Netiquette (What not to say/write in a post)

June 10, 2010 at 11:37:03
Specs: Vista XP Win7, NA
This is about "How To Ask Questions The Smart Way." For myself I loathe posters who write .. solve this problem immediately.

What about you? What is it that irritate you the most?


i_Xp/Vista/W7User


See More: Netiquette (What not to say/write in a post)

Report •

#1
June 10, 2010 at 12:15:59
What bothers me are people who respond as if they are writing a text message.
I don't text, I find it inconvenient, and time consuming, but it really bugs me when I get a response similar to this:
u r on rt trk 2 fix prob. lol, rofl. i no help u.
I dislike it so much, I had a hard time giving an example.

Report •

#2
June 10, 2010 at 12:41:46
re: What is it that irritates you the most?

This:

http://www.computing.net/answers/th...


Report •

#3
June 10, 2010 at 20:31:50
All the above are irritating but I think the ones that grate me the most are the folks that instruct us to contact them via email because they are busy.

On another note I just had one two days ago that told me by responses were stupid.


Report •

Related Solutions

#4
June 10, 2010 at 21:29:45
What is it that irritate you the most?

I don't get irritated too much on what I view as charity-ish work...probably because I don't have very high expectations. What does bug me is when I try to solve a problem, but am not able to do so. For example, when I ask the poster clarifying questions, solicit examples and the like, then make some recommendations that dead ends. Now that's irritating when that happens.


Report •

#5
June 10, 2010 at 23:27:32
... had to throw in this recent post the "op" asked me to "stop helping" him (Response Number 13).

... I'm still chuckling to myself now thinking of the times I re-edited Response 15 ..... ha ha ha!

... but I'm ok now ... lol .... :O)


.

.

... Posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/...
Grrrr... ...im


Report •

#6
June 11, 2010 at 04:45:41
mavis007

At least the OP said Please. LOL.


Report •

#7
June 11, 2010 at 07:56:01
mavis007,

What troubles me most about that thread is that you didn't adhere to the OP's request to stop helping.

Don't you realize that we work for those that ask the questions? Only through their demands for our time do our lives have meaning.

I can't believe you actually offered a detailed explanation even after he told you to stop.

How rude.


Report •

#8
June 11, 2010 at 08:39:09
... "DerbyDad03"

... ya I did it to help others! ... click smiley face last post.

.

... Posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/...
Grrrr... ...im


Report •

#9
June 11, 2010 at 09:00:15
re: click smiley face last post

It'll have to wait until I get home...whatever it is is blocked by our corporate servers.


Report •

#10
June 12, 2010 at 06:31:32
Here are some interesting posts:

"when I click on games they show but will not load to play and there is no volumn"

"what are the possible cause, why my laptop didnt shutdown"

"Hi, My Game Runs To Slow. Please Help? Here Is Some Info If It Helps:
RAM: 1.00GB
Processor: Intel(R) Penium(R) D CPU 3.00GHz
Video Card: Intel(R) 946GZ Express Chipset Family
Please help A.S.A.P!!"

"how to repales windows7 in windows xp bcz i install windows7 and system can not boot with windows xp cd"

Some HELP in posting on Computing.net plus free progs and instructions Cheers


Report •

#11
June 12, 2010 at 09:56:27
The best one I have seen yet was on another forum and I didn't really think it was a computer problem.

" I loaned my husbands laptop to my boyfriend and now it doesn't work. What do I do?"

I responded : "Plan for the divorce."


Report •

#12
June 13, 2010 at 07:07:44
This is a new one LOL
"Fire alarm system Hag up the keys is not function"


Can you make sense of that?

Some HELP in posting on Computing.net plus free progs and instructions Cheers


Report •

#13
June 15, 2010 at 10:19:53
Uhhhhhh I'll take a shot at it.

The keypad that controls my alarm system is not functioning.

Although I am not sure I see a question here.


Report •

#14
June 19, 2010 at 15:05:13
Here's another one...where are these coming from? Is this a texting message????

"i tried installin odr dvd softwares to play dvd in windows 7 starter edition lyk vlc media player n odr softwares 4m www.brothersoft.com, n it worked....only poblem is dat the screen size of dvd screen n movie doesnt kum full screen ..... right side of d screen isnt present / is cut off..... pls help........"


