![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Matt Whiting wrote:
I've been using usenet for 10+ years and have found that people tend to come across as more hostile in writing than they really are in person. This happens in email as well.Â*Â*YouÂ*don'tÂ*haveÂ*theÂ*inflectionÂ*andÂ*o ther nonverbal cues that you get in mano-y-mano conversation and it is easy for things to escalate well beyond what anyone intended. I've been USENETing since at least 84 (according to DejaGoogle), and I agree. For a while, I resisted using those "emotocon" glyphs reasoning that words should be sufficient in a written medium. Eventually, I gave that up. Too many read perhaps every other, or every third, word. Any possible subtlety is lost when reading is so sparse. Spoonfeeding is required. - Andrew |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Andrew Gideon" wrote in message gonline.com... Matt Whiting wrote: I've been using usenet for 10+ years and have found that people tend to come across as more hostile in writing than they really are in person. This happens in email as well. You don't have the inflection and other nonverbal cues that you get in mano-y-mano conversation and it is easy for things to escalate well beyond what anyone intended. I've been USENETing since at least 84 (according to DejaGoogle), and I agree. For a while, I resisted using those "emotocon" glyphs reasoning that words should be sufficient in a written medium. Eventually, I gave that up. Too many read perhaps every other, or every third, word. Any possible subtlety is lost when reading is so sparse. Spoonfeeding is required. - Andrew Your choice of the word "spoonfeeding" here is indicative of the problems found in email and posting communication. Taken in context, the word "spoonfeeding" as you have used it can indicate a deficiency on the part of the receiver of the communication. To focus in any way on the receiver of a communication is to mask the responsibility of the writer of the communication to make EVERY effort to convey the "mood" and "tone" of the communication. This is why we use emoticons for electronic visual communication. The problem is that many people are intimidated by the use of an emoticon; feeling that their use implies a lesser level of intelligence. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are few people in this world with the natural writing skill to completely convey with a zero error margin, the tone and mood of a written thought. Your use of the word "spoonfeeding" is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Your thought was correct. Your statement was correct. The writer does indeed have to be extremely careful when trying to convey the mood and tone of a letter. But the use of the word "spoonfeeding" would not be my first choice to describe what is required. :-))))) This is much less "threatening" than the word "spoonfeeding". Do YOU like the thought that someone thinks in order for you to understand what has been written to you, that you have to be "spoon-fed" the information? Think about it! :-) Dudley Henriques |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dudley Henriques wrote:
Taken in context, the word "spoonfeeding" as you have used it can indicate a deficiency on the part of the receiver of the communication. Or the medium. Try eating soup with a fork, for example. - Andrew |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Andrew Gideon" wrote in message online.com... Dudley Henriques wrote: Taken in context, the word "spoonfeeding" as you have used it can indicate a deficiency on the part of the receiver of the communication. Or the medium. Try eating soup with a fork, for example. - Andrew True. All the more the need for the simple approach like that ridiculous looking little emoticon :-). So simple....so effective. No mistakes. Says it all mood and tone wise all in a simple key hit! Occam's Razor at it's finest! :-)) Dudley |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Andrew, check your settings. I believe that you are posting in HTML,
instead of the preferred plan text. -- Jim in NC |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Morgans wrote:
Andrew, check your settings. I believe that you are posting in HTML, instead of the preferred plan text. I'm not (or at least not in the message to which you replied). The content type of the message to which you replied was: text/plain; charset=utf-8 I suspect instead that you're experiencing some difficulty with the character set, but that's pretty much a guess. My default character set is standard ascii. However, when I quote someone I'm occasionally forced to use utf-8. I've not figured out why. If there was some different message you think I posted in HTML, please give me a message ID or something else I can use to identify it. I'd be happy to check, just in case I am. But I've certainly told my newsreader to not do so. Thanks... - Andrew |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
agonline.com... [...] My default character set is standard ascii. However, when I quote someone I'm occasionally forced to use utf-8. I've not figured out why. If there was some different message you think I posted in HTML, please give me a message ID or something else I can use to identify it. I'd be happy to check, just in case I am. But I've certainly told my newsreader to not do so. He probably is under the mistaken impression that you used HTML because your post showed up in his newsreader with a different font that what he's used to. Outlook Express, for example, uses a proportional-spaced font for plain text 8-bit posts, even when you've set it to use a fixed-spaced font for plain text posts. Since HTML posts are usually in a proportional-spaced font, a person might (incorrectly) assume that any post shown in a proportional-spaced font is HTML. As for why YOUR news reader insists on using 8-bit when 7-bit would do, I don't know. You'd have to ask the KNode folks about that. I didn't see anything in the post you made in 8-bit, nor the post to which you replied (which was itself 7-bit) that would have suggested 8-bit encoding needed to be used. Pete |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Peter Duniho wrote:
He probably is under the mistaken impression that you used HTML because your post showed up in his newsreader with a different font that what he's used to. Outlook Express, for example, uses a proportional-spaced font for plain text 8-bit posts, even when you've set it to use a fixed-spaced font for plain text posts. Ah. Thanks. I'd thought that it might have been the font, but I didn't have the background to explain how it could be the case; I know little-to-nothing about MSFT products. More, I'm sufficiently stuck in my ways that I've tried very few NNTP readers even on my platform of choice. [...] As for why YOUR news reader insists on using 8-bit when 7-bit would do, I don't know. You'd have to ask the KNode folks about that. I didn't see anything in the post you made in 8-bit, nor the post to which you replied (which was itself 7-bit) that would have suggested 8-bit encoding needed to be used. I'd always assumed that it was because I was quoting from an 8-bit message. However, this incident caused me to check and that is not the case. Puzzling. - Andrew |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 05 May 2005 14:51:27 -0400, Andrew Gideon
wrote: Matt Whiting wrote: I've been using usenet for 10+ years and have found that people tend to come across as more hostile in writing than they really are in person. This happens in email as well.**You*don't*have*the*inflection*and*other nonverbal cues that you get in mano-y-mano conversation and it is easy for things to escalate well beyond what anyone intended. I've been USENETing since at least 84 (according to DejaGoogle), and I agree. For a while, I resisted using those "emotocon" glyphs reasoning that words should be sufficient in a written medium. 70% of face-to-face communication is non-verbal. We take that for granted when we are on the internet. It tends to be hard to convery the true spirit of a thought via text to a person that you have never met before. Jim http://www.unconventional-wisdom.org |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jimbob wrote:
70% of face-to-face communication is non-verbal. Have you a citation for this? It's a topic in which I'm interested. I'm also interested in what percentage is "verbal" but invisible in a written medium (ie. tone, inflection, etc.). - Andrew |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
So I invested my US$6°°.....GUESS WHAT!!!... less than ten days later, I received money | [email protected] | Owning | 1 | January 16th 05 06:48 AM |
For Keith Willshaw... | robert arndt | Military Aviation | 253 | July 6th 04 05:18 AM |
Report Leaving Assigned Altitude? | John Clonts | Instrument Flight Rules | 81 | March 20th 04 02:34 PM |
U.S. military leaving Kuwaiti air base ~ Associated Press | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | October 21st 03 10:39 PM |