[HN Gopher] Please don't say just hello in chat
___________________________________________________________________
Please don't say just hello in chat
Author : mooreds
Score : 74 points
Date : 2023-07-06 21:29 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (nohello.net)
(TXT) w3m dump (nohello.net)
| booleandilemma wrote:
| I don't mind an innocent "hello" or "good morning", etc.
|
| If you're antisocial then maybe working in a company isn't for
| you.
|
| Hello everybody!
| version_five wrote:
| That has nothing to do with the message here. This is about
| saying hello and then waiting for a reply as a prelude to a
| longer discussion.
| ThinkingGuy wrote:
| Even worse than just "hello":
|
| Following it up with just "how are you?"
|
| (Yes, I've had coworkers who would actually do this)
| simion314 wrote:
| I would love if people would send just 1 big message instead of
| splitting it in multi lines and send them one of a time. I prefer
| to get 1 notifications not 3+ and having to check and then see
| the "X is typing " message
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| Blackthorn wrote:
| Where I work people indicate their preference by saying "no
| hello" or "yes hello" (or rather the corp equivalent of it here).
| Works pretty well. This problem is entirely solvable!
| sentientslug wrote:
| Where is this preference recorded for each employee? A status
| message?
| Stratoscope wrote:
| This is something every pilot learns early in their training.
|
| You don't do this:
|
| Pilot: "San Jose tower, Cessna 54321"
|
| Tower: "Cessna 321, San Jose tower, state your position and
| request"
|
| Pilot: "Tower, Cessna 321 is five miles to the southeast"
|
| Tower (starting to sound annoyed) "Cessna 321, _and your request
| please?_ "
|
| Pilot: "I'd like a straight-in landing on runway 30 right"
|
| Tower (if pilot is lucky) "321 cleared for straight-in approach
| and landing 30 right"
|
| Instead, you do this:
|
| Pilot: "San Jose tower, Cessna 54321 five miles southeast,
| request straight-in landing 30 right"
|
| Tower: "Cessna 321, San Jose tower, cleared for straight-in
| approach and landing 30 right"
| [deleted]
| Ntrails wrote:
| I am super guilty of sending 4 messages instead of 1.
|
| Hey
|
| Did you see that thread in #hn_feed?
|
| I remember you asking about the right way to sand the wood before
| painting - some great ideas.
|
| Also - cake on the 4th floor kitchen fyi
|
| Since nobody in my entire office answers messages in the time it
| takes me to write those four, I struggle to feel guilty.
| burnished wrote:
| I don't think the problem described is staccatto bursts (at
| least I hope, I do the same thing), but adding a synchronous
| element to the communication that doesn't add thing.
|
| I think what you do is pretty in line with this ethos - the
| other person is pretty free to prioritize your messages as they
| see fit
| eagleseye wrote:
| I suppose, as long as these 4 messages arrive in quick
| succession you're fine. If you wait a minute between sending
| each, that's where you should feel guilty :P
| Volundr wrote:
| Honestly as long as they second message comes promptly after
| the first this doesn't bother me at all. It's when the "Hey" is
| just left out there by itself that annoys me.
| wintorez wrote:
| Unbind Enter key from Send. You will thank me later.
| commandlinefan wrote:
| Or, alternatively, you could: deal with me saying hello.
| dekhn wrote:
| These days, I start wiht a hello, and inline with that, a call to
| not respond if the person is OOO or it's outside of work hours, a
| bit of context on the problem, several links to the relevant
| code/pipeline failure, a specific request for what I need to
| know, another request to actually answer my question and not
| solve another unrelated problem, an unrelated sportsball comment,
| and then finally, what I actually needed.
|
| Then when they're online I can just re-paste that.
| meghan_rain wrote:
| hi
| ChrisArchitect wrote:
| (2013)
| ChrisArchitect wrote:
| Some discussion a year ago:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30642052
| ano-ther wrote:
| I don't like just hi either, but people tell me they do it
| because they don't want to disturb me and don't know if I may be
| sharing my screen - so it is well-intentioned.
|
| I once was on a WebEx when the presenter was notified by her
| manager about the company car she would get for her promotion in
| a thread with many details. Very insightful.
