5 ms·

No, it won't. I distinctly remember being told by many people that email would never replace letter mail because email was too impersonal.

by dunno 12y ago

dunno 12y ago
Are you kidding me? In my lifetime, letter mail has had a longer run than email. And you presume from our brief couple years with it that email is never going to be different?
moron4hire 12y ago
"Impersonal" was only ever a label applied to email by people who didn't yet have access to the Internet, jealous they were being excluded. It's the same people who decried smartphones. In all areas that matter, email is superior to paper letters. And in all areas that matter, no one has proposed an alternative to email that is superior in a way that cannot be applied to email. In other words, whatever is wrong about email, can be fixed from within the system. Paper letters had to become email to fix what was wrong with paper letters.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > "Impersonal" was only ever a label applied to email by people who didn't yet have access to the Internet, jealous they were being excluded. This is factually incorrect. Everone I've ever heard use the term to describe email had internet access and was a regular email user at the time they used the term. I'm sure some people who didn't have email have used the term, and I'm sure some of those people had the motivation you describe, but it is simply not true that it was "only ever" used by people without access to the internet (or, more relevantly, email -- whether on the internet or otherwise, as electronic mail existed on networks besides the internet.) > In all areas that matter, email is superior to paper letters. "areas that matter" is a subjective category (and, further, superiority in each of those areas is, generally, subjective as well), it may well be superior to you in each of the areas that matter to you, but those subjective judgements may not hold more generally.
  - silverbax88 12y ago
    You say something is factually incorrect based on your own experiences, then comment on subjectivity? Are you being serious, or kidding? I honestly can't tell.
    - dragonwriter 12y ago
      > You say something is factually incorrect based on your own experiences Well, yes, a categorical claim that something was "only ever" used by people with certain objective features and for a particular reason is factually incorrect if it was ever used by people without those features or for a different reason, so personal experience, while inadequate to establish that it is factually correct, can be quite sufficient to establish that it is factually incorrect. (You'll note that while I state that the categorical claim is clearly factually incorrect, that it is also quite likely that, while not a categorical truth, there have been at least some dismissals that fit the pattern that it falsely claims is the exclusive pattern for all dismissals of email as "impersonal" -- the error isn't in saying that some people describe email as impersonal for the particular reason described, but in claiming that that is the only reason email has ever been described as "impersonal" by anyone.) > then comment on subjectivity The comment on subjectivity was on a different statement (a claim of what is superior and what matters, both of which are inherently subjective) not the categorical fact claim. Recognizing the difference between subjective statements and fact claims is pretty important to being able to participate in a productive discussion of pretty much any topic, IMO. > Are you being serious, or kidding? The former.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - notahacker 12y ago
      They countered an assertion that people that a particular statement about the impersonality of email was "only ever" made by people without access to email by asserting the existence of multiple people they had known to make that particular statement about the impersonality about email whilst possessing an email address. Which would make the former statement factually incorrect even if the second poster's experiences were atypical. There's nothing "subjective" about logically refuting one sweeping general claim with a counterexample from ones own experience, unless we're getting really postmodern about whether people actually recall others referring to email as impersonal whilst possessing email addresses or just perceive that to be the case... </pedantry>
- dunno 12y ago
  Sorry, this is beyond factually incorrect, and only proves you never dated before email.

No, it won't. I distinctly remember being told by many people that email would never replace letter mail because email was too impersonal.

by dunno 12y ago

No, it won't. I distinctly remember being told by many people that email would never replace letter mail because email was too impersonal.

dunno 12y ago

Are you kidding me? In my lifetime, letter mail has had a longer run than email. And you presume from our brief couple years with it that email is never going to be different?

moron4hire 12y ago

"Impersonal" was only ever a label applied to email by people who didn't yet have access to the Internet, jealous they were being excluded. It's the same people who decried smartphones. In all areas that matter, email is superior to paper letters. And in all areas that matter, no one has proposed an alternative to email that is superior in a way that cannot be applied to email. In other words, whatever is wrong about email, can be fixed from within the system. Paper letters had to become email to fix what was wrong with paper letters.

dragonwriter 12y ago
> "Impersonal" was only ever a label applied to email by people who didn't yet have access to the Internet, jealous they were being excluded. This is factually incorrect. Everone I've ever heard use the term to describe email had internet access and was a regular email user at the time they used the term. I'm sure some people who didn't have email have used the term, and I'm sure some of those people had the motivation you describe, but it is simply not true that it was "only ever" used by people without access to the internet (or, more relevantly, email -- whether on the internet or otherwise, as electronic mail existed on networks besides the internet.) > In all areas that matter, email is superior to paper letters. "areas that matter" is a subjective category (and, further, superiority in each of those areas is, generally, subjective as well), it may well be superior to you in each of the areas that matter to you, but those subjective judgements may not hold more generally.
- silverbax88 12y ago
  You say something is factually incorrect based on your own experiences, then comment on subjectivity? Are you being serious, or kidding? I honestly can't tell.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    > You say something is factually incorrect based on your own experiences Well, yes, a categorical claim that something was "only ever" used by people with certain objective features and for a particular reason is factually incorrect if it was ever used by people without those features or for a different reason, so personal experience, while inadequate to establish that it is factually correct, can be quite sufficient to establish that it is factually incorrect. (You'll note that while I state that the categorical claim is clearly factually incorrect, that it is also quite likely that, while not a categorical truth, there have been at least some dismissals that fit the pattern that it falsely claims is the exclusive pattern for all dismissals of email as "impersonal" -- the error isn't in saying that some people describe email as impersonal for the particular reason described, but in claiming that that is the only reason email has ever been described as "impersonal" by anyone.) > then comment on subjectivity The comment on subjectivity was on a different statement (a claim of what is superior and what matters, both of which are inherently subjective) not the categorical fact claim. Recognizing the difference between subjective statements and fact claims is pretty important to being able to participate in a productive discussion of pretty much any topic, IMO. > Are you being serious, or kidding? The former.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - notahacker 12y ago
    They countered an assertion that people that a particular statement about the impersonality of email was "only ever" made by people without access to email by asserting the existence of multiple people they had known to make that particular statement about the impersonality about email whilst possessing an email address. Which would make the former statement factually incorrect even if the second poster's experiences were atypical. There's nothing "subjective" about logically refuting one sweeping general claim with a counterexample from ones own experience, unless we're getting really postmodern about whether people actually recall others referring to email as impersonal whilst possessing email addresses or just perceive that to be the case... </pedantry>
dunno 12y ago
Sorry, this is beyond factually incorrect, and only proves you never dated before email.