I checked my Pixelfed messages today and see this. I’ve literally no idea what the first half means, so I asked my daughter to translate the acronyms. No idea what “no disrespect” is conveying.
I never really thought of pixelfed as a place for spam or scammers. If the intent is genuine, then I’m even more perplexed by how they are choosing communicating. I’m not going to respond because it feels off, so yeah…
Perhaps I’m just showing my age?
Here’s what would piss me of the most:
“Hey, I got a question. Do you have time to talk?”
Me not knowing what this is about or how long it would take to answer this mysterious question of yours: “not right now, gonna text you in the evening”
Me (later): “So what was your question?”
“I wanted to go to that concert on Friday. But now all of the tickets are gone and I’m going alone, lmao”
I HAD enough time to answer a simple yes/no question. I hate it when people ask if I have time to text. At least give me a fucking hint like “hey I got a short question: its about the concert on Friday”. Asking if one has time to text causes the most social friction IMO but the least visible friction (to you).
If you only reach out to someone with straightforward requests, it seems like they’re being used. I value the hypothetical you as an individual, rather than a resource that provides me with something.
I’ve grown to realize that most other people don’t seem to feel the same way and I try to accommodate, but every time I start a conversation with a demand, it feels rude to me.
Just curious: Would you consider it rude if someone else sends you a text with a straightforward request? Or do you just feel like it could be perceived as rude when you do it?
If the only messages I ever receive from that person are requests and demands, I don’t know if I would call it rude from them, but I certainly wouldn’t feel valued as a person.
Okay I get that. However, I feel like this has nothing to do with the original issue. If I only ever receive “requests and demands” from someone it would not make it any better if they beforehand say “hey, do you have time for a quick question” every time.
Of course I also text about other topics. Of course I ask how they are doing and chat about stuff. But when I have I question I simply ask that question.
I suppose that’s a valid point, but engaging in discourse with a person before and, ideally, after a request seems to me to express that you appreciate them as both a person with whom you’d like to engage as well as someone who can help you. Admittedly the positive impact is diminished if you only do so when you need something.
It is highly dependent on the other person’s interpretation of the situation. If they don’t like to chat, then the person attempting to do so certainly could be interpreted as the rude one.
In that situation, when you asked her later, your friend should’ve said “Oh don’t worry about it, I was able to resolve it without you, but thanks for checking in,” and then changed the subject.
I’d hate to be treated that way. Ofc it’s fine if this is the social norm for you and people around you.
(Me after someone tells me ‘oh don’t worry about it’)
So if they don’t respond to your “do you have time to talk” initial message, then you just don’t invite them to the concert at all and never tell them about it?
All to avoid just asking them up-front whether they want to go or not?
That’s wild, I genuinely don’t understand how this is better in any way.
Imo if the question is urgent, either call them or add something to the text like “tickets are going quick and I’m going to buy them ASAP, so if I don’t hear back by <insert time>, I’ll assume you’re out”
Yep, that’s right.
This is where I have to correct you. Not asking them straight out, and not mentioning it later if they don’t respond, are both is service of avoiding putting pressure on them.
Can you explain the “pressure” part a bit more? It sounds like you’ve got a time-sensitive question, but rather than asking the question and getting a response (or not), you’re asking to ask a time-sensitive question and getting a response (or not). If you’re trying to avoid the pressure of a time-sensitive question, it doesn’t seem like this approach fixes that.
Only thing I can see is that this approach prevents the situation where the recipient takes too long to respond but did actually want to go to the concert, forcing the sender to explain that it’s unfortunately too late, tickets have been purchased and they don’t have one. But it seems like clarity in the initial message is still the best way to give them a chance to respond promptly if they really do want to go.
Who knows, maybe I have finally gotten too old to understand modern youth etiquette
All you’re avoiding is going to the concert with your friend.