Etiquette for Digital Communication

An interesting point of discussion, but not one which is consciously changed.
I think it just evolves, along with those nice examples of culture clash where old and young meet.

Some of us are happier in one medium than t'other.
I like E-mail and written communication, but have been told I have an awful 'phone manner... well I hate telecoms with a passion.
We are all Chameleons to a great extent varying our behaviour and etiquette to suit the situation.

Anyhow.. wha'ever...
Del
(I tend to start E-mails with 'Hi' )

http://emailcharter.org/

Mr. Yahlasit:

Bravo! I'm happy to give you a GA for this answer.

There is an added point I'd like to expound on here.

By going through the added effort of writing in correct grammar and using proper etiquette, one demonstrates that these words have been carefully considered. The writer considers these thoughts as important.

I thank you in advance for allowing me to expand a little on your excellent point.

Your colleague and distant friend,

Redfred

Hello redfred:

I'm always looking forward to read your comments, I seek them throughout the threads, and when you reply to me, I take it as a very worthwhile observation, which I greatly appreciate.

Best regards

Yahlasit

To whom it may concern,

The conversational nature of electronic mail and forums is an apparent culprit in the demise of formal correspondence. This is, however, beneficial in the sense that the free exchange of ideas presents solutions and clarifies ideas in rapid fire fashion. An unfortunate side-effect is the ease at which we also insult one another, either inadvertently or with purpose.

I find this slack and aggressive tone slowly creeping its way into my daily vocabulary and behavior, to my dismay.

I have about 300 binders and publications in my office alone. I know where each one is and can reference them in quick fashion. I can also use the internet with blinding alacrity (even when looking up engineering homework solutions) much to my children's chagrin.

I do not believe adopting "new internet standards" will have any effect whatsoever. I would compare any new "standards" to the existing "standards", of which there are none.

What is this "etiquette" of which you speak?

Respectfully,

Cuba Pete

watz dis thread bout thN cnot underst& it

Dear fellow CR4 members,

Thanks to the internet, the following was introduced

The trol.

Exhibit A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwGFalTRHDA

Exhibit B

People that use Internet anonymity to show their worst side without repercussions!

Guys,

(the above is my multiple address greeting!)

If the communication is to one peson it will be addressed to John, or Harry,or Gwen ..... assuming that I know their moniker. If not I will find a way!

I sign off with my signature as is known to the organisation I am addressing.

That all seems straightforward,

OK

Sleepy

I think it's actually more important because taking the time to adhere to "old" standards of communication actually makes a greater impact in our age of rapid-fire digital communications. Case in point: after I received a generous stipend to attend a business training a few years ago, I mailed the trainer (who happened to be the CEO of the company sponsoring the session) a formal business letter of thanks on heavy paper. I never heard the end of the praise: how taking the extra time to craft and mail an actual letter really sets one apart as opposed to sending a "Thanks a lot" email.

As a disclaimer, though, I am a twenty-something firmly rooted in 20th century technology (read: Luddite??). I live in an old house, have a rotary landline phone, just started texting last year, and listen to analog radio and (occasionally) records. If you want to see how even our verbal communication has changed, check out a clip of "What's My Line?" on YouTube - it's like they're speaking an overly complex foreign language. Or maybe we're now speaking a diluted dumbed-down foreign language...

The hand-written (or even type-written) letter has gotten a similar reaction from elected representatives for a long time. You can imagine it is even more so now, with "electronically signed" petitions, automatic emails, etc.. If you want to magnify your views to "higher-ups" (??), or anyone, do so in personal hard copy.

I, too, have described myself as a Luddite, but the term bears revisiting occasionally, as a reminder of its genesis. The violence associated with it is usually missing in modern characterizations. Otherwise, we self-described Luddites would have been smashing xPods, xPads, "smart" phones, etc., whenever we see them and have the chance. Here's an enjoyable article about how the term came to be, and is, also, indirectly, pertinent to the thread. Luddites had nothing to do with protesting technology but were protesting conditions that have prompted violence (protest) across history -- unemployment being a key ingredient. We've, mostly, added the part about jobs being threatened by mechanization. (This is a, continually, progressive outcome of the "technological" and/or industrial revolution. I think the real beginning of any real displacement begins with mass production, in any manufacturing setting. In that regard, "Luddites" have been the fore-bearers of all, since, who have been displaced (increased unemployment) by "machines." Information technology, anyone? It seems later generations coined the term Luddites and began to then apply it as invented.)

An example of this "progression" is the spinning wheel. It first increased personal productivity, but as looms became instruments of mass-produced clothing, it spelled the disappearance of the spinning wheel as a domestic item. Gandhi utilized the spinning wheel as a rallying point in the struggle for Indian independence. An interesting and rather "famous debate" -- at least, in India and during its time -- about the progress of mass-production, vs. personal craft, centering around the "Gandhi revived" spinning wheel, is described in this article. Not cut and dried then or now. But, I think Gandhi's perspective resonates with our Luddite connotation. (Is the personal computer similar to a spinning wheel? And is the "cloud" computer the similar step to making it not really a computer anymore, but only an interface?)

