You didn't read the thread very carefully, because multiple times I've made it quite clear that I'm not expecting an immediate response. The very first two sentences of my OP even make this clear.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Texting etiquette: people who take for-ev-er to respond (or never respond)
- Thread starter usagora
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You didn't read the thread very carefully, because multiple times I've made it quite clear that I'm not expecting an immediate response. The very first two sentences of my OP even make this clear.
You say that but you also say
While you reply well within the "it shouldn't take even that long" time frame, I don't think it's fair for you to feel others should be obligated to do that. You're expecting something from other people that they might not want to do. You said these are people who do it all the time so they treat texts as something that doesn't require a reply within what you feel is a reasonable time frame.
I think the solution is you understanding that if you text Dave (made up name) and his normal turn around reply time is 48 hours then you have to think "do I need/want a reply sooner than 48 hours". If so give Dave a call.
Maybe it's the wrong way to handle text replies by your thought process but everyone does things differently. I think it's much easier for you to learn how people handle this and deal with it accordingly rather than trying to get them to change. I think much less stressful for you as well
Which doesn't translate to "immediately." There's a LOT of time between "immediately" and "24 hours." Nothing I've said anywhere in this thread indicates I expect an immediate response. In fact, I went out of my way to make that clear, yet people are still attacking this straw man (and others).
Oh, it's not just texting. As I said, these are generally people who always show up late or last minute as well. It's a general problem of disorganization in their life that the texting issue here is just one symptom of. They often do the same thing with emails and calls too. Let's face it: most of us don't want to do a lot of things, but we should do them anyway because they're the right things to do.
Yeah, I'm not stupid. Obviously I know how to keep an eye on the calendar and try other communication methods as needed. That's not the point of this thread. This thread is basically to call out the behavior of consistently failing to respond to texts in a timely manner as rude/inconsiderate. Hopefully some people reading this who may never chime in will take it to heart and change. If even one person does so, that will be worth it.
To be clear, I did say this:
That said, when I have been that person it's generally because I find texting an unnecessarily burdensome way to plan things and need to wait until I can craft a response, by which time it's off my radar. If I need to make plans, I typically do it by voice when I can.
Texting isn't a great means for either detail (email is better) or rapid back and forth planning (voice is better).
I'm not sure what's so burdensome about typing out (or voice-dictating) a quick text. It's faster than an email and better than voice in that you have a written record to refer back to by default. I'm not talking about planning state dinners--just simple gatherings. outings, etc.
If you have issues forgetting people texted you, then I suggest creating reminders to respond. "Hey Siri, remind me at 8pm to respond to Mary's text" etc. The same would apply to returning emails and voicemails too, of course.
You can't because most people these days don't answer or they send you to VM
I think you're finding the root of the problem you're having. You're confused why the people you're communicating with don't respond in the way you would-- it's because they aren't you.
And I'm not sure why you're seeing the texting behavior as particularly worthy of singling out. You've already said the people you're annoyed with are less attentive than you would like to a multitude of social protocols.
Anyway, I'm simply saying that for me, the medium is the message. If you send me a text I don't see it as an urgent communication, and I'm certainly not going to ask Siri to remind me so I can just ask Siri to remind me again later.
I'm not confused as to why at all. It's because they are disorganized, like I've mentioned before. Just ask anyone what they would prefer--someone to respond in a timely manner or to leave you hanging? For them to show up to an event on time or late? No one is going to say, "I prefer them leave me hanging or show up late" or "I don't care." No one's going to say, "Oh, them constantly leaving people hanging or showing up late is just because they aren't you, so get over it." But when the shoe is on the other foot and you're that person, all of a sudden everyone else is the problem and you're just golden. Riiight.
This thread is about texting because obviously texting is a very common, daily activity and I've encountered this issue frequently with many people.
