AAkasha -> RE: Finally a Conclusive End to the "Do you Respond to Strangers Emails?" fiasco (1/4/2006 4:55:25 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Petruchio quote:
I tend to ignore people who can't read a profile. The problem is that it says more about you than the people who are (mistakenly) seeking to know you. Courtesy and graciousness has always been paramount to me. I was surprised when a friend on here (sub-F) told me she also didn't respond to messages that didn't interest her. I contended that it was better to politely decline, but she shrugged it off. Of course she's still looking. I wouldn't have a problem, though, if up front her profile said something like, 'Sub– snooty and seldom responsive.' Then people would know what to expect. It has been posted in many threads on this topic: The simple issue is that if a woman politely responds to *all* the emails she gets, people keep on emailing, even if the note said "Thanks but no thanks." If a woman has limited time online and wants to sit down and spend 15 - 20 minutes responding to the 1 or 2 emails that she chose, she can't respond to the others. For every 5 minutes she is online, another 3 - 4 new messages pop up. For every 10 emails she says politely, 6 write back "Why not? Can you at least tell me why?" If she responds to those 6, 5 will write back again, and not drop it. Then 5 more will write to insult her. Meanwhile, 7 new messages pop up. If she receives an email that clearly is not suited based on her clear profile, there's a good chance if she responds, all she is doing is opening up an invitation for correspondence. At SOME point she HAS to ignore him. He will keep on writing. That's why women don't respond to every single email. Even the ones that respond favorably to her "thanks but no thanks" often still don't "close" the correspondence -- they ask "Do you have any advice for me? Do you know anyone who might be interested?" or "can I at least ask you a few questions? Can we be friends?" It never ends. Akasha
|
|
|
|