I'm not taking offence on her part, I'm saying that there's a degree of propriety for certain things and not acknowledging that for a wider audience is incorrec

I'm not taking offence on her part, I'm saying that there's a degree of propriety for certain things and not acknowledging that for a wider audience is incorrect for the format. MIT editorial style guide for instance: > The best way to deal with professors is to use the capitalized Professor Irwin (second reference) for formal writing. In more informal writing, depending on the audience, a professor may be referred to by his or her first or last name on second reference. http://web.mit.edu/comdor/editguide/style-matters/titles-people.html http://web.mit.edu/comdor/editguide/style-matters/titles-peo... > Use Dr. in first reference as a formal title before the name of an individual who holds a doctor of dental surgery, doctor of medicine, doctor of optometry, doctor of osteopathic medicine, doctor of podiatric medicine, or doctor of veterinary medicine: Dr. Jonas Salk. > If appropriate in the context, Dr. also may be used on first reference before the names of individuals who hold other types of doctoral degrees. However, because the public frequently identifies Dr. only with physicians, care should be taken to ensure that the individual’s specialty is stated in first or second reference." https://umc.utah.edu/communications-style-guide/ https://umc.utah.edu/communications-style-guide/ Note that there is consideration for how the public reads these as well. If it's for more than just a personal note, then a more formal tone is likely more appropriate. Which is both obvious and all that I was saying.