4 ms·
> That's unnecessarily reductionist. Calling is less convenient and takes longer. No, I don't think so. The time for me to ring you, tell you this in voice wou
by doublerabbit 3y ago
> That's unnecessarily reductionist. Calling is less convenient and takes longer.
No, I don't think so. The time for me to ring you, tell you this in voice would be far quicker than typing.
Calling conveys so much more than text ever can.
A call can take seconds, "hey mate, want to go to the cinema tomorrow? Ill text you the time" "yeah cool, see ya".
Voice expresses emotion, you can pick up the mood of your buddy if they're up, down, need cheering up.
Its real, you hear a voice and you know it's your mate. Text, you assume. Text leaves you on edge waiting for confirmation.
The only inconvenience is that you could be interrupting something and even if so, then send a text.
- JoshTriplett 3y ago> The time for me to ring you, tell you this in voice would be far quicker than typing. The post you I was responding to was talking about "group chat". How long would it take for you to call 6 people? How long would it take for you to text 6 people? I'm all for calls from one person to another person, if you know that person doesn't mind voice calls. Text and group chats are great for coordination of groups.
- doublerabbit 3y agoThen apologies, I didn't clock on to that the discussion was regarding to group chats.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- searchableguy 3y agoApologies. I meant when you are the only person who is not in the group chat or messaging platform, then people won't call you to invite. It is much higher friction.