Report •

#15
June 19, 2010 at 23:00:48
I guess I am just too bloomin' old because what I get from that is that someone wants to lick 4 males one of them is a player and apparently there is an oder present. And I am guessing they have a dvd with some dat files on it?

Report •

#16
June 19, 2010 at 23:23:52
And something got cut off too!

Skip


Report •

#17
June 20, 2010 at 02:47:54
We should have an unwritten policy here. No texting language. Proper English only.

Report •

#18
June 20, 2010 at 18:24:14
glwt........Good luck with that.

Report •

#19
June 21, 2010 at 07:29:09
I'll agree with the "no texting language" suggestion but I don't know how it would be enforced - other than to ignore the posts. Of course, the OP would not know why they were being ignored, so I guess someone would have to respond and tell them to post in "full words".

You'll note I said "full words", not "proper English".

For many of our members, English is a 2nd (3rd?) language so we would end up excluding many members if a "proper English only" rule was put in place. I'm not a bleeding heart liberal, I just want to help people if I can.

That sed, I reely hate postts from inglish speeking meembers who dunt uuse a speel chker or proper gramer.

Don't they even read their posts before hitting Submit? If they do, don't they have any pride?


Report •

#20
June 21, 2010 at 08:09:22
I just ran into an example of what I find irritating. See post below:

http://www.computing.net/answers/networking/crossover-cable/41214.html

Read the OP's second posting after "EDIT".

Yeah, maybe I did lose it a little but people like this really piss me off. If you talked to me like that to my face when I was trying to help you out, I'd likely dot your eye for you....

With regard to texting............well, I read computer/text speak pretty fluently having spent a number of years chatting on the IRC's way back when (10 to 15 years ago). All the shortcut talk and acronyms are just time savers for lazy people that got carried over to texting on phones.

***Brief pause for diatribe on texting***

Am I the ONLY person in this world who finds trying to text on a telephone the epitome of stupidity?????

Excuse me, it's a freaking phone!!!!!!!!!!!!! Dial the person you wish to converse with and TALK to them.

As far as I'm concerned, it's akin to picking up your landline, dialing someone, and then proceeding to type out morse code using one button.

****No this was not a thread hijack attempt and thank you for bearing with me****I will now return you to your regularly scheduled programming****

But, I still think it's shows a complete lack of intelligence to use textspeak when asking a question in a forum like this. One should write clearly using correct punctuation, capitalization and spelling in order to clearly make themselves and their problem understood.


Report •

#21
June 21, 2010 at 09:15:30
re: Am I the ONLY person in this world who finds trying to text on a telephone the epitome of stupidity?????

At the risk of hijacking the thread, you asked, so I'll answer.

Maybe you're not the only one, but I totally disagree.

Since moving to an unlimited texting plan, I am in communications with my 4 kids more than I ever was with just a calling plan.

I (they) can text a question/statement, one that doesn't require an immediate answer, and not interrupt the other person.

"I'll be home late."
"What time is your game on Friday?"
"Did you get the job?"
"Just saw a hawk pick up a rabbit!"

I'm in meetings a lot, they are in school, I drive, they drive, etc. Texting is just so much more efficient than leaving a voice mail or waiting for them to answer/call back, etc.

Obviously, if something needs immediate attention, we call each other.

Group texts are also a huge time saver. With one message, I can remind all of my kids that it's Grandma's birthday or tell all the girls on the varsity softball team:

"Game cancelled...2nd base is under water. Let's practice in the gym."

Requisite thread connection: I text in full sentences, with proper grammer and capitalization, and I encourage my kids to do the same. It doesn't always work with them, but for the most part they're pretty good.

re: "then proceeding to type out morse code using one button"

Huh? You are aware that most cells phone today either have full QWERTY keyboards, or at a minimum, T-9 capability, aren't you?

I really can type "Thanks" instead of - .... .- -. -.- ...


Report •

#22
June 21, 2010 at 09:27:52
Derby

I guess Curt and myself must be one those few people the Sprint guy on TV is talking about that use their phone strictly to talk.

I have had a bluetooth enabled phone for 3 years and haven't used that feature. Never have texted and get aggravated at T-Mobile when they send me one advertising their wares. Rarely even use the camera feature.

I bought my current phone based on USB connection and battery capacity.

If I need to send a message to either of my to adult sons I will either call them or email them. They get the message just as fast either way. IMO typing on a cell phone is akin to going back to carbon paper.

