/ Mark H. Wood wrote on Wed 21.Nov'12 at 9:56:23 -0500 / > Well, when it doesn't work to lecture people who are trying to > communicate, try ignoring them. On public MLs, whenever my "this guy > doesn't know how to communicate effectively" recognizer goes off, I > typically hit 'd' and move on. > > If the sender never notices, you probably haven't missed anything. If > he complains, *then* you get a chance to educate him: > > A: Why don't you answer my emails? > B: Because you write like a drunken monkey? Reading your messages > is bootless and exhausting. > A: Huh? What's wrong with my writing? > > [You have reached the Teachable Moment. Shift to a helpful, > empowering tone and explain how he can get more from the time he > spends on his missives by employing a few powerful conventions. > Notice how I didn't say "improve your writing" or "follow rules"? > There's something that he wants, and you're showing him how to > reach out and take it. You're offering him power and influence, > *for free*.] > > Vary the initial answer in accordance with the audience -- you > probably wouldn't talk to your boss *quite* that way, but you can find > a way that works. Whatever the tactics, the goal is to get him to > wonder "what's wrong with my writing?" Then you can tell him what > could become right about it, which is a lot more interesting.
Your preference, of course, but this just seems unnecessarily intollerant if you ask me. Netiquette is merely a guideline, not a law. People sometimes just reply quickly and therefore forget to adhere to some of the netiquette guidelines, it doesn't mean they should be ignored. Why would you want to adopt such an approach? It's unfriendly and unwelcoming and is one of the reasons people sometimes feel uncomfortable posting to mailing lists in fear of being publicly scorned. Surely that goes against the whole purpose of mailing lists and usenet which is to help people and share information.
