top | item 40978957

(no title)

utensil4778 | 1 year ago

It should be entirely socially acceptable to respond to any trivial message with "ACKNOWLEDGED" รก la Picard

discuss

order

rtpg|1 year ago

Well that's what the reactions are for, right? Because then we have this sort of division between acks (and other reactions really) vs "actual messages". Combine that with specific emojis in certain social/professional circles and you've got yourself an extra layer of nuance in an otherwise tricky-to-navigate space!

f33d5173|1 year ago

Networking software engineers just say "ack".

SoftTalker|1 year ago

Why do you need to respond at all? The phone tells you that the message has been delivered, and if you didn't ask a question or otherwise request a response why would there be any obligation to do so?

hunter2_|1 year ago

A delivery receipt, an automatic read receipt, and a human ack are quite distinct. The first means the device will offer it to a user who eventually looks. The second means the device expects that the user saw it. The third means the user definitely saw and understood it.

It's rarely obligatory (unless the sender literally requests an ack) but is more to offer a data point just in case it happens to be useful. In some cases it will definitely be useful, like to unblock something that can't proceed until the sender knows you've been briefed. For example, if I tell my kids they can stay out later than 10pm any night if I know about it, then even if they message me saying they'll be out late tonight, actually staying out late is blocked by my ack. Of course, this could just be turned into a yes/no question awaiting my answer, but that would be silly considering that I only say yes; they're not soliciting a decision from me, just acknowledgement.