germane (how can be, save where carnal interactions are, anatomical face so?) some exherants) is.

I don't actually dislike it but I agree with Brun that having a body is... weird.

pun unintended

We're all big believers in here, aren't we, that the feelings of the recipient of a behavior are more important than the intent behind it. Right?

Wrong. Any one's feeling, intent, is only hisself's. To only who has the intent, feeling is it important. To both the action's effects on their common reality are important.

"Sub-optimal" and "rude" are not synonymous.

Rudity may be suboptimal.
Suboptimality is wrong.

The fact that harm was no caused does not mean that it is not potentially harm causing behaviour.

cautious libertarian explaining his nonleashing canidal

find it odd that anyone wouldn't immediately obey posted rules because they are posted rules

I not, as popular ideals, have whatever against authority; thereof sit I antiservilian: proffering authority unfound whomto oughtta've none---unsound.

e.g. This text; Even if was meant a number, of which are made our machines informatic, I might manuscript. I not

need a number to text

I dunno. I still keep my real life shit and my online shit as separate as possible. Online is my refuge from real life. I don't want the people I am physically involved with tracking me down online, too, if I can help it.

Wherefor multiple unlinkable own personæ may be; one's fleshbound presence may be, with each his other, linkless, enhanced (post) modern informatically. (About informatic techniques psychic associations preferred separate from fleshbound activity may be.)

[Meander]

I just wanted to squee about Brun and Mille holding hands...

[Thrillho]

I don't know what that prior post means but I am definitely not a libertarian.

And by all means squee! Squee to your heart's content.

[Cypher]

A notion has person as the psyche, his body as all the by psyche controled; partly, his ``human'' body (where appropriate, more wholly, cybrid chassis) is of his (AKA extended) body---with property (lucid or illicit). (With such notion is measure: body fitness (to psyche); dysphoria bodine may be about low such fitness, may be about that body an other using. e.g. During loathed task, externity, continuent sensible, yond-dimensely farthens, whither directing, almost not participating. Beware intruders et alia.)
... Alien such factoring as referent an it's aspect, especially accidental, exherent, is. In my, his face an alloy ideal (with germane (how can so be, save where carnal interactions are, anatomical face?) some exherents) is.

...Rudity may be a suboptimality. Suboptimality is a wrongity.
... cautious libertarian explaining his nonleashing canidal

... Wherefor multiple unlinkable own personae may be; one's in-the-flesh presence may be, sans link with any his others, enhanced by (post) modern informatics. (About informatic techniques psychic associations preferred separate from in-the-flesh activity may be.)

I mean, I'm sorry, but WHAT? Is this actually intelligible to... anyone else? Am I missing some joke or other? "Wrongity" and "canidal", for one thing, aren't even words, and that's leaving quite aside the essential- and, one feels, very contrived- incomprehensibility of this whole post.

[notStanley]

I have been wondering if TorporChambre is related to amanfrommars over on theregister.co.uk.  Whether or not they are sincere, a troll, a bot, ...; if you find them annoying the best response is to ignore them.  Once I get a couple sentences in and realize where I am, just skip on to the next post.

[Gyrre]

[snip]

Asking for them number of someone you just met, especially one you have barely interacted with (like this instance) is rude and presumptuous.

Just mho.

That's actually one of the pieces of dating advice my father gave me; offer her your number, don't ask for hers. He also specified that I should only offer it if we seemed to 'hit it off'.

EDIT: To avoid double posting.

[snip]

In the interest of full disclosure, I am not one to try to exchange phone numbers in these kinds of situations, but I have to ask. Is giving your number to someone really less likely to cause awkwardness than asking for theirs? I would have thought that handing your phone number over could also be awkward.

[snip]

It's awkward if the two of you haven't 'hit it off' and she didn't enjoy herself during the time she interacted.
If you're having trouble telling, there are different types of smiles. If you only get a polite smile (or worse a pained grimacing smile), don't bother giving the person you're interested in your number.