I've never said nor implied that the texts in question were "urgent." If it were something urgent, I'd be calling instead. But neither is it unimportant. I mentioned making a reminder because you said you would forget to reply. But that could just as easily happen with email or voicemails/missed calls as well, so it's not really the medium that's the issue. You just do what you need to do to stay on top of things. I make reminders all the time for this purpose.
You keep focusing on “immediately”, but I’m saying it has nothing to do with immediately. Your expectation for the amount of time whether that is five seconds or five days isn’t the same as theirs.
So they’re always running last minute or doing things late. I could see how that doesn’t work with you because you do things in what you feel is an appropriate time range. I’m trying not to focus on numbers because you lock onto that versus the difference which I’m trying to point out. I don’t think there’s any misunderstanding what you’re saying here.
So is it the right thing to do to reply within X amount of time or Y amount of time? Who makes this determination? In a work setting these expectations would be set by the employer, but you’re not their employer.
This is part of what I’m trying to get at is you feel something is right but they don’t feel the same way. They feel what they’re doing is right. Who is right? I think a more appropriate word would be different and also maybe not complementary. Their method of doing something is different and not complementary to your method.
My point is, that’s going to be your most effective way to deal with the situation. You can’t force change on others that you don’t have some control over.
You think somehow posting here and calling people out for what you feel is inappropriate behavior is going to make them change? These are likely adults as I said so they’re not going to say oh Bob might be upset that I take a day to reply to his text and show up late to the dinner party so I think I’m going to change what I’ve been doing for twenty years now. Obviously I don’t know the age of these people but if they’re in their 30s good luck getting them to make this big change.
I think you’re going to get two responses from people here. The first is yeah, I empathize with you because they think exactly the same. Those people don’t need to change because they’re doing exactly what you’re doing.
The second response is, I don’t care. I’ll text people when I get time. I’m busy and if they want something right away, they’ll call. Those are the people that are doing something different than you that you're trying to call out but they’re not going to do anything different because you said something.
I’m not telling you that you’re wrong with your method of being punctual but I’m trying to explain to you that your expectations of people might not be helpful. I think I’m having about as much luck explaining that to you as you will have trying to convince others to be more punctual.
Last edited:
No worries, I don't mind helping. I guess its really up to you, whether you want to let other people's lack of responsibility or maturity impact your peace. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
My suggestion is to not let things that you have zero control over, bother you. At the end of the day, how much has this issue lived in your head rent free? This thread (closing in on 4 pages) its testament to how this seems to have affected you. You're continually posting here to defend your right to be mad.
So get annoyed, mad and angry, but once the dust settles, what have you accomplished? Nothing.
So why are you wasting time here? You obviously don't like my threads, as you've made clear multiple times in the past, so why even engage me? I mean, it's your right to and all, so knock yourself out, but it sure seems hypocritical for you to preach at me about how often I choose to post and then you're also in here posting multiple times as well as many others. Why not give them the same lecture? Oh, that's right, because they agree with you, so they get a pass 🙄. "usagora, why don't you just shut up! Let us make our points, but stop rebutting them!" is basically what you're saying. Well if you stop engaging me, I won't reply to you. It's pretty simple.
"Rant" threads are very common, and as long as I'm not breaking any forum rules, then what's the issue? Ever heard of catharsis? That's what I've accomplished. I feel better about having communicated my displeasure with disorganized people who can't reply to communication in a timely manner. And as mentioned before, if even just one person who's silently reading this thread changes their behavior in this area, then it will be worth it. You seem to want to paint me as a person who goes around all day slamming doors and seething because someone didn't text me back 3 days later or whatever. Nothing could be further from the truth. Yes, I get annoyed, but nothing extreme nor long-lived. So you can stop worrying about that.
Last edited:
You clearly implied I was expecting an immediate response multiple times. Here are your own words (bold underline mine):
I never said nor implied I expected an immediate answer, so you're interacting with a straw man there.
Doesn't work with me? LOL! I think most people frown on consistent tardiness. If you don't, then you're in the minority.