Ultimately, etiquette, it seems to me, is the precursor (or equal) to being treated with civility; creating a civil environment to live in.

The mention, in the article, of sending some convicted Luddites to Australia prompted me to find this short article about penal colonies.

An interesting thread. My usual opening to an email follows the more formal approach. By using a more formal approach, I hope the recipient appreciates that I have something that I wish to communicate of a more important nature. Correct spelling, grammar and use of the correct word, whether or weather, their or there and many other examples, show a respect to the recipient. It also shows that the sender is not being lazy.

I appreciate that language evolves but in accepting that evolution do we have to accept laziness in that process. There are many wrong words becoming accepted, for example, transportation when the word should be transport, organisational instead of organisation. The 'longer' words may seem more impressive but to me shows a degree of ignorance.

This is just a personal opinion and not meant to stir anger or cause offence.

Tony

I thought I would chime in with my own thoughts...

On voice mail: At work, our voice mail messages used to appear in our email inboxes as attachments. This was great. I could listen to my voice mail anywhere! Now that technology is no longer in place. I'm not the type to dial into voice mail from home so it may be a while before you hear back from me. When it's urgent, email. It's just faster (in my opinion). Of course, if everyone is working the same 9-5 schedule, the phone may be more reliable. (But people could still be in the bathroom, at a meeting, out sick, etc.) I prefer the "paper" trail left by email. It's automatic notes!

On emails: I usually begin all of my emails by addressing the recipient and closing with my name. This is standard for any "first" email I send. I tend to get more informal with replies as the conversation goes on, especially if it's communication between two people. By that point the person knows I'm writing to them, what it's about, and that I sent the message.

On mobile communication: This tends to be casual because it's usually among close friends or family. We have our own "language" and definition of what's acceptable. If I'm emailing from my phone the message may be abbreviated but I try to keep it professional.

On forums: In this I think it's appropriate to be more casual than an email but more formal than an IM. Proper sentence structure, grammar, and spelling are important, but I think it's standard practice to post without a greeting or closing. Some of that stuff is almost built into the tool (subject line and your name attached to the post).

I'll admit that the intended recipient of any piece of communication plays a role in what I say or write. Letters to my grandparents, for example, are written in a traditional style. Birthday cards to friends? Not so much.

Also, I find it interesting that people can be so different on the phone from who they are in person! Short and abrasive (maybe they just don't like talking on the phone?) or long-winded (maybe the barrier of the phone helps shyness?). I can't say that I'm a fan of talking on the phone. As with the Internet you lose the benefit of non-verbal communication - but you don't have the help of emoticons!

Regarding phone communication... Laughter and silence are a couple of emoticon counterparts, I think. You can, also, "hear" a smile in verbal expression. At least, I can. Crying, too. (Consoling someone in email also lacks real-time presence.) The tongue stuck out is usually a giggle. Winks, possible giggles, too. Angry emoticons lack the intensity of a verbal expression. Those are the ones that emails can tone down. And all caps for shouting, actually defeats the purpose of communication, by increased difficulty of reading. It, also, softens the actual expression of emotion, verbally and might keep any therapeutic value of shouting from happening.

I totally agree that people can be quite different from written expression. I tend to prefer written communication for presenting thoughts, as do most people, probably. Spontaneous expression often lacks the organization and coherence of written expression. So emails and forum posts have that advantage. Emoticons are almost a necessity for emails, but they don't appear in other written communications -- even in Kindle books. Maybe authors just haven't made the connection yet.

I agree with Yahlasit that etiquette should be maintained. Etiquette reflects a persons good manners; how you regard those you communicate with. Most people these days don't follow etiquette rules, but no reason why you can't continue using it. I still use salutations and closings in E-mails. Using digital instead of paper, doesn't change anything.

Dear SavvyExacta:

My concept of the forums here is that an answer or comment is to a specific user, by virtue of the reply button; and the signature at the bottom is implied by the user ID of the post. It never ocurred to me to add these customary greetings when to me they were already implied by the format. With regard to Anonymous posters, I feel they fall outside most of the rules of etiquette by their own choice. One feels odd replying "Dear Anonymous", it is like saying " to whom it may concern ", a phrase I find very cold indeed, reserved for legal-speak.

Regards, LongintheTooth.

PS- I do tend to shorten the names when responding, and might use 'Savvy' as opposed to the full version - and if I do sign, might sign as LIT or some variation. Again for me it goes back to the fact that the site identifies both parties. I hope that I do not offend anyone when I shorten their ID, it is the same as first name basis, to me. -LIT.