5 ms·

No, you've got it all wrong! Geeks aren't socially awkward, they're socially "efficient" Social conventions aren't established by protocol drafts, they're orga

No, you've got it all wrong! Geeks aren't socially awkward, they're socially "efficient" Social conventions aren't established by protocol drafts, they're organic. Also, people write long replies for a reason. Wording indicates emotional state. If you have trouble reading emotional state, you don't care. If, like most people, you do care, then this proposal is ridiculous. An example: "How about we schedule lunch next week? VSRP" VSRP: "Can't make it, extremely busy. Maybe next month?" FULL: "Sorry to say, I can't make it. I'd really like to but we're in a crunch right now, and I've got a booked calendar. Perhaps next month when things have died down? I'd really like to catch up but this month is already overwhelming" I might take the VSRP as a bit of an affront. The full explanation however is quite understandable.

lowboy 14y ago
And organic things can be inefficient.
- sliverstorm 14y ago
  As we are not organic beings, clearly it would be foolish of us to accept such unnecessary inefficiencies.
  - lowboy 14y ago
    I agree with the second part of your statement. Why not make things more efficient where we can?
    - sliverstorm 14y ago
      The main reasons are: 1) Because it isn't always worth the cost 2) Because we don't always fully understand the systems we are modifying Which hearkens back to, "Don't fix it if it ain't broke". Inefficient is not automatically broke.
      - lowboy 14y ago
        In this case I don't think that these reasons apply. Introducing a VSRE on the initiator side, or a Short Response, Not An Asshole on the responding side would be a worthwhile change with a manageable side effect. Don't fix it if it ain't broke seems to run counter to innovation. I'd try for improvement on a functional system if there's a positive expected outcome.
        JadeNB 14y ago
        > Short Response, Not An Asshole Heh. Forget IANAL; we need IANAA.
lt 14y ago
Sounds like the VSRP would be more like: "Can't. Next month?"
- sliverstorm 14y ago
  If we're really going for the gold: "No. Next month?"
  - estebank 14y ago
    I'm liking No ++month? :)
    - JadeNB 14y ago
      If we're really going for brevity above all else, then I think it can be taken for granted that the answer's 'no' if we suggest moving the month—so the 'no' can be dropped, too. (Alternatively, interpreting the reply as "Yes, how about next month?" seems to work perfectly well, though it's unusual.)
danbruc 14y ago
No one is required to use it and even when you receive a mail tagged VSRE, you may still decide to write a long reply if you can not communicate your messag in a few words. The obvious use case is you are communicating with someone for the first time or for not so long, you are fine with a short reply and you know that recipient would like to write a short reply but will not do so in order not to sound impolite.
TeMPOraL 14y ago
I think there's time and place for both VSRs and long responses. > Social conventions aren't established by protocol drafts, they're organic. Organic stuff lends itself better to optimization - by constant feedback. I often have to write FULL responses like the example you provided and find this incredibly annoying. There are many reasons to that. Sometimes, I just don't have time to craft a nice sounding and formatted answer at the moment (if I'm going FULL, I won't tolerate any spelling mistakes, typos, double spaces, etc. If one commits oneself to quality, it should be 100%). But sometimes, the crafting of the answer FULL requires too much cognitive power. Quite often in situations similar to your example, my real reaction is a linear combination of things like "I'm not sure if I have time", "I wanted to go to a party on friday", "I'm worried what my girlfriend will think of this", "I really need some rest", "I'm worried we won't have much to talk about and it will feel awkward", "I'd really like to save this money for 3D printer electronics", "goddammit, I'll break my ketosis again if I'll eat a normal lunch with you", etc. It takes a bit of effort to craft a message that is a) nice, b) not an outright lie. A bit of effort I don't always want to make at the very moment. So yes, I'm all-in for any kind of social protocol that would allow me to decline/postpone requests without having to explain myself to other party just for the message to sound polite.
andrewflnr 14y ago
So, this is an attempt to add something organically. It's optional. If you would find a VSR an affront, don't say VSRE. The whole point is a declaration that the sender won't find it an affront. It says you don't need the emotional state transmitted like that.
Swizec 14y ago
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.
- ok_craig 14y ago
  This is strange to me. It was just 3 sentences, and you were the one who asked them for a response.
- dopamean 14y ago
  Four sentences constitutes a "novel" now? What is going on in the world that people dont have the time, or worse seem not to care, to communicate in a normal way?
- eropple 14y ago
  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 not potentially affronted by terse communication. This is why normal people, lacking in the self-absorption your post exudes, do this sort of thing. And in any case it doesn't take more than a few seconds to write or read; when the hell did four sentences become a "bloody novel"?
  - yarou 14y ago
    >And in any case it doesn't take more than a few seconds to write or read; when the hell did four sentences become a "bloody novel"? Welcome to the generation of twitter. :)
  - srbloom 14y ago
    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.

