Chat vs Email



  • I tend to limit my chat transmissions to tweet-sized chunks.

    I was IMing back and forth with a coworker when she needed to send me an explanation of something. While I had stepped away for a few moments, she tried to copy/paste the contents of a 10 page Word document into the chat window. Naturally, it truncated most of it. She was smart enough to realize that it had a message size limit, so she cut and pasted the whole thing, 3 lines at a time, into the chat sesssion.

    Then she sends me an e-mail asking me if I was able to see all the information in the IM window.

    wow

     

     



  • Next time tell her to reverse the polarity of her thought process, it might actually make her do something smart.



  • @snoofle said:

    wow

    I'd hesitate to say...

     

    WTF!?

     

    There you have it, its the Whatsapp generation.



  • @snoofle said:

    Then she sends me an e-mail asking me if I was able to see all the information in the IM window.
    No, sorry, it only goes back about 10 messages.  Rats.  Maybe you could send it again?



  • @boog said:

    @snoofle said:
    Then she sends me an e-mail asking me if I was able to see all the information in the IM window.
    No, sorry, it only goes back about 10 messages.  Rats.  Maybe you could send it again?
    You, Good Sir, are evil.

    Actually, after a few minutes our conversations get saved in Outlook. From there, you can swipe and edit the whole thing back to something coherent relatively quickly and painlessly, but I didn't want her to get into the habit of doing this again and again.



  • @snoofle said:

    You, Good Sir, are evil.

    I meant well though:

    coworker: Did you get that thing I sent you?

    snoofle: No, sorry, rats.  Send again?

    coworker: Ugh!  No, that takes too long.  Can I just email it to you?

    snoofle: Well... if you think that would work.

    Problem solved.



  • I was thinking that too - there's no better encouragement to use a different/better method than the user finding flaws in the existing method. Let them "discover" the benefits for themselves, then they'll follow that path.



  • @Cassidy said:

    I was thinking that too - there's no better encouragement to use a different/better method than the user finding flaws in the existing method. Let them "discover" the benefits for themselves, then they'll follow that path.
    Error: On line 1:  humanStupidity is a const, no methods can override this.



  • @Anketam said:

    @Cassidy said:

    I was thinking that too - there's no better encouragement to use a different/better method than the user finding flaws in the existing method. Let them "discover" the benefits for themselves, then they'll follow that path.
    Error: On line 1:  humanStupidity is a const, no methods can override this.

    Damn straight. And if the user trying to paste 10-page docs into chat is in senior management, expect to be assigned a year-long project to migrate the entire company to a different chat server that does support pasting 10-page docs.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @Anketam said:

    @Cassidy said:

    I was thinking that too - there's no better encouragement to use a different/better method than the user finding flaws in the existing method. Let them "discover" the benefits for themselves, then they'll follow that path.
    Error: On line 1:  humanStupidity is a const, no methods can override this.

    Damn straight. And if the user trying to paste 10-page docs into chat is in senior management, expect to be assigned a year-long project to migrate the entire company to a different chat server that does support pasting 10-page docs.

    This is where ridicule actually helps. If you call someone up to give them a friendly ribbing about the daft thing they just did, they can't then claim it's not daft without looking stupid.



  • @fterfi secure said:

    If you call someone up to give them a friendly ribbing about the daft thing they just did, they can't then claim it's not daft without looking stupid.

    That depends on their attitude. Plenty of people dig in their heels when given a "friendly ribbing". And if they have the power to take vengeance on you, well, look out..



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @fterfi secure said:
    If you call someone up to give them a friendly ribbing about the daft thing they just did, they can't then claim it's not daft without looking stupid.

    That depends on their attitude. Plenty of people dig in their heels when given a "friendly ribbing". And if they have the power to take vengeance on you, well, look out..

    Yeah, you need to handle it right. But if you call someone up in a jokey way to give them a friendly bit of mockery about something, it's hard for the tone to change to one where they can tell you it's a technical problem. You need to make sure it's a 'here's one of those funny things we all do from time to time' rather than 'what an idiot you are ha ha ha'.



  • @fterfi secure said:

    @morbiuswilters said:
    @fterfi secure said:
    If you call someone up to give them a friendly ribbing about the daft thing they just did, they can't then claim it's not daft without looking stupid.

    That depends on their attitude. Plenty of people dig in their heels when given a "friendly ribbing". And if they have the power to take vengeance on you, well, look out..