| rodgerd wrote:
| I do not for the life of me understand why people have not got
| into the habit of sharing windows, not screens.
| adrr wrote:
| I could also have people at my desk looking at my screen as
| we go over some code or a project plan. Messaging services
| are for urgent matters which usually have some privileged
| info. If it's just a non urgent question or request, send an
| email so you don't interrupt people. Biggest issue with
| messaging services is that they easily abused for things that
| can done via asynchronous communication. They become big
| distractions.
| andrewmunsell wrote:
| Your notifications aren't automatically silenced when
| presenting your screen?
| fsflover wrote:
| No, on Qubes OS, different apps work in indepenent VMs and
| don't know about each other.
| ano-ther wrote:
| Oh, they are. It's part of my routine when I get a new setup.
| But the people pinging me cannot know and want to be
| considerate.
| naikrovek wrote:
| they can be in every tool I've used, and are also on by
| default, so I think this is a lot of people shooting
| themselves in the foot.
|
| when I am on support, if you ping me with only "hi" or
| "hello" or some other simple greeting, I will simply not
| respond to you until you give me something actionable for me
| to look at. if you don't say your problem and provide some
| info about what you need, then I have neither the time nor
| the desire to pull it out of you. tell me what you need or I
| will not respond.
| asdkjkasjd wrote:
| lol, I can't do anything in any of these meeting softwares
| unless I'm using some specific OS+Browser combination that
| nobody actually uses.
| debo_ wrote:
| hello
| unglaublich wrote:
| This all assumes the person doesn't have a reason to verify your
| presence before doing a brain dump.
|
| Maybe they do. Maybe they want to make sure you're there; maybe
| their issue is dependent on the time; maybe they want to
| send/receive a TOTP; maybe the whole point of the conversation is
| to check whether the medium is functional; maybe they want to
| send you something sensitive...
| mastazi wrote:
| You could hint that the convo needs to be synchronous, e.g.
| "Hey, let me know when you have a few minutes to spare / can
| jump on a call" or something along those lines.
| OkayPhysicist wrote:
| If you're sending a message like that, you should at least
| include a subject. "Hey, let me know when you have a few
| minutes to spare / can jump on a call to talk about the
| company's new live squirrels project"
| mastazi wrote:
| Yes, I agree, I should have added that in my example
| mason55 wrote:
| None of these are counterarguments
|
| > _Maybe they want to make sure you 're there_
|
| There's not even an a real scenario here
|
| > _maybe their issue is dependent on the time_
|
| "Hi, I have a time sensitive question about X, are you
| available to help for a minute?"
|
| honestly that's much more likely to get a response from me than
| "hi" anyway, because I know it's urgent, assuming you're not
| someone who abuses the idea of urgent.
|
| > _maybe they want to send /receive a TOTP_
|
| "Hey, I need a TOTP real fast, are you around?"
|
| And my response would be "no, I'm not sharing my TOTP with you"
| but alas
|
| > _maybe the whole point of the conversation is to check
| whether the medium is functional_
|
| "Hey, having trouble with Slack today, are you seeing this?"
|
| Again, I'd be much more likely to respond than just "hi" that
| might turn into a real time suck for me
|
| > _maybe they want to send you something sensitive_
|
| "Hey, are you screen sharing? want to send you some budget
| numbers"
|
| None of these are improved by just saying "hi"
| imbnwa wrote:
| I really wish people would stop treating IM as a proxy for
| face-to-face interactions. It isn't that, because we are
| _not_ face-to-face, but that 's how these IM apps got their
| contracts, sadly.
|
| Email forces people to wait, be patient, be clear about what
| they want to say since its much more obvious engaging in
| face-to-face conventions in that medium is hella annoying.
| klausa wrote:
| This is all better accomplished by explicitly saying all of
| that:
|
| "Hey, you around? I need a help with a $time-sensitive-thing"
| or "Hey, ping me when you're around, I need a 2FA code for
| $XYZ", instead of just "hello".