To each his own. That said, cell phone use, either talking or texting while driving has become rampant.

I mentioned the texting shorthand because while I do understand the need when using a cell phone to text it is much faster, what has happened is that the texting crowd thinks it is and acceptable method when emailing or typing on forums like this one.

Perhaps they never learned how to type with any speed because they can't do it on their cell phones. Two finger or two thumbs are still slower than 8 fingers and two thumbs.


Report •

#23
June 21, 2010 at 10:51:45
re: IMO typing on a cell phone is akin to going back to carbon paper.

Now that one you'll need to explain. First you compared texting to Morse Code, and now you've compared it to Carbon Paper. Since I am old enough to have used both, I have no clue how you are making those connections.

I recall that Carbon Paper makes a copy of what you type/write, but I don't remember it actually sending that information to the intended recipient(s). I also don't get blue ink all over my fingers when I text. ;-)

Have you ever tried texting? Do your adult son's text? If so, why not try it for a month or so? I'm pretty sure it won't feel like Morse Code or make anywhere near the mess that Carbon Paper does.


Report •

#24
June 21, 2010 at 12:08:18
Curt is the person that referred to Morse Code.

Both of my adult sons do text on fancy phones. I have no problem with them doing it. They email me and I them. We also speak on the phone, where I can sense their moods.

First of all my phone does NOT have a full keypad but a normal phone layout. I am not even sure you could text with it but I sure as hell ain't gonna try, thank you.

As you can see from the number of my responses, I type just fine and see no reason to change the way I do things. I am not a technophobe. On the contrary, I buiild computers for friend, use a digital camera, know how to use my DVRs, am in the process of buying a GPS and a netbook.

That said, texting may work for you. Is seems to work for my kids too. If they were to post on this forum using text shorthand I would let them know how I felt about that. I even use a few of what I believe are shorthand abbreviations. BTW, LOL are a couple. Those sprinkled in are OK. The examples above are not. I usually don't even bother with posts like those.


Report •

#25
June 21, 2010 at 15:22:53
LOL- yep, I said morse code...and, that is actually a very apt analogy.

Like OtheHill, I email or phone my kid. If he's not around, like last night when I called him, I leave him a voice message.

While he was at home, he didn't have a cell phone. He could have had one, but there's no way on God's green earth I was going to pay for it. So if he had wanted one, he'd have earned the $$$ to buy it and keep it running.

I supplied necessities. Food, clothing, shelter. He had free use of my landline, but a cell phone is not a necessity in my books.

My wife likes to text me at work. Things like "Pick up some Milk" or "Need ice" and things like that.

Some times I even remember to check the text message and stop and get what she asked for. Other days, I immediately write the grocery list down on a sticky note and attach it to my travel mug so I don't forget. The 3'd option is, I forget the text and thus forget to pick up whatever. Mostly, my wife calls me or emails me knowing I'll sticky note it and put that on my mug and will be most likely to remember. I suspect I've had less than 20 text messages total.

I've tried texting myself but it's too slow. I can call and say what I have to a whole lot faster than I can text it. Texting takes up too much time and concentration. I have a voice command button. I hit it and say "Call [Name]" or "call [phone number]" and it dials and I'm connected and talking to that person in seconds.

Texting means going through the address book, find the person, choose "message" type in the message laboriously and then hit send. The phone call takes a lot less effort and, best of all, I don't have to deal with a tiny keypad.

I have big hands and I don't even like laptop keyboards so I HATE trying to text on a freaking phone.

Texting does work for some people and all the power to them. It's not for me. Since I'm stuck with a cell phone, I get the best one money can buy that has a lot of power and a good battery.......the rest be damned.

When I accidentally broke my last one while out hunting last November, they tried to replace it with one that had all the bells and whistles and internet and the whole 9 yards. I was adamant and after a week of arguing back and forth, I got my way. Now, I have a cell phone that when everybody else around me can get no signal, I'm only down one bar and my phone will run for about 10 days off a single charge if I don't use it much.

Again, sorry about the hijack, it really was unintentional.......LOL


Report •

#26
June 21, 2010 at 17:13:43
re: Texting means going through the address book, find the person, choose "message" type in the message laboriously and then hit send

Bull. (Sorry)

I have a voice command button. (Sound familiar?)

I hit it and say "Send text message [name]". The text input screen pops up. I type, I hit send, I'm done.

