[geebee]

I'll give it to you that you aren't a hypocrite - you have no problem with cell phone conversations at the table, and you'd grant other people the right to do this in exchange for your own right to do it.

It doesn't work, though. What you're proposing essentially allows the lowest common denominator to impose a low standard of basic courtesy on everyone else.

Can you think of anything you wouldn't want someone else doing at the table, even in exchange for your own right to do it?

[huggyface]

you have no problem with cell phone conversations at the table

It isn't the lowest common denominator. It is the evolution of society, empowered by new communication methods. I need to know if the nanny has an issue, just as I need to react to critical professional demands, as quickly as possible. Modern technology has made that possible. If someone is personally offended because I keep my smartphone with me and check if I receive priority messages, that's rather quaint and traditionalist, but it doesn't blend with the real world.

[geebee]

I said earlier that I never field a call at the table. That isn't completely true. I (discretely, I hope) noticed that the green light was flashing, and I went outside to listen to the message, because it was from an unlisted number and like you I have kids, one in school, one in daycare.

I guess the big difference is that I don't say "deal with it". I actually felt I owed my colleagues a quick explanation and apology.

Think of how different the reaction would have been if instead of writing this:

"If I am at dinner and I decide that I want to keep on top of my device (I have four children and a very busy professional life), those with me have to deal with it. Most of the time my phone is more important than the discardable conversation happening over a meal."

you'd written something like this instead:

"Because I have four children and I want to be reachable in an emergency, I do keep an eye on my phone and occasionally take a call outside. But I try to do this in a way that minimizes the disruption to the people at the table. I hope that people can understand the distinction between putting your phone on the table and fielding casual conversations."

People are generally pretty nice and understanding if you're respectful rather than telling them to deal with it.

[rokhayakebe]

I need to know if the nanny has an issue, just as I need to react to critical professional demands

How often has this situation happen?

[slantyyz]

My experience with people who like to cite edge cases for their habits is that those cases are either extremely rare, or that issues of less importance are "artificially escalated" to high importance to support their case.

[baddox]

Presumably not very often, but that should make it even more acceptable to keep a phone with you during a dinner.

[huggyface]

This is exactly it. This submission is about a restaurant removing the smartphone from one's person, and the post I replied to took significant issue with people putting their smartphone on the table (which they usually do if they have a notification LED and want to essentially forget about it -- it is actually the least interrupting mechanism of using a phone). So many seem to have taken my reply as some blanket endorsement of endless smartphone use, presenting it as a extremes when it is nothing of the sort.