Yes, I think most people would agree that, absent extenuating circumstances, 24 hours is more than enough time to respond to a text where a response is needed, even if that response is "I'll get back to you by ____" so the person knows what to expect. This is common sense and common courtesy.
Ok, so, for example, if someone you invite for dinner regularly shows up an hour late every time, but they see nothing wrong with that, then I just have to accept that as valid because they feel differently about it than I do? Sorry, but no. They're being extremely rude, even if unintentionally.
For some it obviously won't, but for others it very well might. As I said, if even one person changes their habits, then that will be worth it. People make major changes all the time in their lives for the better. The ball's in their court, though. No, I can't "force" them to change, nor have I ever been under the impression that I could. But it could be that they simply never realized how other people felt about them failing to communicate in a timely manner, and now that they know, they might be motivated to change.
Passing on my advice and trying to help you.
I never said I didn't like your threads. I posted only twice (i think) in one of your earlier threads and stated this:
Its more of an observation that you seem to get annoyed very easily or at least that was my take away by creating a number of threads on things that bothered you. My second post was apologizing if my earlier post annoyed you
I don't think so, see, I'm providing advice, where as you seem to be continually looking for justification to remain angry or be proved right. Personally I don't care how many times you post
So it would seem, especially for people who are easily annoyed (I meant this in general and not directed to anyone single person)
I have no issue
You're putting words in my mouth, I never said that, nor are my posts implying anything of the sort. I think the gist of all of my posts have been if someone hadn't responded to you by text and you need an answer then call and don't major on minor things, i.e., don't get worked up over inconsequential things.
I never said shut up
Yes, and I'm genuinely happy for you. We all find peace in different ways, and its good that you were able to find some measure of peace over the slight of not incurring a response via text.
I'm sensing a bit of hostility with my involvement in this thread, my advice has been sincere and an attempt to to improve your peace and tranquility. Why are you projecting anger and frustration over people's suggestions? You seem to only want to cater people who agree with you.
Gaslighting at its finest. I don't believe you for a second when you say you're being sincere. I'm done replying to you.
I take forever to reply because I'm an insanely busy person and I simply can't answer every message I get every day. I get hundreds between texting, email, facebook messenger, instagram, teams, outlook etc and I have a job that requires a lot of focus so...
...I turn my phone on silent and ignore it all. I'm not some bored person on their phone all day, even after work I don't have my phone on me because I'm exhausted from the constant communication.
It's nothing personal against anyone who texts me, but every single person wants an instant response and I don't have enough energy for that.
I hate hate hate the idea that we're supposed to be reachable 24/7.
...I turn my phone on silent and ignore it all. I'm not some bored person on their phone all day, even after work I don't have my phone on me because I'm exhausted from the constant communication.
It's nothing personal against anyone who texts me, but every single person wants an instant response and I don't have enough energy for that.
I hate hate hate the idea that we're supposed to be reachable 24/7.
I whole heartedly disagree with that assessment. In no way have I tried to manipulate you into thinking you have mental issues or your sanity
Agreed, and throw in work generated texts - depending on your work and how it communicates, you can easily get information overload
That's why you prioritize. And, again, I never said anything about needing an "instant" response, but consistently taking over 24 hours before replying to something that takes a couple seconds to reply to (and actually needs a reply) is not cool imo. Most of us are busy. That's a cliché excuse. I'm also confused when you say you're "exhausted from the constant communication" after you just said you ignore all communication and silence your phone.
Well, it sounds like the person you're talking about did prioritize...you just weren't first priority.
I'm not sure what's confusing. Just because I ignore everything doesn't mean I don't see the constant barrage of notifications or feel the pressure to respond. Everyone thinks their issue is important and most of the time, it's just not. You obviously don't get a lot of communication or you'd likely feel the same way. Over a hundred (many times several hundred) messages every...single...day...you can't respond to all that.