If you are going to try and make texting sound so much more laborious than a call, then to be fair, you should include the fact that when making a call you have to wait for an answer (person or voice mail), dispense with the introductions, say what you want to say, sometimes deal with bad connections, background noise, etc.

I'm not saying that one is better than the other, but simply that we need to be fair when making the comparisons.

re: yep, I said morse code...and, that is actually a very apt analogy.

But alas, it's an analogy that's lost on me. Would you care to explain it? It might indeed be very apt, but I'm just not making the connection.


Report •

#27
June 21, 2010 at 17:36:38
Morse code was a very crude method of long distance communication.

Report •

#28
June 21, 2010 at 19:02:09
To be accurate, "crude" is arguable, especially in relation to when it was invented.

"Was" isn't really correct either since Morse Code is still used on a daily basis. For example, the aviation navigational aids NDB and VOR transmit their identity in Morse code constantly.

But alas, I'm still missing the analogy to texting.


Report •

#29
June 21, 2010 at 19:48:04
Well Derby, there are at least two of us here that DO get the analogy.

Morse code may still be in use but it is still ancient tech. I think I can speak for Curt on this when I say that texting is a step backward.

We went from the telegraph to the Wireless radio, then to the telephone with operators. Somewhere in there came the stock ticker tape. Then to rotary dial phones, then touch tone, then phone with speed dial and built in messaging. Then wireless phones the size of a package of cigarettes. It is like an episode of Flash Gordon.

Then, low and behold some genius thought "Gee, why don't we combine the best of ticker tape, telegraph and telephone". Alas, we have $400 phones that are internet, bluetooth, wireless computers that can perform the same tasks that the first computers could do. They are still called phones, but users prefer to do things the old fashion way and type out messages on them.

As far as your explanation of how you save time when texting I have my kids on speed dial. Press a total of three keys and I'm off to the races.


Report •

#30
June 21, 2010 at 21:40:08
You are totally missing my point, but since you don't text, you probably won't see it.

It's got nothing to do with going backwards with technology.

It's simply another form of communication. It's not "old fashioned" any more than typing a message in this forum is "old fashioned".

I could give you many, many examples of the advantages of texting over calling in certain instances but that's not the point. Oh heck, let's toss out a few anyway because maybe that is the point.

Situation 1: The softball game is rained out and it's my responsibility to let my team know what the new plans are - 12 girls and 2 other coaches. Tell me which one of these is more "old fashioned":

Option 1 - Are you familiar with a "phone tree"? I can make 3 calls to 3 girls and have each of them call 3 or 4 others. 14 phone calls will be made, probably more since some of the girls/coaches will have to call into their voice mail to retrieve the message. During those calls, we will all have to wait while the phone rings, listen to bad music "while your party is being located" or sit through a boring Voice Mail greeting.

Option 2 - I can send a single text to a "group" - which I have on speed dial - and all 14 people will get the exact same message at the same time. All they will have to do is open their phone and read it. Nothing will lost in translation and any or all of them can respond to me directly if they have questions.

Which one of those sounds more "old fashioned"?

Situation 2: My daughter is expecting me to pick her up at work.

Option 1: Whether I'm sitting outside the building or running 10 minutes late, I can call her, make her answer the phone to find out why I'm calling (if she wants a ride, she'd better answer) just to tell her either "I'm here" or "I'll be 10 minutes late." If it does go to voice mail, she'll have to dial in to retrieve the message, figure out what time I called, etc.

Option 2: I can text her with either of those same messages and all she has to do is look at her phone to see my status. She's free to respond if she wants, but there's no real need.

Which one of those sounds more "old fashioned?"

Situation 3: My team at work needs some data for the project we're working on. We're all out in the field, possibly scattered around the city.

Option 1: Tom can call me or Bob or Sue (or all of us) and give us the data and somehow we need to figure out who has the data and how are we going to get it to each other and not get things confused.

Option 2: He can text the data to any (or all of us) and we can forward it around to each other, reply to each other, etc. We'll all have the data "in writing" for future reference and they'll be no danger of any of us transposing a number when we write it down or misunderstanding what was said.

Which one of those sounds more "old fashioned".

re: I have my kids on speed dial. Press a total of three keys and I'm off to the races.

