Yes, thank you so much. I totally wanted and have time for a scavenger hunt + jigsaw puzzle. Clearly you understand enough of the issue to know that I need to handle it but can’t be bothered to spend 45 seconds to summarize the relevant bits.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 hours ago

    honestly I feel the same about people just putting links or media into a post. I get it. Its me. I come here for communication. I want to know at the very least why you felt something was important enough to post. Why did they like it. Why I should like it. Does it have meaning to them. Is it just a laugh. etc. I kinda wish I could block all posts that did not have about as much body as you have up there.

    • Pika@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Valid. I hate link only posts. Especially when the link is to a video with clear clickbait titles. I tend to just keep scrolling. I would love a setting to block posts that are only a link and no details.

    • EastofEdson@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 hours ago

      This drives me crazy. At least give me a description for your YouTube link so I can decide if it interests me. “Check this out” isn’t good enough, give me a bloody reason.

      • HubertManne@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 hours ago

        im a bit of a hypocrite though as I will respond to comments with links to songs or something relevant to convo with no statement. But that is a commment so I feel the bar is lower and usually kinda a joke. like one of the most often ones I do is stan ridgeways I want to be a boss which works with both general work things and things about rich trump holes.

    • forestbeasts@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 hours ago

      No, no it is not.

      It is a case for smarter client software, if anything. Deterministic smarter client software that just shows you the context instead of making it up.

  • Midnight Wolf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I have a filter that checks for “Fwd:” and immediately trashes it. If you cant be bothered to format even the subject line, you’re a lost cause. Cut down significantly on useless shit from my parents especially.

    I have like 150 other filters that sort messages into folders, trash others, and immediately permanently delete others. My inbox now has 1-5 messages in the morning, and usually 1 or 2 throughout the day, vs the like 25-50 daily. Having unique email addresses for each recipient is great too, since if you unsubscibe from some garbage and it doesn’t actually unsubscibe (fuck you, AT&T Business), you can just blackhole it and it’s gone.

    I prefer email to texting or calling, since there’s less expectation of a rapid response, but I got tired of getting so much garbage all the time - and I was already actively trying to keep my inbox clean 15+ years ago.

  • jtrek@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I can’t tell if people who do that kind of thing are lazy and malicious, actually stupid, or stressed beyond their capacity to be decent.

    I do think a lot of people are actually only semi literate, and asking them to write is legitimately difficult and embarrassing for them.

  • i_stole_ur_taco@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 hours ago

    That’s when you reply and fixate on completely the wrong part of the thread. Teach them for not setting the right context.