lowboy 14y ago

And organic things can be inefficient.

sliverstorm 14y ago
As we are not organic beings, clearly it would be foolish of us to accept such unnecessary inefficiencies.
- lowboy 14y ago
  I agree with the second part of your statement. Why not make things more efficient where we can?
  - sliverstorm 14y ago
    The main reasons are: 1) Because it isn't always worth the cost 2) Because we don't always fully understand the systems we are modifying Which hearkens back to, "Don't fix it if it ain't broke". Inefficient is not automatically broke.
    - lowboy 14y ago
      In this case I don't think that these reasons apply. Introducing a VSRE on the initiator side, or a Short Response, Not An Asshole on the responding side would be a worthwhile change with a manageable side effect. Don't fix it if it ain't broke seems to run counter to innovation. I'd try for improvement on a functional system if there's a positive expected outcome.
      - JadeNB 14y ago
        > Short Response, Not An Asshole Heh. Forget IANAL; we need IANAA.

lt 14y ago

Sounds like the VSRP would be more like: "Can't. Next month?"

sliverstorm 14y ago
If we're really going for the gold: "No. Next month?"
- estebank 14y ago
  I'm liking No ++month? :)
  - JadeNB 14y ago
    If we're really going for brevity above all else, then I think it can be taken for granted that the answer's 'no' if we suggest moving the month—so the 'no' can be dropped, too. (Alternatively, interpreting the reply as "Yes, how about next month?" seems to work perfectly well, though it's unusual.)

danbruc 14y ago

No one is required to use it and even when you receive a mail tagged VSRE, you may still decide to write a long reply if you can not communicate your messag in a few words. The obvious use case is you are communicating with someone for the first time or for not so long, you are fine with a short reply and you know that recipient would like to write a short reply but will not do so in order not to sound impolite.

TeMPOraL 14y ago

I think there's time and place for both VSRs and long responses. > Social conventions aren't established by protocol drafts, they're organic. Organic stuff lends itself better to optimization - by constant feedback. I often have to write FULL responses like the example you provided and find this incredibly annoying. There are many reasons to that. Sometimes, I just don't have time to craft a nice sounding and formatted answer at the moment (if I'm going FULL, I won't tolerate any spelling mistakes, typos, double spaces, etc. If one commits oneself to quality, it should be 100%). But sometimes, the crafting of the answer FULL requires too much cognitive power. Quite often in situations similar to your example, my real reaction is a linear combination of things like "I'm not sure if I have time", "I wanted to go to a party on friday", "I'm worried what my girlfriend will think of this", "I really need some rest", "I'm worried we won't have much to talk about and it will feel awkward", "I'd really like to save this money for 3D printer electronics", "goddammit, I'll break my ketosis again if I'll eat a normal lunch with you", etc. It takes a bit of effort to craft a message that is a) nice, b) not an outright lie. A bit of effort I don't always want to make at the very moment. So yes, I'm all-in for any kind of social protocol that would allow me to decline/postpone requests without having to explain myself to other party just for the message to sound polite.

andrewflnr 14y ago

So, this is an attempt to add something organically. It's optional. If you would find a VSR an affront, don't say VSRE. The whole point is a declaration that the sender won't find it an affront. It says you don't need the emotional state transmitted like that.

Swizec 14y ago

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.

ok_craig 14y ago
This is strange to me. It was just 3 sentences, and you were the one who asked them for a response.
dopamean 14y ago
Four sentences constitutes a "novel" now? What is going on in the world that people dont have the time, or worse seem not to care, to communicate in a normal way?
eropple 14y ago
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 not potentially affronted by terse communication. This is why normal people, lacking in the self-absorption your post exudes, do this sort of thing. And in any case it doesn't take more than a few seconds to write or read; when the hell did four sentences become a "bloody novel"?
- yarou 14y ago
  >And in any case it doesn't take more than a few seconds to write or read; when the hell did four sentences become a "bloody novel"? Welcome to the generation of twitter. :)
- srbloom 14y ago
  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.