Do you not think that Speed Dial works for texting? In those same 3 keystrokes my phone is ready to send a text to a specific contact or contacts - and don't forget that I can text to multiple individuals at one time by adding their names with just a couple more keystrokes. That's something "modern" that can't be done with a phone call.

The steps required to get a user ready to either make a call or send a text are virtually the same. Whether it's speed dial keystrokes or spoken voice commands, it's a wash. I tried to make that point earlier, so I'm not sure why it was brought up again.

There's a whole array of texting features that make it pretty modern compared to Morse Code, Carbon paper, and yes, even the phone call. Heck, we haven't even discussed the inclusion of pictures, animation and video in a text message.

I'm not trying to convince you to text, I'm just pointing out that your argument that texting is an "old fashioned" use of technology simply doesn't hold water.


Report •

#31
June 21, 2010 at 21:45:16
If you send a text to my phone you will get a very angry call in response to it. I do agree that a text is a great way to send a message that does not need to be replied to now or at all for that matter. My major issue with texting is that I know not a single person that does that. I have watched my daughter walk in circles for several minutes sending and recieving texts for a conversation that could have lasted all of 30 seconds. I send texts via email to my kids all the time to ask when they get off work or to call when they can. If they respond at all it is to my email address. I have a signal jammer I use on the street now so when I see someone on their phone or sending texts I turn it on and shut most of them down. One day they can thank me for saving their lives or they can kiss my butt I don't care. I have had to out manuver enough of them on the highway. If they wish to fight about it I am more than happy to ablige them. To me they are no better than a drunk driver which in my opinion is a person committing attempted murder. If this person leads such a powerful life that they are in such demand that they must be on the phone while on the road get a limo and a driver and let the rest of us live.

Report •

#32
June 21, 2010 at 21:59:31
@ hardrocker:

What if I sent you the kind of text that you agree they're "great" for - one that doesn't require a reply at all?

Would you still respond with a "very angry call"? ;-)


Report •

#33
June 22, 2010 at 04:43:11
Derby Dad

What if I concede that text messaging can be better, in some circumstances, than speaking on the phone.

Will you concede that in most cases talking on the phone is a more enriching experience than receiving a text?

I will go off on a tangent here and point out that because you can send the same text to multiple folks doesn't mean you should. Both forms of communication have their place but I think texting is used to the point of excess.

My older son has sat down to play cards with his brother and parents. During the card game he responded to texts at least a dozen times. I suspect it was with a person of the fairer sex.

That doesn't excuse the rude behavior. Additionally, it seems to negate many of your arguments that text messages, unlike phone calls don't require an immediate or any response.

BTW, that is not the way my son was brought up. I can only assume the behavior is some prevalent that he didn't realize it was rude.

Had the first text been a phone call I am sure he would have answered by stating his current status along with a promise to contact the person later.


Report •

#34
June 22, 2010 at 05:22:15
OTH - I wasn't looking for any concessions as to the value of texting.

If you'll reread my Response #30 you'll see how many times I asked the question "Which one of those sounds more "old fashioned?""

The analogies to Morse Code and Carbon Paper were used to illustrate how "old fashioned" texting is and that is all that I was debating.

The use of groups to send texts to multiple recipients was included to show that texting is actually much more "modern" than the alleged reversion to the "old fashioned" method of typing your communications when compared to calling.

...Unless of course you want to compare it the old Party Lines. ;-)

Whether texting is used to excess or not is a totally different argument and one I which I side more with you than not.

re: Will you concede that in most cases talking on the phone is a more enriching experience than receiving a text?

I won't say "most" because it really depends on what is being communicated. In many cases, just theidea that one of my kids texted me out of the blue with a random thought or to say "I got a 100 on my math test!" on the way to their next class is a reward in itself. They were thinking of me, had something to say and popped it into a quick text. Not something worth calling about, but they wanted to get in touch just the same.

My daughters will occasionally text nothing more than a "Hi!" just to let me know that they are thinking of me. That's pretty darn rewarding and puts a smile on my face in the middle of busy day.

As I said many responses ago: I am in communications with my kids more now that we have a texting plan than when we had just the voice plan.


Report •

#35
June 22, 2010 at 05:41:02
" As I said many responses ago: I am in communications with my kids more now that we have a texting plan than when we had just the voice plan".

Ever stop to ask why that is? If your children are typical they may avoid phone calls because that allows us to be parents more easily. When communication is instantaneous the conversation can move in the direction we want it to much easier.



