Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #33474 > unrolled thread

Texting: Do You Acknowledge Receipt?

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Contents

  Texting: Do You Acknowledge Receipt? "(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> - 2016-08-17 12:14 -0400
    Re: Texting: Do You Acknowledge Receipt? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2016-08-17 11:24 -0500
    Re: Texting: Do You Acknowledge Receipt? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 20:28 +0200
    Re: Texting: Do You Acknowledge Receipt? John McGaw <Nobody@Nowh.ere> - 2016-08-17 14:46 -0400
      Re: Texting: Do You Acknowledge Receipt? "(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> - 2016-08-18 11:02 -0400
        Re: Texting: Do You Acknowledge Receipt? AL <noemail@none.com> - 2016-08-18 10:03 -0700
    Re: Texting: Do You Acknowledge Receipt? tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2016-08-17 16:36 -0400
    Re: Texting: Do You Acknowledge Receipt? Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2016-08-18 15:58 +0100
    Re: Texting: Do You Acknowledge Receipt? daves@leaflinelabs.com - 2017-01-13 12:29 -0800

#33474 — Texting: Do You Acknowledge Receipt?

In my little world, the polite thing to do is acknowledge receipt of
emails.

But the texting paradigm seems tb around brevity/economy of time - so
acknowledging receipt would seem to partially defeat that by requiring
the originator to check their text messages and just see "Thanks..." or
"Got it..." or something like that.

So, Bottom Line: do you acknowledge receipt of text messages?

e.g. Somebody texts you "Arriving at 13:30"....  Do you text back, or
just let it ride?
-- 
Pete Cresswell

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#33475

PeteCresswell wrote:

> In my little world, the polite thing to do is acknowledge receipt of
> emails.
> 
> But the texting paradigm seems tb around brevity/economy of time - so
> acknowledging receipt would seem to partially defeat that by requiring
> the originator to check their text messages and just see "Thanks..." or
> "Got it..." or something like that.
> 
> So, Bottom Line: do you acknowledge receipt of text messages?
> 
> e.g. Somebody texts you "Arriving at 13:30"....  Do you text back, or
> just let it ride?

In the example you gave, yes, I would reply.  That is so the person that
says they are coming knows that I'm actually where they expect to meet
me.  Otherwise, I might not be there and they make a wasted trip.
However, if you just texted them that "Got home, come over" then them
sending an "Arriving" text does not require or even hint that a reply is
needed.  

For most texts, you can tell if a reply is warranted, just the same as
when you are talking to someone.  If you have a doubt, include "Bye" at
the end to announce you are leaving the discussion.

A lot depends on how long it is between texts.  If someone texted you to
say "Remember to bring the salsa" for some party that is yet days away,
do you bother them with a reply?  They're just sending you a reminder so
you aren't like the rest of the guests that typically all bring just
chips but nothing to dip them in.  You could reply with "Okay, will do"
but then should then say "Okay" to your "Okay" and then you back to them
and continue without end?  

Do you reply to every e-mail sent to you, too?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33484

On 08/17/2016 06:14 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
> In my little world, the polite thing to do is acknowledge receipt of
> emails.
>
> But the texting paradigm seems tb around brevity/economy of time - so
> acknowledging receipt would seem to partially defeat that by requiring
> the originator to check their text messages and just see "Thanks..." or
> "Got it..." or something like that.
>
> So, Bottom Line: do you acknowledge receipt of text messages?
>
> e.g. Somebody texts you "Arriving at 13:30"....  Do you text back, or
> just let it ride?
>

I think neither yes neither no answer for replying is correct,
as it is conditional, depending on context and the other person.

Using common sense should be enough to evaluate,
if the cost of bothering to reply is higher or lower
than value to received handshaking message.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33486

On 8/17/2016 12:14 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
> In my little world, the polite thing to do is acknowledge receipt of
> emails.
>
> But the texting paradigm seems tb around brevity/economy of time - so
> acknowledging receipt would seem to partially defeat that by requiring
> the originator to check their text messages and just see "Thanks..." or
> "Got it..." or something like that.
>
> So, Bottom Line: do you acknowledge receipt of text messages?
>
> e.g. Somebody texts you "Arriving at 13:30"....  Do you text back, or
> just let it ride?
>

In the example you cite, yes, I would definitely at least send an "OK". I'm 
sure that there any number of other circumstances where I would not/do not 
bother. My time is not so valuable that, if it might prove helpful, I can't 
manage to put in two characters and press send.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33510

Per John McGaw:
> My time is not so valuable that, if it might prove helpful, I can't 
>manage to put in two characters and press send.

I was thinking more about the guy on the other end having to pick up his
phone, navigate to Text Messages, and see what just came in.
-- 
Pete Cresswell

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33519

On 8/18/2016 8:02 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:

> Per John McGaw:

>> My time is not so valuable that, if it might prove helpful, I can't
>> manage to put in two characters and press send.
>
> I was thinking more about the guy on the other end having to pick up his
> phone, navigate to Text Messages, and see what just came in.

On my phone I can read the incoming text on the lock screen, no 
navigation required. Course if I want to respond then it's tap time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33494

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 12:14:47 -0400, (PeteCresswell) wrote:

> In my little world, the polite thing to do is acknowledge receipt of
> emails.
> 
> But the texting paradigm seems tb around brevity/economy of time - so
> acknowledging receipt would seem to partially defeat that by requiring
> the originator to check their text messages and just see "Thanks..." or
> "Got it..." or something like that.
> 
> So, Bottom Line: do you acknowledge receipt of text messages?

Of most text messages, yes. Of mere receipt-of-text-message messages, no.

HTH. Cheers, -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33509

On 2016-08-17, (PeteCresswell) <x@y.Invalid> wrote:
> In my little world, the polite thing to do is acknowledge receipt of
> emails.
>
> But the texting paradigm seems tb around brevity/economy of time - so
> acknowledging receipt would seem to partially defeat that by requiring
> the originator to check their text messages and just see "Thanks..." or
> "Got it..." or something like that.
>
> So, Bottom Line: do you acknowledge receipt of text messages?
>
> e.g. Somebody texts you "Arriving at 13:30"....  Do you text back, or
> just let it ride?

Depends entirely on context - part of which is whether or not it costs
your correspondent money to receive your acknowledgement (or diminishes
their 'monthly allowance' of free messages).

-- 
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
--  Whiskers 
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#37724

On Wednesday, August 17, 2016 at 11:14:54 AM UTC-5, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
> In my little world, the polite thing to do is acknowledge receipt of
> emails.
> 
> But the texting paradigm seems tb around brevity/economy of time - so
> acknowledging receipt would seem to partially defeat that by requiring
> the originator to check their text messages and just see "Thanks..." or
> "Got it..." or something like that.
> 
> So, Bottom Line: do you acknowledge receipt of text messages?
> 
> e.g. Somebody texts you "Arriving at 13:30"....  Do you text back, or
> just let it ride?
> -- 
> Pete Cresswell

I think you treat it like you would a phone a call or an actual conversation.    If someone tells you on the phone "I'll see you at 6pm tonight" do you just hang up, or do you say "ok" or "sounds good".    In this example, a response would be warranted.    I have several people in my life that seldom acknowledge emails and texts, and inevitably there comes a time where they didn't get one that I assumed they did,  and they are upset because I never followed up.    But then I point out if your someone that never acknowledges receiving something, I have to assume you got it.  

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web