As many of the replies here have made quite clear, it is not being "slack", still less, "disorganised" that leads people to respond to texts in what you consider to be a less than timely manner. This is your timetable, not theirs, a timetable determined by you, not them. And - by their choice (not to reply) they are clearly rejecting your timetable.
Their timetable is not yours - by choice; outside of a coercive domestic situation, or a professional situation, one cannot control (and nor should one wish to exert this degree of control) the actions of others - friends, relatives, acquaintances, - how - and when - people choose to respond.
As @maflynn has already pointed out, the only thing you can determine is your reaction. The only thing you can control is your own response to this.
People have other priorities, and to them, their choice not to respond, or to respond when they wish - is equally valid; they are neither "disorganised" nor "slack", rather, they are busy at work and wish to switch off when at home, or they simply choose not to respond, or both.
And, not responding to a text is also a choice, and it is a valid choice.
I would argue that people are making a choice to exert control - by claiming time and boundaries - in their own lives, when they choose not to respond.
The thing is, people may be extremely "organised" in one area (such as punctuality) and a lot less bothered, or concerned, about replying in a short period of time to texts.
Actually, if I am meeting someone, (or someone is meeting me), by arrangement, in a specific place, that is a time when I will send a text ("I'm running late; bus caught up in traffic; am hunting the bins which were emptied today; will be there in five minutes" sort of thing) - which are all all examples of messages that I have either sent or received.
@usagora: If the tone of your replies to @maflynn is how you respond to tardy texts, I am not surprised that people decide to let a text from you stew for a few days or weeks before sitting down and steeling themselves to respond. At least, that would be my response.
In any case, for what it is worth, he - and everyone else here - have replied to you in good faith, even if they disagree with how you frame your position; accusing someone of "gas-lighting" is both unfair and untrue.
Nobody has gaslit you; they have disagreed with you, and explained why their stance on tardy text replies differed from yours; above all, they have made it clear that they do not - for a variety of reasons - choose to abide by a set of standards and timetables set by someone else, if the existing relationship (such as a professional one) does not require that.
In an earlier post, I have written that an agreed etiquette for communicating via modern means of communication (mobile/cell phones, social media) has yet to evolve, or to be established. That will happen, but not for some time yet.
Their timetable is not yours - by choice; outside of a coercive domestic situation, or a professional situation, one cannot control (and nor should one wish to exert this degree of control) the actions of others - friends, relatives, acquaintances, - how - and when - people choose to respond.
As @maflynn has already pointed out, the only thing you can determine is your reaction. The only thing you can control is your own response to this.
People have other priorities, and to them, their choice not to respond, or to respond when they wish - is equally valid; they are neither "disorganised" nor "slack", rather, they are busy at work and wish to switch off when at home, or they simply choose not to respond, or both.
And, not responding to a text is also a choice, and it is a valid choice.
I would argue that people are making a choice to exert control - by claiming time and boundaries - in their own lives, when they choose not to respond.
The thing is, people may be extremely "organised" in one area (such as punctuality) and a lot less bothered, or concerned, about replying in a short period of time to texts.
Actually, if I am meeting someone, (or someone is meeting me), by arrangement, in a specific place, that is a time when I will send a text ("I'm running late; bus caught up in traffic; am hunting the bins which were emptied today; will be there in five minutes" sort of thing) - which are all all examples of messages that I have either sent or received.
Excellent post, and well said.
@usagora: If the tone of your replies to @maflynn is how you respond to tardy texts, I am not surprised that people decide to let a text from you stew for a few days or weeks before sitting down and steeling themselves to respond. At least, that would be my response.
In any case, for what it is worth, he - and everyone else here - have replied to you in good faith, even if they disagree with how you frame your position; accusing someone of "gas-lighting" is both unfair and untrue.
Nobody has gaslit you; they have disagreed with you, and explained why their stance on tardy text replies differed from yours; above all, they have made it clear that they do not - for a variety of reasons - choose to abide by a set of standards and timetables set by someone else, if the existing relationship (such as a professional one) does not require that.