Report •

#36
June 22, 2010 at 07:30:43
re: "Ever stop to ask why that is?"

Of course I have - and I'm comfortable with the reason.

It's interesting that you took that comment as a possible negative and I take it as a definitive positive.

I get more texts asking for my advice and counsel than I ever got phone calls asking for the same. If they were trying to avoid those types of conversations, they wouldn't be asking at all. BTW - it's not all that hard for me to actually *call* them (and vice-versus) if the question requires more in depth back and forth.

I see the increase in contact as simply due to the ease of contact rather than any avoidance of voice-to-voice communications. Since you don't text on a regular basis, it might be hard for you to understand that - and that's OK. I don't mean that as a put-down in any manner. I was right there up until a couple of years ago.

Perhaps I should clarify something - my oldest is 24, my youngest is 18. Our conversations are more adult-to-adult discussions than parent-to-child conversations. This isn't about them "getting away with something" by using text instead of calling.

It's not that they don't want to talk to me, it simply that there is often no need for direct conversation.

Trust me, when the need arises, we have those conversations face-to-face and/or on the phone.

When you get a chance, ask my daughter how I basically talked her off the ledge with my frequent "pearls of wisdom" during her first month away at college. Simple texts like "One day at a time", "You don't have to go through this alone", "Sometimes you have to take the leap, and build your wings on the way down."

All she needed was to be assured that I was thinking of her and had faith in her. That was easily done with random texts throughout the day. There was no "avoidance" of voice-to-voice conversations. Trust me, we had plenty of those too!


Report •

#37
June 22, 2010 at 09:23:07
Well, as usual we need to agree to disagree and leave it at that. Been entertaining though.

BTW, we did hijack this thread. Sorry about that XpUser.


Report •

#38
June 22, 2010 at 09:55:48
re: BTW, we did hijack this thread. Sorry about that XpUser

Me sorry too!

OK, just to get the thread back on track, here's one that I hate...it happened to me just last week.

There was complex Excel question in the Office forum - too complex to answer without actually seeing the workbook.

I asked the OP to send me the workbook and we traded emails back and forth - fairly rapidly - over a couple of days until we were both on the same page as to what he wanted to do.

I spent more than a few hours coming up with a solution for him and sent the workbook back with a detailed explanation of how to use it and what steps he needed to do to complete the project. I even tossed in some enhancements to make the workbook more efficient and idiot-proof so his users couldn't blow it up.

3 days went by with no response. On the 4th day I sent him an email letting him know that it is common courtesy to acknowledge the work that someone has done for you – especially when it was done for free.

Within minutes he responded by saying "I've been away from the computer for a few days. I've reviewed the workbook and it does what I need it to do. Thanks."

I can't possibly see how he could have reviewed and understood the workbook in the time it took him to respond, which tells me that he saw and used the workbook way before I sent him the email.

I wasn't looking for praise, but I just don't see how someone can ask for help and then not even acknowledge the time and effort it took to solve their issue. This is not the first time that a solution was offered and no acknowledgement was received.

I’d like to text their parents and let them know how rude their kids are. ;-)


Report •

#39
June 22, 2010 at 10:02:21
Another possibility is that the OP was too embarrassed to admit they didn't understand your work.

Did they post originally in the Office software forum?


Report •

#40
June 22, 2010 at 13:10:12
re: Did they post originally in the Office software forum?

Yes they did.

Let me explain what I meant by "too complex to answer without actually seeing the workbook".

The complexity wasn't in the formulas required, it was in the layout of the workbook. Multiple cells on one sheet being compared to multiple cells on another sheet and different results being return based on how certain sets of cells compared to other sets.

The required formula weren't all that complex (some Nested IF's with AND/OR functions included) but if you saw the workbook you'd understand how it would have been hard to describe the layout in a post.

If the OP was the one who built the spreadsheet in the first place, I have no doubt that he understood my solution.


