Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Very Short Reply Expected

blog.vrypan.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 232 posts

Re: Very Short Reply Expected

#161

Post by JabavuAdams »

kyro wrote: post #144

I think people tend to grossly exaggerate how many emails they really do get. Are you really that damn busy that you can't spend a minute or less writing a more natural and conversational reply that indicates to the other person that you're reciprocating the amount of thought and effort they invested in their message? I agree with some others here in saying that this is awkward. You don't strive for efficiency in soc…

It's not so much the volume, but that we tend to check e-mail in between other activities.

So, if I pop into personal email for 5 min during work hours, I don't want to have to sit and think for a few minutes to reply to one email. If I don't pop into personal email every so often, then people complain that I'm unresponsive or do really intrusive things like calling me.

Re: Very Short Reply Expected

#162

Post by tempestn »

andrewljohnson wrote: post #149
kyro wrote: post #144

I think people tend to grossly exaggerate how many emails they really do get. Are you really that damn busy that you can't spend a minute or less writing a more natural and conversational reply that indicates to the other person that you're reciprocating the amount of thought and effort they invested in their message? I agree with some others here in saying that this is awkward. You don't strive for efficiency in soc…

Many people do eventually get so many emails that they have to think about how to manage them better. I don't think his solution is very good - he probably should just not write back to every email, or just write back curtly without some odd acronym. People get used to it, and if they don't like it, they email you less.

Note that he's not suggesting adding an acronym to his replies. He's suggesting adding VSRE to emails you send to someone if you expect they may be busy, and you only require a short reply. If they have time and feel like writing you a long reply anyway, no harm done, but if they recognize the acronym, they can go ahead and send you a quick note.

I already do something like this regularly, but since there's no existing shorthand, it generally means adding something like, "I'm sure you must be busy, so if you literally want to just send a one or two word reply, that's no problem! Cheers." If there were a universally-known way to say that in 4 characters, it would make things a bit easier when both parties are busy. That said, you could also just use a macro to add the above to an email.

The closest parallel to the OP's suggestion that comes to mind is adding (nt) to the subject line of an email if there is no text, saving the reader the time of opening the body of the email. (Although this is made obsolete by most modern email programs, which show previews.)

Re: Very Short Reply Expected

#163

Post by tempestn »

rattray wrote: post #133
andrewvc wrote: post #40

Annnnnnd this is why geeks have a reputation for social awkwardness.

Many of my most truncated email responses have come from executives and other businesspeople. VSRE sounds great for anyone with limited time, and sufficient trust. I'd feel good using something like this with another person who I know well, or know to be businesslike. I wouldn't use this with someone I don't know well in a social context.

That's a great point. While I can't see this catching on in the wider world, it could certainly be used in a small team, say at a startup. In fact, I think I'm going to pass it on to the other two devs on my team right now!

Re: Very Short Reply Expected

#164

Post by andrewflnr »

sliverstorm wrote: post #142
andrewflnr wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Protocols are about consensus, almost by definition. In computer protocols, we get the consensus before we start using the protocol. In social interactions, we're molding the protocol as we use it. As for communicating "correctly", it's a matter of (mostly) definitions and circumstances whether putting people off and "correct" communication are consistent. You may have transmitted the correct information to someone's…

In computer protocols, we get the consensus before we start using the protocol. VSRP analogue in computing: Unannounced, start omitting headers in response to HTTP requests. They are unnecessary baggage that gets in the way of the actual content of the message.

Not quite. If you're using VSRE, the information contained in those headers is already implicit. I can't think of an example off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are protocols where you don't need to send loquacious headers or equivalent with every response. "VSRE" says, "go ahead and assume I know what the headers would be and skip them". If you're not expecting headers, it's not a problem if they're missing.

Re: Very Short Reply Expected

#165

Post by tempestn »

__david__ wrote: post #158
Swizec wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I find the latter response just disrespectful of my time. If all you want/need to say is you can't make it, don't write a bloody novel! All I need is an answer. There's a time and place for long communication and it's in person. Not in an email.

And I'd find anyone that wrote "VSRE" to be very disrespectful. And since I'm a bit hot headed I'd probably write a big long response, just out of spite. :-)

My understanding was that the whole point of VSRE is to be respectful of your time. The idea is simply to let you know that there's no need to write them a long reply if you don't have the time. You're still welcome to do so if you wish. How is that disrespectful?

Perhaps the acronym should've been something like VSRA (Accepted), or SROK (Short Reply OK) instead.

Re: Very Short Reply Expected

#167

Post by eropple »

srbloom wrote: post #153
eropple wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be a problem between you and...you. People are more important than "your time", and a failure to realize that is a dehumanization of the other party. The latter response demonstrates emotional sensitivity towards the other person in the conversation. Among most people, that is important. It makes the other party feel good. It reinforces that you do care about the other party enough to ensure that they are…

I think two key parts of what you said are "most people" and "normal people". This normativity is taken for granted here. Preference for terse messages is ultimately a matter of taste and I've yet to see evidence that one belongs to a clear majority.

It may not be a clear majority of people, but it's pretty obviously a majority of people who set expectations in public discourse. That's why it's normative.

Re: Very Short Reply Expected

#168

Post by andrewflnr »

ebbv wrote: post #113
andrewvc wrote: post #40

Annnnnnd this is why geeks have a reputation for social awkwardness.

I'm glad I'm not the only person who had this reaction. Sheesh, how hard is it to type out "A one word response would be fine." It takes me less than 10 seconds to type that. C'mon.

Because if you take the trouble to write that out, there will still be slightly more pressure on the receiver to reciprocate by giving a more formal reply, despite the surface content.

I think "how hard is it?" is the wrong question. We should be asking "how can this be better?". It doesn't take very long to type something like "as far as I know", but we still routinely use acronyms like AFAIK, because as long as everyone knows what it means, it's often a waste of time to type the full thing out. The only difference here is that VSRE is not already a custom.

Re: Very Short Reply Expected

#169

Post by ycombobreaker »

openmx wrote: post #122
Wintamute wrote: post #53

The most viral/popular acronyms are easily pronounceable, I think. Acronyms like lol, rofl, afaik, imho etc. Not that you go around saying them all the time, but you can easily pronounce them in your own head so I think they tend to stick there and flow into your text easily. Maybe something along the lines of "sro" (short reply ok) would be better ...

You pronounce lol, rofl, afaik, imho? Talk about awkward.

how else would we say "roflcopter"?

I never say AFAIK aloud, but I do always pronounce it "a fake" in my head when typing.

Re: Very Short Reply Expected

#170

Post by batiudrami »

nemonoko wrote: post #96

I wish email came with a YES/NO embed button. Even a RECEIVED/READ button would be useful. Recipient can hit those buttons and move on... Sender knows the status and can move on. I know you can embed Google Forms, but don't know if they work for all email clients. Anyone use them?

Initially I wasn't a huge fan of the 'seen' status in Facebook messenger, but it's actually really useful when speaking with my good friends (who I know won't reply, but knowing they've seen it is all that's necessary).

I just wish it was optional so that certain contacts won't necessarily know that I've seen their message.

Post reply on HN