| Lt_Riza_Hawkeye wrote:
| Hey, are you there? I need a 2fa code for the netflix account
| Volundr wrote:
| This message I will reply to if/when I'm around. I know
| exactly what I'm getting into. "Hi" could be I have a quick
| two second thing, or I'm about to dump 6 pages on you and
| expect a reply in a few minutes. I'll reply when I'm prepared
| to deal with the latter. Maybe.
| mastazi wrote:
| > This message I will reply to if/when I'm around.
|
| which is perfect because the precondition is that the other
| person wanted to know if/when you're around
|
| > "Hi" could be I have a quick two second thing, or I'm
| about to dump 6 pages on you
|
| so you agree that "Hi" carries zero information and should
| be avoided?
| Volundr wrote:
| Yes exactly. I'm agreeing that this is the right
| alternative and will get a response from me much faster
| than the empty "Hi". "Hi" <brief description of why I'm
| reaching out> is always superior.
| twodave wrote:
| That's the point--it's ambiguous. It's better to use more words
| to indicate what you're saying hi for than to try and force me
| to acknowledge you by hiding your reasons up front. That is a
| form of manipulation.
| burnished wrote:
| That is kind of a terminally online attitude about it don't
| you think? Exchanging pleasantries before getting to the
| point is a part of a lot of cultures in-person verbal
| communication and the point is to avoid the appearance or
| actuality of treating another person as a machine to be
| operated for maximum profit.
|
| It just doesn't translate to online text communications at
| all, is so maladapted that it becomes actively rude.
|
| Its gauche to call shennanigans on a simple faux-paus
| xur17 wrote:
| This feels like the sort of thing that could be easily solved
| with technology. Something like: if I receive a message on slack
| with the message hi, how are you, hello, or something similar,
| wait 15 minutes to notify me about it. For all other messages,
| notify me as normal.
| bluefishinit wrote:
| It's a social issue, not a technological one. People just need
| to be ok communicating with people who have different styles.
| _Most_ people do not care to optimize their communication like
| this and will have a more natural way of speaking, including
| starting a conversation with "hi".
| comfypotato wrote:
| If the people at the receiving end are annoyed by the
| interruption, they have every right to implement a solution.
|
| Your remark implies the "hello" folks are correct, and that
| is purely opinion.
| gAI wrote:
| None of that is how communication works. It requires
| (basically equal) effort on the part of the sender and the
| receiver. Gatekeeping communication styles is just a
| symptom of not having control in other areas.
| bluefishinit wrote:
| If people are annoyed by someone saying "hi" then yes, I
| think they are in the wrong and creating a hostile work
| environment. I've worked on a lot of different teams, and
| people who complain about stuff like this are always the
| single biggest drag on morale. Teams should practice
| tolerance, trust and flexibility, _especially_ remote
| teams.
| mrdude42 wrote:
| YES. I completely 100% agree. Try to minimize the number of
| messages you're going to send. Just saying "Hi" and then also
| saying what you want to ask just makes my phone ring twice
| instead of once and that just gets more annoying with each
| subsequent message you send before I have a chance to respond.
| hamasho wrote:
| I'm pretty sure this is what my chatgpt thinks whenever I say hi.
| I know it's annoying, but you respond so quickly and gladly, so I
| can't stop starting the chat with hi. I should stop this, or I
| would begin to do the same to real humans on Slack.
| another_story wrote:
| You have the choice to ignore the hi. Seems like a non-issue.
| Dudester230602 wrote:
| Just ignore the 'hi'-sayers. Either they will go away or they
| will state the matter. Make sure their message is marked as read,
| so that they would understand.
| caconym_ wrote:
| I think "no hello" evangelists should emphasize that you can say
| hello if you want, as long as you follow up with your actual
| question/request in the same message. The point isn't that the
| "hello" itself is a critical waste of some human resource, but
| rather that interrupting somebody with "hello" and then making
| them wait for something actionable is disruptive and frustrating.
|
| This may seem obvious to many, but I don't think it's universally
| understood.
| SteeCee wrote:
| Saying hello and then your inquiry is what every example in the
| website says is the right thing to do. Who is saying you
| shouldn't say hello at all?