Report •

#41
June 22, 2010 at 15:41:16
I have to say after thinking about it a while I will have to agree with both of you. The issues I have had with texters is them doing it and driving and that it is replacing speech. I think it's great that your kids, at their ages, are still into you Derby. The texting you post about in that respect I guess is acceptable. If I could have gotten my kids to understand that from the beginning maybe I would not hate texting so much in general. My problem here is they would send me a text and a few minutes later another saying " U there?". They needed a response even though it wasn't anything important. After this went on and on and on I had had enough of texting. Plus when all this started texting was not cheaper as they claimed it was as I would not pay extra money for a service I would not use. I watch them with their friends and it's all eyes and thumbs on those bloomin' phones. Just my opinion but if your going to carry on a coversation texting is not the way to do it either with or without the texting plan. But that is what they all do. I know for a fact it has cost many of them few extra years in school. It almost cost my daughter an exta year until I caught wind of it and destroyed her phone. When I was in school if you got caught with a phone in class the first time it was taken an a parent had to pick it and you up after school. The second time it was just taken. Now they are as common as pencils.

I do agree that there are times that I do not need to be bothered with a phone call but a quick message may be a good idea. My wife used to be bad about going the other way with things. I used to work nights at a jail and she would have to call me with, in my opinion, stupid things at the worst possible times. When I am trying to take a final head count at the end of the night, she knew what time we did this, she calls the desk with "Hey I am home from bingo". Ofcourse we were not allowed to carry cell phones but still this could have waited.

The costs: My kids used to say " It costs you 10 cents a minute to make a call but it only costs me 3 cents to send a text so my way is cheaper." To which I respond " Oh your way is cheaper? I can do what I need to do in most cases in less than a minute. You have to send a text that's 3 cents, recieve a response that's 6 cents, respond back that's 9 cents. Now you have to send another text to make sure your point got across that's 12 cents get a response that's 15 cents you send another response to them that's 18 cents. But your way is cheaper?" You can bark about the texting plan being cheaper if you like and if you send and recieve texts then I am sure it is but I don't so it isn't. I know plans and services have changed since all this started a few years ago but I haven't changed. It still more expensive for me no matter what. If I get texts I get charged. If I opt for the texting plan for my old phone or go out and get all new phone and plan I still get charged more for services I would rarely if ever use.

I have discussed this with my kids and told them that if they want to just say hi or something that we do not need to talk about a text is fine. If they need an imediate response and it is important especially while I am working then call me.


Report •

#42
June 22, 2010 at 20:06:20
Lot's of good stuff in there, harrddrocker.

As far as the cost goes, I guess I'm getting my money's worth.

At less than $20/month (taxes included) for the unlimited texting plan, I'm paying less than 0.001 per text. Yep, 0.001. My college daughter does about 5K a month, my HS senior does about 15K. But before you say anything, consider this...

You said "I know for a fact it has cost many of them few extra years in school."

In my situation, the 15K/month daughter is a member of the National Honor Society, Captain of the Varsity Softball Team, member of the Varsity Cross Country and Varsity Indoor Track teams and is enrolled in the International Baccalaureate program. She works at the local Y on weekends and baby sits in her "spare time". Somehow I don't think her "excessive" texting is having too much of an impact on her academic or athletic life.

The 5K/month daughter graduated HS with Honors and just completed her first year of college with a 3.7 GPA. I'm not too worried about her texting level either.

It's all relative, I guess.


Report •

#43
June 23, 2010 at 10:30:32
What was ment by that was all the texting durng class. It doesn't sound like that's when your daughters are doing the most of their texting. My daughter told me of several that got busted for cheating via text as well. Also it would seem your daughters have pretty full busy lives so I don't really consider those numbers that excessive. My kids have their own phones and plans so as much as they text it I bet is cheaper for them to have the texting plan. If I did that my texts would cost me a 1.00 or 2 per. So it would not be cheaper for me.

A local catholic school suspended a girl a couple months ago on the grounds that she was cutting class. She was in class every day admitted by her teacher. However when roll was taken she could not be bothered to answer up nor could she be bothered to participate in class because she was texting all this time. The teacher warned her after a couple weeks that she would begin marking her absent. The girl acknowledged the warning and went about her texting. After being marked absent every day for over six weeks the finally cut her loose for a week. This is where I have issues with texters.


Report •

#44
June 23, 2010 at 10:38:29
Your issue with texters is teenage kids don't consider the consequences of their actions and consider themselves immune to said consequences?

Man, you must really hate drivers.

Also, I love how OtheHill tries to stop the derail, but two posts later we're back to SMS messaging.


Report •

#45
June 23, 2010 at 11:21:09
Yeah sorry about that. No I hate drivers that don't take driving seriously. The ones that feel my life is not worth more than a drink or a text.

Report •

Ask Question