In an earlier post, I have written that an agreed etiquette for communicating via modern means of communication (mobile/cell phones, social media) has yet to evolve, or to be established. That will happen, but not for some time yet.
Last edited:
Nice attempt at a jab, but I'm not asking to be first priority. But 4-5 days to respond to a simple text (actually, they never did . . . I had to contact his wife)? Come on, there's no excuse. That's pure disorganization/procrastination/laziness/etc.
So you're not "ignoring" it then.
Again, that's why I said you prioritize. If someone's waiting to hear back from you to arrange plans for the weekend, that takes priority over someone texting you some non-time-sensitive message like "Hey, bro, how've you been?"
Exactly.
And bravo, very well said.
I have already written that not responding is a response, and is a choice.
The text in question is simply not deemed sufficiently important to the recipient to require an instant, or immediate, response, or, to demand the time - and time is what is important here, one's own use of one's private time - is what is important here, to craft a reply.
@chrono1081 has already commented on the demands of the 24/7 world, this insane insistence that you be readily available.
Some of us reject this, profoundly and passionately reject this - in my case, I most certainly do, especially in my private life, precisely because such an option is not available to me professionally.
In fact, I prefer if people - when dining with me, or having coffee with me - do not have phones present, and if they do have to take a call during a meal, that they leave the room to answer the call; to me, interrupting a meal (and there is no TV when I dine, either) by answering a phone, or texting, is something I consider or deem rather rude, actually, exceedingly rude.
Seriously, that is not a jab; that is an explanation.
@chrono1081 was not seeking to "jab" you; he (I assume that the poster is a "he") was explaining that you - and your message - are not a priority in the mind of the recipient; clearly, neither the existing relationship between the two of you, that is, between you and the tardy texter, nor the situation in question (the week-end activity) warrant that it be seen as a priority.
That is a fact, an explanation, not a jab.
I do the exact same thing for the exact same reason.
Anyway, as time is precious, as a follow up text, might I suggest simply ask them to reply with a "yes please/yes thanks" or a "no thanks".
Last edited:
Bottom line, OP expectations or wish of etiquette is not the unspoken prevailing behavior. It should be clear very few people both from your own anecdotal observation in your circle and in this thread that your view of this is not the consensus. My own brother has a broad spectrum of response times. I don't get bothered by it because I know and most likely with anyone else I know has lives outside of my circle. Kids, Family, work, errands, etc, etc. Your wish for this specific etiquette is not what people desire in the macro view. When cell phones were starting to become ubiquitous I remember the incredibly rude behavior of people answering their phone in inappropriate settings(i.e. in the middle of movie screening). Guess what, people eventually deemed that extremely rude and publicly and privately shamed such behavior and you hardly see it anymore. If the behavior you sought was more desired you'd see a shift in behavior. In your view obviously that's unfortunate. And you want to be validated. Well that's not what most people feel. YOu're gonna have to reconcile this with yourself because that's the only thing you have control over.
Last edited:
So true!
By end of the work week I have a few hundred emails, a few dozen IMs, a crap load (>100) texts across several apps, and several other communications I just could not get to. Both personal and work. Mostly work.
Overload is a great term!
Like it or not, you have to prioritize.
Welcome to the 21st century. Cheers!
I don't know about text etiquette but the prevailing behavior at least in my circles is that texting is great for conveying, but don't hold your breath for a response.
My kids default to facetime when the need is more immediate, even for the most innocuious stuff they'll face time. Many times they'll have a facetime session going and not even talking. My daughter will be doing one thing, her friend on the other end something else, and they're not even talking, just spending time together. That's basically the prevailing behavior in teens around here its seems. Btw, my town seems to be largely an Apple town, as everyone face times and android is a second class citizen.
Depending on my tasks, I also get a lot of texts, many of them are automated - information overload