    Yeah, you need to handle it right. But if you call someone up in a jokey way to give them a friendly bit of mockery about something, it's hard for the tone to change to one where they can tell you it's a technical problem. You need to make sure it's a 'here's one of those funny things we all do from time to time' rather than 'what an idiot you are ha ha ha'.

    You mean.. tell someone they're wrong without calling them names? I.. that's not.. you can't just..



  •  Have to ask...

    Potamus?



  •  @Anketam said:

    @Cassidy said:

    I was thinking that too - there's no better encouragement to use a different/better method than the user finding flaws in the existing method. Let them "discover" the benefits for themselves, then they'll follow that path.
    Error: On line 1:  humanStupidity is a const, no methods can override this.

    In all fairness, he never said anything about overriding the humanStupidity const, just encouraging the user to use an alternate method.

    Don't get me wrong - I'm pretty sure the user will manage to fuck-up sending the document through email (hopefully not 3 lines at a time).  But it's a bit harsh to say that stupid users can't be trained just because they're stupid.

     



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    You mean.. tell someone they're wrong without calling them names? I.. that's not.. you can't just..

    Relax, it's not mandatory. Take a deep breath. Relax. There, now. Click on the next link and proceed to insult fuckwittery. See? They haven't stopped you!

    @boog said:

    In all fairness, he never said anything about
    overriding the humanStupidity const, just encouraging the user to use an
    alternate method.

    That's the fellah.

    Stupidity can't really be overridden, but it can be highlighted - and once this occurs, the runaway lorry of stupidity begins to auto-brake. Similarly, redirecting to an alternate path means that occasionally stupidity can be bypassed. Not always the case, but I've been fairly successful in that approach.

     



  • @Cassidy said:

    the runaway lorry of stupidity
    If this was my metaphor, the stupid users would have been pushed in front of the lorry at some point.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

     Oddly enough, I tend to write more verbose IMs than emails. This is because my emails tend to largely fall into four buckets: "Here's that thing you asked for" "Not my problem" "Simple question I don't need an answer for immediately" and "Thanks". Essentially, asynchronous stuff I may not even be wanting a reply for.

    I end up using IMs for in-depth troubleshooting and more technical discussions.



  • @Cassidy said:

    the runaway lorry of stupidity
    Which actually exists, see this footage:

    Lorry pushes car down at 60 mph in Yorkshire – 00:28
    — ODN



  • @token_woman said:

    @Cassidy said:
    the runaway lorry of stupidity
    Which actually exists, see this footage:

    Lorry pushes car down at 60 mph in Yorkshire – 00:28
    — ODN

    Haha that movie is awesome. Who knew the forest-loving furry guy from that Dr. Suess book was such a bitch on the freeways.



  • Out the way nigga!





  • @blakeyrat said:

    @token_woman said:
    @Cassidy said:
    the runaway lorry of stupidity
    Which actually exists, see this footage:

    Lorry pushes car down at 60 mph in Yorkshire – 00:28
    — ODN

    Haha that movie is awesome. Who knew the forest-loving furry guy from that Dr. Suess book was such a bitch on the freeways.

    And the title says "mph" but it clearly should be "millimetres per arcseconds" or whatever-the-fuck the tea-backs use.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    And the title says "mph" but it clearly should be "millimetres per arcseconds" or whatever-the-fuck the tea-backs use.
     

    Jimmies per knave.



  • @dhromed said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    And the title says "mph" but it clearly should be "millimetres per arcseconds" or whatever-the-fuck the tea-backs use.
     

    Jimmies per knave.

    Cornwallises per tilly-willy-wamoo.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @dhromed said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    And the title says "mph" but it clearly should be "millimetres per arcseconds" or whatever-the-fuck the tea-backs use.
     

    Jimmies per knave.

    Cornwallises per tilly-willy-wamoo.

     

    I don't really know what you mean.

     



  • @dhromed said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Cornwallises per tilly-willy-wamoo.
     

    I don't really know what you mean.

     

    That's because he's using the Brittish spelling. "Cornwalliz per tile-wile-wamu".  Make more sense now?

     



  • @Lorne Kates said:

    That's because he's using the Brittish spelling. "Cornwalliz per tile-wile-wamu".  Make more sense now?
     

    Google translate has trouble with Cymraeg.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.