[artumi-richard]

Back in 2006 I read that people don't understand the intended tone in emails. I'm assuming it applies to most text based communication, and is one of the reasons I have devalued email and comments.

The key quote:

"According to recent research published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, I've only a 50-50 chance of ascertaining the tone of any e-mail message. The study also shows that people think they've correctly interpreted the tone of e-mails they receive 90 percent of the time."

I think this means we overlay what we think the intended tone was meant to be on top of the email, and usually it's more to do with us than the content of the email, and I suspect in Coraline's case it was uniformly negative due to unrecognised prejudice. I would suggest that in the corporate setting, if you've not got a relationship with the author of code you shouldn't be able to feedback initially as text, but instead either in person or on the phone. In that way you get the relationship between reporter and coder off to a good start, and follow up text communications will have a better chance of working.

I would actually go so far as to say no-one in a corporate setting should be communicating with each other as text without a phone call or a meeting to introduce each other.

Here's the article that's stuck with me so long:

https://www.wired.com/2006/02/the-secret-cause-of-flame-wars...

[jacobr]

I have started to use emojis almost excessively in situations where there is risk of misinterpretation due to my terseness. It comes across a bit unprofessional, but I prefer that over being considered rude or lacking empathy. I believe the latter impression is harder to recover from.

[raesene6]

I do the same thing. I wouldn't do it in early interactions with someone or with customers, but with colleagues and friends in conversations I often think that terse factual statements can be mis-interpreted, and I'd rather be thought of as unprofessional/frivilous rather than rude.

Also re-reading e-mails whilst mentally putting myself in the shoes of the recipient to see if I think it could be mis-intepreted helps avoid potential issues, I find.

[aws_ls]

Its a wise thing to do. I use it to simulate, how I would do in a face to face communication. So a smiley, where you would actually smile, to soften the blow, or to add humility when pointing somebody's wrong could be useful. Of course its use has to be limited, else it will look like a typical WhatsApp message emoticon train. :)

There are lots of small things, which if more people do, would lead to friendlier communications. E.g. replying with a greeting, to a mail which has greeting.

[plopz]

So your basically adding a laugh track to an email? I think japanese/korean tv do something similar, where they show people's faces in a corner reacting to whatever is on screen so the audience is encouraged towards a certain reaction.

[anc84]

Careful with that, you might just add more confusion! https://grouplens.org/blog/investigating-the-potential-for-m...

[ThrwyAcnt]

Personally, I prefer text communication to calls (and asynchronous to synchronous) to such an extent that such a policy would just result in me not contacting people for simple things.

I know I'm probably rehashing an argument many here have had before, but consider: With text, the whole of your message is visible at once, for rereading. You can include links or files, and the recipient doesn't have to take any notes or do anything special to make this communication archived and searchable. With voice, you need to set aside a specific time to make the call, and the other person needs to drop whatever they're doing to accept it. And, unless you can find some special nook to do it, everyone around you is both subtly bothered by having to listen to you, and able to eavesdrop on your conversation.

The stated reason doesn't seem to hold up either--having one initial voice conversation won't help with any tone conveyance problems down the line. Unless it is used to convince you that the other person is indeed a person, and you shift your default assumption of what their tone might be (which is itself a worrying tribalistic bias, but separate). This, however, could backfire. What if your voice or in-person conversation with the person reveals some personal detail of theirs that makes you dislike them (such as an annoying voice, or personal style, or hygiene, or, more seriously, race or gender)? You'd then be less inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt in future text conversations.

Finally, I know I'm in the minority in this, but I don't get any extra benefit out of voice communications myself anyway. I'm oversimplifying somewhat, but I could say that all non-yelling "tone" is basically indistinguishable to me. Instead, voice communications often end up being a way for the more extroverted speaker to dominate a conversation through sheer force of will. My current boss does this all the time--his writing style is pretty scattered, but, whenever we Skype with someone, he'll rhapsodize at length about his abstract ideas about the current project before some of the other speakers are able to get anything in. I don't mean to be too harsh on him, because, one-on-one, his ideas and direction are often useful, but in these Skype conversations, it often turns out that it's the others' more focused additions that end up being the real product of the meeting, and his only contribution is some high-minded, well, tone-setting.

[artumi-richard]

You've written a lot here, and I don't have much time. My apologies, I will be terse:

1) I prefer text too and ongoing communication requires lots of this. 2) You should be able to call people over simple things. 3) You should have a work environment where calls are OK. I've solved to many problems with a phone in 10 minutes that others have spent a week playing email ping-pong with. 4) An initial conversation does have lasting effects, "First impressions count" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_impression_(psychology) 5) It's not about making people like you, it's about reducing misunderstandings. If you've got open prejudice then this could help to address even that. 6) While you may not learn about someone from a call, especially if you struggle to understand the emotional content of a call, but that doesn't mean they don't understand something about you which eases future communications with that person. 7) Tone setting is really valuable for some people who struggle with focus.