| burnished wrote:
| I think the tone being kind of sassy and put apon over a
| small inconvenience shifts the focus from the more
| constructive parts of the message and in that sense I agree
| with the person you are responding to - the etiquette
| evangelists might be more effective if they did less spleen
| venting.
| em3rgent0rdr wrote:
| The marketing of "no hello" (nohello.net) is contrary to what
| those examples say. So maybe there is a better way to market
| it instead of "no hello". Like maybe "just ask the question",
| or "start with a query", or "Don't just hello".
| bluefishinit wrote:
| Please don't complain about how people use chat, it's super
| annoying. Just say "hi" back, it's not going to kill you.
| jonny_eh wrote:
| hi
| throwbadubadu wrote:
| hi
| johnea wrote:
| hello
| mrdude42 wrote:
| hey
| lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote:
| I'll be saying "hi" back the next hundred times they bother me
| with literally nothing. No thanks, I'll ignore it until they
| ask me something.
| outworlder wrote:
| That wastes everyone's time. 'hi' is fine at a personal
| setting. At work, you waste time for a reply, then the reply to
| the reply, and only then the person will state their request.
| This can take hours if done across timezones.
|
| Just say "Hi. <Request>"
| bluepizza wrote:
| How is typing "hi" a waste of time?
| JoshuaEN wrote:
| Because the initial "hi" forces a context switch which the
| recipient (after reading and replying) has to either: Sit
| idle while the sender writes their actual question, or try
| to context switch back for a tiny amount of time.
|
| 10:30:01 [Coworker] hi
|
| 10:30:12 [Me] hi
|
| 10:30:35 [Coworker] do you have time for a call?
|
| 10:30:39 [Me] sure
|
| Versus:
|
| 10:30:01 [Coworker] hi, do you have time for a call?
|
| 10:30:16 [Me] sure
|
| This example isn't really that bad, but it is showing
| basically the best case with a simple question. It gets a
| lot worse if the sender actually has to type out a long
| message, or if there's a gap between each response because
| the other person was busy at the time.
| bluefishinit wrote:
| How is it "wasting time"? It takes less than a second to type
| "hi". Presumably you have something you're doing while you
| wait to hear back, no? Not being uptight and pedantic is far
| superior to trying to "optimize" everyone's time by forcing
| them to communicate in an unnatural way.
| Ecstatify wrote:
| The person initiating the interaction should make it as
| easy as possible for the other person.
|
| For example I work with multiple different timezones, I
| have meetings all morning. I can quickly answer questions
| if they're straight to the point. Daily I'll get 10-15
| people contacting me about X topic. If it's not straight to
| the point I can't help, it will be after lunch before I can
| and then it's probably too late.
| bluefishinit wrote:
| I think if "hi" is causing problems, you have larger
| process issues. For instance, it sounds like you're
| overloaded and understaffed. The issue isn't with "hi",
| it's with running the machine at too high a pace to
| absorb even basic social interaction without derailing.
| That's a problem.
| error_500 wrote:
| I'm so glad we don't work together
| [deleted]
| lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote:
| > communicate in an unnatural way
|
| Neurodivergent individuals are expected _every day_ to
| communicate in unnatural ways (to them). Everybody is
| different and everybody will communicate differently.
| People who have something to get done have their own
| responsibility to make sure their question or concern is
| addressed and saying "hi" with nothing else isn't doing
| them any favors.
|
| I appreciate that you voiced this opinion and especially
| that you're willing to back it up. If it helps, there are
| some who are at least kind enough not to pedantically reply
| with a link to this website. I might sometimes even choose
| to respond back with a "What's up?" but I don't make a
| habit of it as a rule.
| eyelidlessness wrote:
| The time wasted isn't saying hi back. The time wasted is
|
| 1. Some nonzero time waiting in case of a prompt reply to
| the initial hi.
|
| 2. Some probably greater time waiting for an async
| response.
|
| 3. The time it takes to restore previous mental context and
| flow.
|
| 4. 1-3 again, but with the parties reversed. And, let's be
| honest, probably for a longer duration.
|
| All time spent to convey approximately zero information.
| barefootcoder wrote:
| Because the query is an interruption. Frustratingly, about
| 30% of the time (or more!) the person who sent me the hi
| doesn't send their actual question even if I respond almost
| instantly after it's sent, so I've stopped responding to a
| bare hi.
