the "things you wish you could say" thread

[mamselle]

Yes.

Very.

Been there, been the one in charge of making sure things happened like that and people got told what was going on.

Were it my situation, heads would've rolled.

Not good at all.

Many more sympathies.

M.

[ergative]

I want to be compensated for getting up early, driving 50 miles and waiting an hour in the heat for an event that did not happen because you didn't manage your time well.

Oh, how awful. Hold that grudge near to your heart and use it to stay strong next time you feel bad about saying no.

[paultuttle]

I want to be compensated for getting up early, driving 50 miles and waiting an hour in the heat for an event that did not happen because you didn't manage your time well.

Oh, how awful. Hold that grudge near to your heart and use it to stay strong next time you feel bad about saying no.

Great advice, actually!

_____

You don't know the first thing about being an American: You obviously haven't read the founding documents, much less the extant written conversations and then-current and later interpretations of those conversations; you don't know a damn thing about what you claim "originalism" is, or else you would have read about our country's history so you wouldn't be doomed to repeat it; you don't wish to expand the high promise of the greatest experiment in democracy on the planet, because it threatens your power, so you're all about taking away rights instead of giving them, which is (again) completely antithetical to the language in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence; and, worst of all, you want to construct some theocratic-fascist mockery of this country's government in some twisted attempt to maintain your place in the socioeconomic pecking order.

Congratulations, you're the problem.

. . . Unfortunately, you're also my neighbor, friend, relative, legislative representative, and/or co-citizen. How the hell can I reach you to let you understand that the values we share are more important (and more crucial to our country's future) than the ones we don't? How can we find a way forward??

[mamselle]

That's the right question.

As Rilke noted, we have to "live ourselves into the answer"....

M.

[fishbrains]

There's nothing mysterious about my grading system. The only reason you "don't know where your grade came from" is because you can't do 4th grade math.

[hmaria1609]

Congrats! You're saying something that'll come back to bite you down the road. Don't look at us if this event can't be greenlit/approved in time.

[evil_physics_witchcraft]

I wish I could say, 'I'm no longer talking to you since you are such a toxic person.'

[sinenomine]

Why ... why ... do you think that 40 extra people need to read your message to one person?! Don't use Reply All!

[EdnaMode]

Dear "Scholarly Communication Librarian,"

Your email to me was neither scholarly nor very communicative, nor was it very professional. Starting with "Hey Edna," and then not including the Journal volume or number, the author(s), the title, or any other relevant information on the article you are enquiring about [aside comment, I'm a journal editor] is not going to get you the information you need. Your email was as bad, or worse, than those I receive from my first-semester freshpeeps.

Best professional regards,

EM

My actual reply simply asked for more information but dang, who is teaching these people how to write work-related emails? Probably no one.

[apl68]

Why ... why ... do you think that 40 extra people need to read your message to one person?! Don't use Reply All!

I see that mistake pretty often.  I can see how anybody could accidentally hit "Reply All" now and then, but it does puzzle me how certain people seem to do it all the time.  For things that pretty obviously wouldn't be of any particular use or interest to "All."  We get an e-mail every Monday from our local Rotary Club president asking who plans to attend Thursday's luncheon meeting.  She needs to know how many meals to have catered.  Invariably we have a couple of people who let everybody on the list know that they plan to attend.  It's usually the same ones each week.  It's a bit baffling.

[mamselle]

Sometimes it's hard to tell the digital illiterates from those who just want to blow their own horn to as large an audience as possible.

Sometimes they're the same people.

M.

[ciao_yall]

Was that really necessary?

[poiuy]

Why ... why ... do you think that 40 extra people need to read your message to one person?! Don't use Reply All!

I often have the opposite problem. I have undergraduates on my research team, and I routinely (and repeatedly) have to remind them to 'reply all' on team related emails so that everyone gets relevant updates. These emails are not very frequent so people's inboxes are not getting filled and the updates are important to keep things clear.

Maybe they are emailing from their phones and 'reply all' is not the default and is a click or two away, so it takes a tiny bit more effort, and that's why they often don't do it.

[Liquidambar]

Why ... why ... do you think that 40 extra people need to read your message to one person?! Don't use Reply All!

I often have the opposite problem. I have undergraduates on my research team, and I routinely (and repeatedly) have to remind them to 'reply all' on team related emails so that everyone gets relevant updates. These emails are not very frequent so people's inboxes are not getting filled and the updates are important to keep things clear.

Maybe they are emailing from their phones and 'reply all' is not the default and is a click or two away, so it takes a tiny bit more effort, and that's why they often don't do it.

I was about to post a similar thing.  Sometimes I'll be scheduling a meeting with multiple students, and each student will reply only to me so I have to keep adding the other students back into the email chain.

It seems to be a generational thing.  Old people reply all when they shouldn't.  Young people fail to when they should.

[marshwiggle]

Why ... why ... do you think that 40 extra people need to read your message to one person?! Don't use Reply All!

I often have the opposite problem. I have undergraduates on my research team, and I routinely (and repeatedly) have to remind them to 'reply all' on team related emails so that everyone gets relevant updates. These emails are not very frequent so people's inboxes are not getting filled and the updates are important to keep things clear.

Maybe they are emailing from their phones and 'reply all' is not the default and is a click or two away, so it takes a tiny bit more effort, and that's why they often don't do it.

I was about to post a similar thing.  Sometimes I'll be scheduling a meeting with multiple students, and each student will reply only to me so I have to keep adding the other students back into the email chain.

I don't reply to the whole group if it's just to a yes or no question, such as "Can everyone meet at 10 a.m. Tuesday?" since I have no interest in just seeing 15 emails to say "Yes I can" or "No I can't". The person who is deciding whether there is quorum or not is the only one who needs to see those.