For the Love of God, Please Stop “like” All My Lyrics.
All in all, texting is an easy and productive way to communicate. Of course, it can get tiresome when I find myself in a group chat that turns into a flood of messages that I don’t care about; in these cases. the ability to drown out an annoying thread is a godsend. But there is another annoying aspect of texting that is completely out of my control and deserves criticism: the seeming inability of some text messages to resist sympathy, fagot, or other emoji responses to every good message I send them. few of those itchy fingers texting among your friends and family are people who think nothing of answering even downright banal messages with cryptic thumbs up, hearts, or exclamation marks, not to mention these texts can really deserve answers containing – GASP – real words.
You might think my gripes are a breeze , but the feedback feature, which allows text messages to reply to messages with simple, unwritten responses like question marks, hearts, and thumbs up or down, is badly used and makes text messages even more impersonal. The Discourse Blog recently encouraged people to come to a consensus on how to properly use thumbs up emoji in texting, but I would push this with a little more energy: you need to use your reply messages sparingly and strategically and use real words more often.
Some minor texts are of great importance
Reacting to text with a heart is not a substitute for gratitude. In this regard, sending someone a heart emoji also pales in comparison to “thank you,” especially the exclamation mark. (I’m not making rules, it’s just that the unspoken intricacies of texting can confuse even the most level-headed of us.)
If I wish you a happy birthday via text message, just reacting to the heart message doesn’t mean you appreciate the gesture. To me, your reaction is a non-verbal yawn, a testament to the tribute pouring in on this special day, which makes it impossible to express gratitude! while you wade through the stream of good wishes.
The same is true for many other types of messages. Why would you put a thumb up or an exclamation point in my message asking, “What are you doing tonight?” Is our brain fluttered by the sheer number of screens and digital notifications vying for our attention? If you get in response to simple messages like “Do you have plans for the evening?” the answer is probably yes.
The text – although more devoid of tangible emotion and nuance than any other form of discussion – should be conversation. And pressing back, especially in a text chain between two people, does not contribute to the conversation at all. Rather, it is like a bear trap that stops the discussion in place.
When someone sends you a joke or a wish for good, I think it’s okay for you to reply with an answer if it is followed by some other subtle textual confirmation. I often add “lol” or “good letter” just to confirm that I actually read the message and did not fall off a cliff staring at my phone.
When kickbacks are good
Don’t get me wrong: if we consider forks at their simplest functional level, they can be quite useful with moderate use. Is someone telling you to remember to lock the back door before leaving the house? React by lifting your finger up – this indicates that the message has been received, and you understand how important it is not to be robbed. Are you in a group chat where someone’s jokes highlight the topic? A simple “ha-ha” reaction is enough – no need to obscure the joker or try to shout down the noise.
Retraction is also a great way to indicate a point. Are you trying to end a continuous conversation? Simply mark the last message with your thumb, assuming that the message was actually received, so to speak.
But it is vital that we do not abuse the power of the branch. There is undeniable usefulness in it, but how appropriate it is is highly dependent on context. So if I text you “hello, how are you?” please, out of love for everything decent in this world, do not raise your finger. Send me a text. It’s right in the title.