|
| Moreover, now that I'm interrupted I can't really go back
| to what I'm doing because I know that (presumably) a
| question is coming very soon, so the interruption clock has
| already started and I have to sit and wait while they
| painfully slowly type the actual question.
|
| And then there's the frequent case where I get a bare hi,
| but cannot get back to it until a few hours later, and then
| that person is offline -- but I don't know what they
| needed, so I cannot ask them and cannot send a response. If
| they'd have just included their question then I could just
| answer it and we'd all be better off.
|
| I've just gotten to where I just refuse to answer a bare
| hi... if that's all you're willing to type, then I guess
| you didn't need anything.
| bluefishinit wrote:
| If I'm heads down with something, I don't check my
| Slack/Discord... if I'm not, I have the bandwidth to
| chat. Sometimes people do just want to say hi.
| crop_rotation wrote:
| It just delays everything and wastes everyone's time. Nobody is
| complaining, more like a request that sending context with
| hello would save everyone's time.
| twodave wrote:
| Saying "hi" back implies that I have time to listen to you
| right now. Maybe I don't, or maybe I'd like to wait to decide
| until I know what you want.
|
| And it's not always "hi" anyway. I used to have one of our
| C-levels DM me on Slack almost daily with some form of
| "hellllp!" No context whatsoever. Eventually I figured out they
| had a list of people they thought were helpful and would just
| spam that list for any kind of thing they needed. I stopped
| responding and got myself off their list. Problem solved haha.
| bluefishinit wrote:
| While the original article doesn't mention it, I think there
| are two issues here, one of which you allude to.
|
| 1. Someone in a position of authority making context-less
| contact: "hi", "helllp!"... this is going to cause anxiety
| and fear in nearly anyone and leadership should avoid doing
| this at all costs.
|
| 2. Regular people communicating in a "normal" way by starting
| a conversation off with "hi". Maybe they're not so online as
| to be honed with IM etiquette, maybe they just like to say
| hi. Regardless, their intent is not malicious and a healthy
| and collaborative culture should be able to handle their
| natural (and quite popular) social communication style.
| Selfcommit wrote:
| I wonder if your tone and advice still make sense in these
| similar scenarios:
|
| 1. You have a large number of peers who start chat
| conversations with "Hi, are you busy?" That question is begged
| with just "hi" and implies a forced urgency.
|
| 2. All your coworkers start email threads with "hi" and wait
| for peers to respond before continuing. If that seems
| ridiculous, you now have an idea what "hi" is like for remote
| workers.
| gAI wrote:
| If I've already emailed someone and they haven't responded in
| 48 hours, can I send a message that just says "Hi" or is "Hi,
| respond to your email" more appropriate?
| jwagenet wrote:
| It's as simple as "Hey gAI, I sent an email about xyz the
| other day, have you had a chance to look at it?" No need to
| say nothing but hi or be indirect.
| gAI wrote:
| If someone's not responding to their emails, they've
| already failed to meet me halfway in communication. It's
| not my responsibility to go even further before they make
| a first attempt.
| bluefishinit wrote:
| > If that seems ridiculous, you now have an idea what "hi" is
| like for remote workers.
|
| I've been remote for 10+ years. I've never once had a problem
| telling someone "hi", even on large teams. I do find that the
| people concerned about these type of "micro productivity"
| issues tend to make for un-harmonious team members and
| ultimately drag down the productivity of the team, often to
| the point of chasing out good employees with their toxic
| attitudes.
| as_bntd wrote:
| Saying hi can actually cause disharmony by confusing newer
| team members:
|
| For example:
|
| > How am I supposed to respond to a bare 'hi' after I asked
| a question?
| bluefishinit wrote:
| I've never had anyone ask me such a strange question. I
| think most humans know that when someone says "hi" you
| say "hi" back, I don't see how that could be confusing to
| new team members.
| Dudester230602 wrote:
| I assume that the person is gathering their thoughts and give
| them plenty of time without replying anything at all.
| mooreds wrote:
| Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30642052
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-07-06 23:02 UTC)