Electronic communication has taken off in a big way and now far exceeds that by letter. Proposals and relationship break-ups can be executed online and traumas in the workplace can originate or be quoshed there. There are also those (such as in a happy community like this!) who can only communicate electronically -and how easy it is, sending and recieving when it is convenient, allowing both for pause for thought or spontenaity accordingly.

But generally, should there be an etiquette to such communication? Such as acknowledging a message, replying to a query, or 'letting down gently' in a correspondence which has passed its sell-by?

And is it kind or cowardly (or rude!) to ignore electronic communication?

Thoughts please!

Well, personally I try to answer any e-mails or PMs that I get, if they need an answer..it's only polite.

People who don't bother to respond ('I'm too lazy/busy/hate PMs') are a little rude as you wonder what you've done wrong..or I do anyway. But that's just my opinion, no doubt I could be accused of paranoia or taking things too seriously ('whyyyyyyyyyyyy didn't you answer meeeeeeeeeeee?????????? :laugh:)

Whatever mode of communication that is chosen whether it is email, phone, letter, face to face it is the individuals choice on how and whether to respond which has positive or negative consequences (fairly simplistic description) on the receiver. If I choose to ignore an email or a phone call the consequence for this relates to the type of matter being communicated, my relationship with the person, work/personal context, social rules/context/culture etc.

The only emails I have blocked or ignored generally relate to the spam communications. One particular mail that I have received I have found offensive so I have blocked that.

The particular element re emails is that there is wider access from people to communicate that you may not have chosen to communicate with or indeed invited them in but they are present. The computer provides a screen or a cover to protect the real person so behaviour also can be extreme because there is no-one to face directly the consequences of their interaction.

Prescribed etiquette is, for me, idealistic. Screening protocol would be useful. I generally only like to receive emails from people or organisations that I have consented/invited into my space.

Prescribed etiquette is, for me, idealistic. Screening protocol would be useful. I generally only like to receive emails from people or organisations that I have consented/invited into my space.

I agree 100% with Tonee's post. It was along the lines of what I wanted to say, only I suspect that Tonee has said it better.

As far as I am concerned, a defined etiquette for electronic communication is idealistic. Its a nice idea, but its unrealistic and unenforceable due to the sheer magnitutude of the medium.

Yes, I quite agree. Indeed, in this way internet communication is like any other, in that once it has been mutual on both sides, one expects a response -regardless of whether it is positive, negative or neutral -even if all it does is to reach closure.

Spam/abuse is quite different. I have no problem in rapidly consigning it to the cybertrash!

This thread has wasted minutes of my valuable time and doesn't warrant a response :lol:

I think i must be very lazy as i dont always reply to PM's or emails .... but i get quite annoyed when people do the same to me :laugh:


I do 'try' and answer them, but it can be days before i do, and then i feel hopelessly guilty and spend ages trying to give reasons and explainations why it took me weeks to answer a simple yes or no question :wacko: