Settle a very minor etiquette dispute between me and my parents

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Yes, it's about cell phone use. Please play Dear Abby to me, I'm genuinely interested in other people's input about this.

I had to see a professor at the college I attend after class in her office hours. She also needed to see a boy in my class called Dan, who was to show her how to use a basic computer program to email the whole class (she is an older woman and quite computer illiterate).

Dan and I went to her office. She decided she wanted to see Dan first. They talked about other things first. I joined into the conversation. She went off to do her own stuff. Dan and I made small talk about a few things. Then she got to business. He patiently explained it to her. She didn't get it. He tried again. This went on for a long while. While she and Dan were sitting at the computer, I sat very patiently on a chair about a foot or two away from them, waiting for my turn. I did have a big favor to ask of her so I didn't want to offend her in any way.

I got a text message from a friend. It was about something fairly important and she needed my response right away. Dan was still explaining the program to the teacher. I interrupted them and said "I'm sorry, I just got a text message on my phone. It's about something important. May I respond to it?"

The teacher and Dan both looked up from the screen at me and looked at me with a confused expression. They exchanged confused looks and then looked back at me. The teacher asked "Why...are you asking me? What do you mean? Of course you can".

I awkwardly bumbled "Well...I'm in your office...in your presence. It would be impolite to text in front of you and Dan without your permission. "

She looked at me rather baffled, shrugged and said "I don't care. It's fine. If you need to make a call, just step outside the office and come back in when you are finished". Dan gave me a weird look, shrugged and said "Uhm, I don't care. Go ahead." And they returned to what they were doing.

I later mentioned this to my parents in conversation about something else. They were both stunned.

My mother and father both said that I shouldn't have even asked the professor's permission, I should have just not texted in her office. They were appalled that I'd text in a teacher's work room and in her presence- and a foot or two away from her and another person, to boot. They said they would have understood if I had done it while sitting across the room from her- and even that would have been pushing it. They said I should have excused myself and completely left the room- or waited until my turn with the teacher was over before responding to my friend.

I responded that the professor had said I shouldn't have even asked her permission, I should just have texted! :D She didn't even understand why I was asking!

They were shocked and said that Americans have no manners whatsoever and that this would have been unacceptable in the home country.

Thoughts?

[MetalPig]

It depends on the nature of the meeting I'm in. If it's formal, my phone would be off or in silent mode, and anyone trying to reach me would have to wait until after the meeting.
In a more informal setting, like your meeting with the professor and Dan, I would have acted exactly the same as you did.

[Richard Masters]

Professors are less formal in the United States. You can almost speak freely with them as if they were colleagues. I've been told that this is not possible in countries like Italy.

Cultural conventions aside, your professor was absorbed learning the intricacies of spam. As long as you were not interrupting, or drawing attention to yourself, I don't see a problem.

[Wolfman]

As reflected by the answers you've gotten, the real answer is: "It depends"

Problem is, "it depends" on the specific people you're dealing with. Some will consider it impolite. Others will consider it strange to even ask or raise the issue. Heck, in China, people will answer a phone and talk to others right in the middle of a meeting...and everyone else will just ignore them and continue with their own discussion. Leaving the room to talk to someone on the phone would be a little strange, indicating that you are talking about something that you don't want others to hear.

[Richard Masters]

Additionally, (1) you weren't expected to pay attention to the computer lesson; (2) if your professor is computer illiterate, she probably can't tell the difference between texting and using your phone as a calculator, looking up an address, researching a definition, or even typing a note for yourself on your phone.

[Democracy Simulator]

I think you did the right thing.

You asked for permission to text from the only parties who have any just cause to be inconvenienced or otherwise put out by this action.

They accepted your request in good faith.

I think this highlights the problem with your parent's reasoning:

They were shocked and said that Americans have no manners whatsoever and that this would have been unacceptable in the home country.

This suggests that they believe that the etiquette of their home country is more appropriate than 'American etiquette' when working/studying in America. I'm not sure why anyone would expect this to be the case as etiquette varies from culture to culture - American etiquette is 'most right' in America and your parents etiquette is most appropriate in their home country. There is not one over-arching standard that trumps all others.

[Morrigan]

Your parents are overreacting. You asked permission, which was very polite anyway. Had I been the professor (I do know what texting is :P), I would simply have said "sure, go ahead".

[phantomb]

I would have responded the same way as that professor and student. I guess some people are very formal, but unless you're in a movie theater or actively in conversation with someone, I can't think of many situations where I would expect someone to ask permission to respond to a text message.

At most I would have butted in to say something like "I have to make an important call while you guys are talking. It'll just take a moment.", and then withdrawn.

[arthwollipot]

"Sorry, I have to take this, it'll only take a minute or two." I certainly would not have waited for permission.

[GrandMasterFox]

Manners are complete BS.

Your teacher was not offended. Just in case he is someone who would be bothered, you asked for permission. That is the end of story.

[Rasmus]

Uh ...

they way I see it, you just happened top be in the same room, waiting for your turn to talk to the prof. Why would it be impolite to text?

You were not part of any ongoing conversation, you had nobody's attention, nobody had your attention, etc, pp.

I wouldn't have asked permission, either. Also, you read the initial message without asking permission, right? How can it be polite and okay to read a message, yet impolite to respond? (Unless, of course, you should have set things up in away that you could tell the message was important without looking at it at all ...)

Just to make you feel guilty: You probably caused more of a hassle when you interrupted them to ask if it was okay to text then you would have just texting ...

(And, yes, I would have asked permission to step outside for an actual call. But I would have never known it was important, since I wouldn't have taken any incoming calls at the time ...)

[Aepervius]

Usually in such a case if the meeting is not extremely important and you are not the speaker, you excuse yourself , the same way you would go to toilet, and get outside, without explaining the nature of your action.

BTW it is "Settle a very minor etiquette dispute between my parents and me"
Usually out of politesse one always cite the other party before citing one self :). / DUCK

[Ocelot]

The point is disruption. Firing off a quick text can often cause less disruption than asking permission.

[Wolfman]

BTW it is "Settle a very minor etiquette dispute between my parents and me"
Usually out of politesse one always cite the other party before citing one self :). / DUCK
This is obviously off-topic. If you want to "Settle a very minor grammar dispute between EeeneyMinnieMoe and me", then you should start a new thread to do so.

;)

[Richard Masters]

The point is disruption. Firing off a quick text can often cause less disruption than asking permission.

Precisely.

[Meadmaker]

I agree that the important point is disruption.

The all too common problem with cell phones is that, during a face to face conversation, a cell phone rings and the person whose phone rang takes the call, leaving the other person sitting next to them twiddling his thumbs waiting for a different conversation to end. This sends the message that it's perfectly ok to waste the time of the person to whom one is actually with, in order to accomodate a disruption from a distant source. One should always give priority to the person who is actually present with you.

Depending on the nature of your job, it might be impossible to make a complete, blanket, rule that you should not answer a call or respond to a text while engaged in conversation with another, but all things being equal, the person you are with gets priority over the person trying to call in. For example, in my particular job, it is not at all uncommon to be in a meeting and hear a cell phone ring. The person whose phone rang looks at his phone to see the caller ID mesage and then either closes the phone or says, "Excuse me. It's from a customer." Because of the nature of our work, everyone understands that the face to face conversation gets shoved to the back burner. However, if it is another coworker that is calling, it would be very rude to take the call.

In your position, you were not actively engaged in any conversation, and would not have been disrupting anyone by responding to the text. It seems to me that you were waiting for something to happen and were only coincidentally in the same room with other people. Therefore, the best action would be to simply respond and not draw any attention to yourself. What you actually did doesn't strke me as bad manners, though. It's hard to fault someone for asking permission to do something that might be perceived as a breach of etiquette.

Of course, tone of voice plays a big role, too, and body language. I can picture a situation where the exact conversation from the OP occurs, but the meaning is extremely different. Suppose the person waiting was irritated that he is being made to wait while someone else explains email. He is shifting and squirming, and wears an expression of irritation. Then, a text message comes in and, in a voice dripping with sarcasm, says, "I'm sorry, I just got a text message on my phone. It's about something important. May I respond to it?"

The intent of the speaker in that situation would be to say, "Hey, you guys are really wasting my time here. Do you mind if I do something worthwhile while I wait for you?" In other words, I have seen people use feigned politeness to actually send a very rude message. Needless to say, that would be a bad.

Summary: It sounds like you did the right thing, although if you could have handled the situation without interrupting them at all, that would have been even better.

[Sledge]

I think you did the right thing.

You asked for permission to text from the only parties who have any just cause to be inconvenienced or otherwise put out by this action.
I disagree that he did the right thing. By asking he inconvenienced them more than if he'd just responded to the text. If I'm reading the OP right, neither person was speaking to him or paying any attention to him at that point. If he'd received a phone call or needed to make one in response to the text message, I agree that it would have been polite to say "Excuse me, I just need to take this/make a quick call, I'll be back in a minute," and leave the room.

I think etiquette has become a far more situational matter than it was in the past. Things like mobile phones have created social issues that simply didn't exist even a generation ago, leaving us to make our own minds up as to what is rude and what isn't. Kind of interesting that we're being left to make our own minds up as to what is acceptable rather than having it dictated by formal books of rules.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

I wouldn't have asked permission, either. Also, you read the initial message without asking permission, right? How can it be polite and okay to read a message, yet impolite to respond? (Unless, of course, you should have set things up in away that you could tell the message was important without looking at it at all ...)



Well, I was just a foot or two from the professor. If I had whipped out the phone to text in her presence, she might think I was inconsiderate. She's a teacher, you behave even more formally towards her than towards other adults. She might have also gotten the impression that I'm one of those airheaded young people that are always glued to the phone and might not have treated me very seriously from that point on. And as a guest in someone's office during their office hours, you aren't there on your own time and in your own space (or in a neutral space) and so you can't do your own personal things there.

I heard my phone give off that little ring that means that a text has come in. I waited a few minutes and weighed whether to look at it or not. When the teacher still wasn't done with the boy, I decided to quickly sneak a look at it while they were both still absorbed in what they were doing and probably wouldn't look in my direction.

If it had been nothing, I'd obviously have put the phone away right after reading it.

Yes, I think I did disturb them more by asking than if I had just texted. However, they weren't in the least offended by being asked- just confused.

[phantomb]

Well, I was just a foot or two from the professor. If I had whipped out the phone to text in her presence, she might think I was inconsiderate.

Well, the general consensus here seems to be that she probably wouldn't think it inconsiderate, especially if you mentioned that you had to deal with an important message for a few moments and stepped back. We can confirm that this is true by her actual reaction, and furthermore, since her reaction can probably be considered typical of professors at your school, you should safely assume that most of your professors will not be expecting that level of politeness in the future.


She's a teacher, you behave even more formally towards her than towards other adults.

Teachers definitely deserve respect. On top of the fact that they provide an important service to society often for modest pay, they're the local experts in the skills and knowledge that you are working to master. But let's not forget that in this relationship you are the one paying her salary through your tuition, and that her boss and future prospective students will be going over what you write in your assessments (I assume your school has these).


She might have also gotten the impression that I'm one of those airheaded young people that are always glued to the phone and might not have treated me very seriously from that point on.

That is a legitimate concern, yes.


And as a guest in someone's office during their office hours, you aren't there on your own time and in your own space (or in a neutral space) and so you can't do your own personal things there.

Of course. However, you should again note that your tuition pays her salary, and that the job description that goes along with that salary likely includes a certain number of office hours for students in your course. You are paying her to be there.


I heard my phone give off that little ring that means that a text has come in. I waited a few minutes and weighed whether to look at it or not. When the teacher still wasn't done with the boy, I decided to quickly sneak a look at it while they were both still absorbed in what they were doing and probably wouldn't look in my direction.

If it had been nothing, I'd obviously have put the phone away right after reading it.

Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is? I myself have an office at my workplace and I really couldn't care less what people do in it while waiting to talk to me. They could read a book for all I care. If it's not distracting me from the person I'm currently talking to, why would I care?

[Rrose Selavy]

Maybe you should have simply switched off your cellphone before you started the meeting. Then you would have avoided the entire issue.
Any calls or reading of texts can be distracting.

[Cain]

I can tell a lot of the above answers are wrong because they're too long.

No, it's not impolite to reply to a text while she's dealing with a computer problem. It was probably impolite of her to have Dan help her first, unless your issue would have taken longer to resolve, which I doubt.

I may have mentioned this before, but one day I was in the graduate adviser's office. His phone rang, he said he had to take it, and I offered to step outside. "No." Afterward he said it was kind of me to ask -- most people don't give a ****.

[Ocelot]

There's an important factor that nobody has touched on. Were you nekkid?

If not then a brief "excuse me" might be sufficient. However if you were nekkid then I suspect that no course of action would be appropriate to avoid a social faux pas.

Now moving on, how to deal with an unwanted erection on public transport when it's your stop.

[Dave Rogers]

Well, I was just a foot or two from the professor. If I had whipped out the phone to text in her presence, she might think I was inconsiderate. She's a teacher, you behave even more formally towards her than towards other adults. She might have also gotten the impression that I'm one of those airheaded young people that are always glued to the phone and might not have treated me very seriously from that point on. And as a guest in someone's office during their office hours, you aren't there on your own time and in your own space (or in a neutral space) and so you can't do your own personal things there.

I agree with all the above. And there's a meta-issue with respect to etiquette here, which is that several posters seem to think it's a breach of etiquette to enquire of somebody as to what they consider proper etiquette in a specific instance. If that were true, it would be impossible to behave correctly. If anything, I suspect your teacher has got so used to casual low-level impoliteness that it came as a pleasant surprise that someone was actually considering her reactions.

Dave

[Alferd_Packer]

Did you talk out loud as you texted back?

OH. EM. GEE. DOT DOT DOT. DOUBLE YOU. AICH OH SPACE EFF AY ARE TEE EEE DEE QUESTION MARK

[commandlinegamer]

Turn off your phone before you go into the meeting or leave it outside. No disruption.

For general etiquette questions Miss Manners is your friend; she's been providing reams of good advice for years.

http://www.missmanners.com/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/03/25/LI2005032501837.html

(The newest postings in the above link required registration - free)

[EvilSmurf]

If I were in your situation I would not have even asked for permission. Your professor was engaged with someone else at the time, the text was important and your professor was probably going to be engaged with Dan for quite some time. If your professor was ready for you, you could have easily dropped what you were doing and been ready to start with what it is you were doing with your professor. Also, what you were doing was likely not going to be disruptive. Well, not disruptive assuming your phone doesn't make a noise every time you hit a key.

[Dorian Gray]

You should have left your professor and Dan alone. You were acting like some type of blocker just then. She obviously wanted him to stuff her inbox.

[TheKiwiSkeptic]

You should have left your professor and Dan alone. You were acting like some type of blocker just then. She obviously wanted him to stuff her inbox.

Ha, ha, ha... Nothing discrete about that remark. :D

[Naddig74]

The etiquette surrounding mobile phones, or more precisely certain people's perception that using your phone is somehow rude, is ridiculous.

If the person who texted you had knocked on the office door and said 'Eenie, can I speak to you for a minute?' there would be no issue. Either you'd be free to step outside and chat to them for a minute, or you wouldn't.

It's just the 'we fear change' mentality that makes some (older) people object to mobile phones. How is using your phone on the bus/train any more annoying to other transport users than talking to a person sat next to you? It isn't, but the Vocal Minority have decided it is.

We've invented a device the size of a matchbox that allows anyone on earth to contact anyone else anywhere else on earth (within limits of signal coverage obviously) and some people think that's a bad thing?

[Foolmewunz]

The etiquette surrounding mobile phones, or more precisely certain people's perception that using your phone is somehow rude, is ridiculous.

I guess you think the same thing of land lines? It is rude to have a conversation on any type of phone when you're with someone. It says, "Hey, you're not that important to me, so I'll take this call and you'll understand and not fail me, right?"


If the person who texted you had knocked on the office door and said 'Eenie, can I speak to you for a minute?' there would be no issue. Either you'd be free to step outside and chat to them for a minute, or you wouldn't.
Just how would the person who texted her know where she was? She was in a teacher's office, I believe.
Do you actually have friends who'd knock on the office of a meeting you're in (meaning a "meeting" e.g. with a teacher or a boss/co-workerl), and say, "Hey, can Naddig come out?"


It's just the 'we fear change' mentality that makes some (older) people object to mobile phones. How is using your phone on the bus/train any more annoying to other transport users than talking to a person sat next to you?

No it isn't. You'd be surprised how hip some of us old geezers are. And no one objects to people having conversations on their mobile phones where I live. The problem is the morons who think they're impressing you, (not realizing that WE ALL HAVE mobile phones, now) and/or don't realize that there are little tiny amplification devices and that they do NOT have to shout into the phone.
On my average commute (via MTR, or "underground choo choo train thingamajigger" as we call it back at the home), there are ten to twelve people talking on their mobile, another three or four get calls during the commute, including me quite often (and I'm 60 you young whipper-snapper), and no one gives a damn.

But, last night one idiot sat there with his volume up all the way deleting SMS messages. At least five of us told him to STFU and turn the volume off - beep, kabing, beep, beep, plink. Rinse. Lather. Repeat. Through seventy-five messages! He got chewed out for it - by a younger person, not one of us withered old near-dead types.


It isn't, but the Vocal Minority have decided it is.

You'll be posting evidence of either your major or minor premise in that sentence, then?


We've invented a device the size of a matchbox that allows anyone on earth to contact anyone else anywhere else on earth (within limits of signal coverage obviously) and some people think that's a bad thing?
We've also invented a device the size of a matchbox that could blow up most of downtown Paris. Do we need to use it? And even if there is an appropriate use for it, do we need to use it all the time? As Groucho said to the man who had seven children which he explained away with "Well, Groucho, I guess I must really love my wife",....
"I love my cigar, too. But I take it out of my mouth sometimes."


I've had someone track me down and hand me a fax under the stall door in the men's room. Hey, we invented this fax thing... we should be available to everyone in the world, anywhere in the world, 24/7.

I have friends who I used to make dates with on say, Sunday, the 3rd. We'd say, "Sure, let's have drinks on Thursday. 8 o'clock. The Riviera." We'd be there if one or the other didn't call and change the plans.
Today? You leave the person on Sunday, and they immediatelly text you an appointment to meet on Thursday, which you accept. And you exchange phone conversations, emails, and SMS messages for the next three days, in cluding a forty-five minute exchange on Thursday that essentially consists of "Where are you?" "About five minutes." "Closer than before." "I'm just around the corner now." "Oh nvr mnd I c u." It's like landing a jet on a carrier deck with a team of six to guide it in.

So no, it's not an old fuddy-duddy generation not understanding. It's foolish younger people thinking that what they've grown up with is the only way things could ever be accomplished.

Now go to your room!

[Foolmewunz]

Eeney, ya done right. But you might want to remind your parents that there are Innuit lands in America and one of the traditions of the Innuit is that when parents get too old to fend for themselves, they just float them out to sea on an ice floe.
(I have no idea if that's true or not, but it sure gets parents to stop being so damned judgmental.)

[Naddig74]

I guess you think the same thing of land lines? It is rude to have a conversation on any type of phone when you're with someone. It says, "Hey, you're not that important to me, so I'll take this call and you'll understand and not fail me, right?"

I don't have a problem with any of that. As I understand the OP, Eeny was waiting for her meeting to start, and wasn't actually engaged with anyone.

Just how would the person who texted her know where she was? She was in a teacher's office, I believe.
Do you actually have friends who'd knock on the office of a meeting you're in (meaning a "meeting" e.g. with a teacher or a boss/co-worker), and say, "Hey, can Naddig come out?"

If they felt it was important enough, yes. Again, from the OP, Eeny seems to imply that the message she recieved was important enough to merit an immediate response.

No it isn't. You'd be surprised how hip some of us old geezers are..

I wouldn't...my mother just bought a new motorcycle. <shudder> I withdraw my generalisation.

And no one objects to people having conversations on their mobile phones where I live.

They do where I live. Most trains in the UK have 'quiet carriages' in which the use of mobiles, PDA's and laptops are banned. Screaming children, rowdy teenagers and pensioners who think everyone is as deaf as they are, are seemingly perfectly acceptable in the 'quiet carriages.' In Japan, you are not allowed to use a mobile on any public transport anywhere.

The problem is the morons who think they're impressing you, (not realizing that WE ALL HAVE mobile phones, now) and/or don't realize that there are little tiny amplification devices and that they do NOT have to shout into the phone.

[/snippy]

But, last night one idiot sat there with his volume up all the way deleting SMS messages. At least five of us told him to STFU and turn the volume off - beep, kabing, beep, beep, plink. Rinse. Lather. Repeat. Through seventy-five messages! He got chewed out for it - by a younger person, not one of us withered old near-dead types.

Agreed. This should be a hanging offence.

You'll be posting evidence of either your major or minor premise in that sentence, then?

Nope. Withdrawn.

[/snippy]So no, it's not an old fuddy-duddy generation not understanding. It's foolish younger people thinking that what they've grown up with is the only way things could ever be accomplished.

From the OP it sounds like Eeny's parents also think that what they've grown up with is the only way things can ever be accomplished too. I can think of several people I know, of all ages, who think exactly the same way. It's an example of the Dunning-kruger effect.

Now go to your room!

No! <high pitched screech> You're not the boss of me! <stamps off to room anyway>

[WildCat]

Hell, you did better than I would have. I would have just said "excuse me" and stepped into the hall for a few moments.

[WildCat]

No it isn't. You'd be surprised how hip some of us old geezers are. And no one objects to people having conversations on their mobile phones where I live. The problem is the morons who think they're impressing you, (not realizing that WE ALL HAVE mobile phones, now) and/or don't realize that there are little tiny amplification devices and that they do NOT have to shout into the phone.
There is an actual reason people tend to talk loudly into cell phones. When you use a landline phone, you can hear your own voice in the earpiece of the phone. Cell phones, for whatever reason, don't have this feature so there's no feedback to the talker and they often have no idea how loud they are talking.

If I'm forced to use a cell phone in a public place I take pains to talk quietly, because I'm aware of this effect. Most people, I think, are not aware of this and have no idea how loud they're actually talking.

[quarky]

Rude is the new polite.

[Rrose Selavy]

I
They do where I live. Most trains in the UK have 'quiet carriages' in which the use of mobiles, PDA's and laptops are banned.




News to me. I don't think so. Really? Most? Or some ? or one? What lines are those?
Not on any of the trains I've travelled on. And how is such a "ban" enforced or even indicated in the first place?
And why should a laptop be banned for noise?Hitting the keyboard too loud?

[Naddig74]

Really? Most? Or some ? or one? What lines are those??

Everyone I've been on in the last few years...can't pinpoint when they first started appearing.

Not on any of the trains I've travelled on. And how is such a "ban" enforced??

In the same way as most similar bans are enforced, ie. it isn't because that would involve the train staff growing a set of balls.

And why should a laptop be banned for noise?Hitting the keyboard too loud?

My mistake, lappies just have to be kept on silent.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Content.aspx?id=62

[slingblade]

And how polite is it to declare, stereotypically, that the entire population of a given country has no manners?

That strikes me as rude. And you can tell your parents, politely, that I said so.

[Rrose Selavy]

Everyone I've been on in the last few years...can't pinpoint when they first started appearing.


What you've been traveling on is a rare exception not the rule. That's one route on one line that you linked to with an officlal "quiet" carriage.
That isn't "most trains in the UK " .
I can assure you it isn't the case with most trains eg in London & the South East.
-

[Naddig74]

. That's one route on one line that you linked to with an officlal "quiet" carriage.
-

How do you work that out?

I'll take your word for it as far as the South East goes. :)

[Ocelot]

C2C's London Tilbury and Southend Line has quiet carriages. Not enforced by anything more than a stern glance though.

[Naddig74]

10 minutes work found me these:

http://www.nationalexpresseastanglia.com/on_board_trains/in_your_coach/quiet_zone

http://www.electricpig.co.uk/2008/10/30/new-quiet-train-carriages-to-block-mobile-phone-signals/

http://www.c2c-online.co.uk/on_board_trains/in_your_coach/quiet_zone

http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/travelling.aspx

http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/uploads/quietzone.jpg

http://www.virgintrains.co.uk/trains

There are probably lots more if I could be bothered to search through more over-designed train company websites.

[Rrose Selavy]

10 minutes work found me these:

http://www.nationalexpresseastanglia.com/on_board_trains/in_your_coach/quiet_zone

http://www.electricpig.co.uk/2008/10/30/new-quiet-train-carriages-to-block-mobile-phone-signals/

http://www.c2c-online.co.uk/on_board_trains/in_your_coach/quiet_zone

http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/travelling.aspx

http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/uploads/quietzone.jpg

http://www.virgintrains.co.uk/trains

There are probably lots more if I could be bothered to search through more over-designed train company websites.

If only. Pretty meaningless if not enforceable.
From your second link

Train operator C2C (http://www.c2c-online.co.uk/) have given up asking people to actually stop using their phones in the ‘Quiet Zone’ on their trains and instead plan to cover the carriage windows in a film that simply blocks all mobile signals


It would be better to block the signals altogether.
You try telling someone not to use their phone in a London Overground train and you'll likely get more than just a verbal reaction.

[Naddig74]

If only. Pretty meaningless if not enforceable.
From your second link


It would be better to block the signals altogether.
You try telling someone not to use their phone in a London Overground train and you'll likely get more than just a verbal reaction.

I quite agree with the pointlessness of these Quiet Zones/Carriages...but they are out there :p

[Foolmewunz]

Well, like I said, we all talk on our mobiles on the MTR(Underground). It's usually about the same level as any normal conversation. There are rude exceptions as I mentioned, but we usually stare 'em down. I can't see the Quiet Car thing for mobiles. For idiots who insist on playing games with volume on? Yes. For clones like the guy who was beeping away deleting his messages? Ditto.

[Naddig74]

Well, like I said, we all talk on our mobiles on the MTR(Underground). It's usually about the same level as any normal conversation. There are rude exceptions as I mentioned, but we usually stare 'em down. I can't see the Quiet Car thing for mobiles. For idiots who insist on playing games with volume on? Yes. For clones like the guy who was beeping away deleting his messages? Ditto.

You get a signal on the Underground? :jaw-dropp

[Travis]

Quick question: the important issue you were texted about, how would you have resolved that issue if you had no cell phone? If it was resolvable without an immediate reply then waiting until later might have been the better option.

[quarky]

Rude is the new polite.

Everyone has you on ignore, quarky, my love.
Or, you aren't as clever as you think.





(Let's have sex later, anyway, OK? We could do it when "she" wasn't around. We could maybe involve that cute chick that just started at the "Dollar General 99 cent Family" store, eh what big guy?)

[Naddig74]

Everyone has you on ignore, quarky, my love.
Or, you aren't as clever as you think.


I lol'd quarky :D

[Philosaur]

Everyone has you on ignore, quarky, my love.
Or, you aren't as clever as you think.





(Let's have sex later, anyway, OK? We could do it when "she" wasn't around. We could maybe involve that cute chick that just started at the "Dollar General 99 cent Family" store, eh what big guy?)

You should have very loud, public phone sex with the cute chick from the Discount Store while riding a train. Then get offended that people are listening in on your private conversation. Would that qualify as the new rude/polite?

[Jekyll's Guest]

Obviously this doesn't apply to the OP, but people who text or answer their phone during a conversation, for anything short of an actual to goodness emergency, should be dragged for a mile behind a team of horses.

Then flogged.

After that, they may apologize, and the conversation may continue.

[Alferd_Packer]

I was in a car with someone today and in the middle of the conversation, they answered the phone via bluetooth. The phone mut have been on vibrate becuase I didn't hear it. The only way i knew that he was not talking to me was that i had seen his hand go over to hit the answer key on the phone.

needless to say, I thought of this thread.

[quarky]

You should have very loud, public phone sex with the cute chick from the Discount Store while riding a train. Then get offended that people are listening in on your private conversation. Would that qualify as the new rude/polite?

Good idea.
As a scientist, I can barely resist.



(I'll get back to you with the raw data.)

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Quick question: the important issue you were texted about, how would you have resolved that issue if you had no cell phone? If it was resolvable without an immediate reply then waiting until later might have been the better option.

If I didn't have the cell on me and hadn't immediately replied, the whole thing would have been totally screwed up. I couldn't have resolved it at all.

[Foolmewunz]

You get a signal on the Underground? :jaw-dropp

Yep, I pay for it, as does everyone, in a few HK$ charge on our monthly bill. It covers the cost of relaying the signals... and catch this part.... even into the tunnels under the harbour! We can be on the MTR or in a taxi or bus and be stuck under the harbour and still get a signal - clear as a bell.

I'm gonna guess you guys don't have your elevators wired for reception, either? We do in some buildings, but in Shenzhen, across the border in primitive old China, all office buildings have uninterrupted reception. You can just keep talking from the Underground to the street, through the lobby, up in the elevator, and to your desk. It's not uncommon to hear someone say, "I'm going into my office(at my desk). Ring me back on my land line."

[Foolmewunz]

Oh, and back to the quiet car, or mobile-free zones. We have a few private clubs and restaurants here who insist you put them on silent or turn them off. I think it creates as much consternation, if not more, as just allowing them to talk on their phones. (I mean... We're talking HK Chinese here... they are of that young whippersnapper generation who can't survive without their mobiles being fused to their ears.)

People also make announcements in meetings. And it'll be just like the restaurant/club requirement. "Please put your mobile phones on vibrate or turn them off. If you really MUST take or make a call, please step outside." In a meeting in a large venue, you'll have 300/400 in the audience, and you have them popping up in their seats, drawing all eyes to themselves instead of the speaker, and whispering loudly,

"I'm in a conference... hold on.... hold on.... I'm in a conference.... Shhhhh.... I'm stepping outside.... gimme a second...." All the way up the aisle to the door.

And there's one of them doing this every three minutes! They ****** well trip over each other in the entranceway! Meanwhile, back in the seats, there are people discussing the presentation in low conversational voices, much the same as you could be using on your mobile, and it's not bothering anyone! Ditto the Foreign Correspondents' Club or China Club or American Club. There are conversations going on at every dinner table, so where's the harm in a phone conversation at normal volume?

It's faux gentility.

And the trick is, of course, "... at normal volume". That's what you have to concentrate on and who we need to pick on. The idiot who thinks he/she has to speak at eleven on the volume dial. Stare down! Ostracize! Shun!

My gripe here is, I think, similar to one mentioned above. If you're having dinner with me or even just chatting to me on a street corner, and you're not anticipating an answer to an emergency call,.... To then hold your hand up to me (as in "hold that thought") and take a call which I can tell is casual, e.g. "Hello? Oh... Hey! How are you?" ... is a pretty good giveaway that this wasn't a scheduled important teleconference, and a fairly good indication that I'm not important to you, not as important as the person on the other end of that phone.

That, to me, is the height of rudeness. I've seen people do it on dinner dates. If that happened to me on a date, I'd just walk out.

And I think that is what Eeney was getting to. If you take the call, you may be undoing the groundwork you've laid in getting the audience with the prof (or the date) in the first place.

Should I mention the flight attendant (Amy Baobao) in Taipei who told me her boyfriend interrupted their love making to take a mobile call? It was a wrong number! (Turns out it was a really wrong number - she's gorgeous and he was dumped, that evening!)

[theprestige]

The Internet changes everything. It raises questions we are only beginning to understand, and which only our grandchildren will begin to answer in any meaningful and lasting way.

This thread is part of an obsolete, dying civilization, that still clings to the hope that cell phones and text messages and MMPORGs are just amusing adjuncts to their cherished civilization, rather than the harbingers of something entirely new and different and paradigm-shattering.

[theprestige]

My gripe here is, I think, similar to one mentioned above. If you're having dinner with me or even just chatting to me on a street corner, and you're not anticipating an answer to an emergency call,.... To then hold your hand up to me (as in "hold that thought") and take a call which I can tell is casual, e.g. "Hello? Oh... Hey! How are you?" ... is a pretty good giveaway that this wasn't a scheduled important teleconference, and a fairly good indication that I'm not important to you, not as important as the person on the other end of that phone.
Well, but of course you never really were as important as the person on the other end of that phone. It's just that previously, all the more important people weren't conveniently accessible, so it was easy enough to pretend that you were the most important person around. In fact, most of the time, it wasn't even pretense. You really were the most important person around.

The cell phone changes all that, of course. Now the really important people are readily available, anywhere and everywhere. Now your importance can be much more realistically represented, in real time. Now your proper place in world affairs, and in the lives of the people around you, can be readily demonstrated at the sound of a bell, or the buzz of a vibrator module.

This may come as a shock to those of us who were accustomed to a world where time and space were our friends, and where we could exploit physical reality to keep more important people out of our social circle.

But for those who see no reason to consider telepresence any less "real" than physical presence, the situation is very different indeed.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Well, I see what you are saying but I have to take the opposite view.

The person on the phone is NOT there. He/she is NOT present.

The person you are with is the one who IS there and the one you have to give primary attention to.

They are the ones forced to physically stand around and stare at you while you blab into a device.

Furthermore, this situation would be quite rude even if both people actually were physically present.

If you were on a date or with a friend and someone you knew happened to come up to you and you totally ignored Person 2 to endlessly yap with Person 3, this would be totally inappropriate. That's the real life physical scenario that the cell phone recreates.

The trouble with the phone is that it doesn't give Person 2 an opportunity to speak to Person 3. When you are interrupted by Person 3 in real life, you at least get to introduce him/her to Person 2 and draw Person 2 into the conversation. You get to talk to them both and not ignore either one. And they can engage with one another. Not so with the phone.

[ZirconBlue]

I agree that the important point is disruption.

The all too common problem with cell phones is that, during a face to face conversation, a cell phone rings and the person whose phone rang takes the call, leaving the other person sitting next to them twiddling his thumbs waiting for a different conversation to end. This sends the message that it's perfectly ok to waste the time of the person to whom one is actually with, in order to accomodate a disruption from a distant source. One should always give priority to the person who is actually present with you.

Depending on the nature of your job, it might be impossible to make a complete, blanket, rule that you should not answer a call or respond to a text while engaged in conversation with another, but all things being equal, the person you are with gets priority over the person trying to call in. For example, in my particular job, it is not at all uncommon to be in a meeting and hear a cell phone ring. The person whose phone rang looks at his phone to see the caller ID mesage and then either closes the phone or says, "Excuse me. It's from a customer." Because of the nature of our work, everyone understands that the face to face conversation gets shoved to the back burner. However, if it is another coworker that is calling, it would be very rude to take the call.

In your position, you were not actively engaged in any conversation, and would not have been disrupting anyone by responding to the text. It seems to me that you were waiting for something to happen and were only coincidentally in the same room with other people. Therefore, the best action would be to simply respond and not draw any attention to yourself. What you actually did doesn't strke me as bad manners, though. It's hard to fault someone for asking permission to do something that might be perceived as a breach of etiquette.

<snip>

Summary: It sounds like you did the right thing, although if you could have handled the situation without interrupting them at all, that would have been even better.

I agree with Meadmaker's assessment. In this case, I would have responded without asking permission.


I agree with all the above. And there's a meta-issue with respect to etiquette here, which is that several posters seem to think it's a breach of etiquette to enquire of somebody as to what they consider proper etiquette in a specific instance.

If you have to interrupt them in what they are doing to so enquire, then it might not be a good idea.

The trouble with the phone is that it doesn't give Person 2 an opportunity to speak to Person 3. When you are interrupted by Person 3 in real life, you at least get to introduce him/her to Person 2 and draw Person 2 into the conversation. You get to talk to them both and not ignore either one. And they can engage with one another. Not so with the phone.


Just put in on speakerphone! :duck:


My issue with cellphones (and other mobile devices) is that people seem to feel compelled to answer them immediately, whether it's an appropriate time to do so or not.

I remember way back in the 70s, before we had cell phones (or even cordless phones!), that we would often let the phone go unanswered if we had guests. Especially once we got an answering machine. But cell calls tend to get treated differently from landline calls. I suspect this has something to do with the transition from when cell phone calls were relatively expensive, and many people had them "for emergencies". So, it became ingrained, for some people as cell call = urgent call.

Anyway, I'm just not sure this constantly being available at others' beck and call is always a good thing.

[Soapy Sam]

Eeny, your parents should disown you. Your cellphone should be taken away and ceremonially destroyed and you should be grounded for six weeks.

Seriously, I would turn off a cellphone before going to an important meeting (where the senior person gets to decide what is "important"). I do not share the common assumption that a cellphone call takes precedence over what is happening when it comes in.
That said, I think your tutor was pretty thoughtless keeping you waiting that way. If she knew the software thing would take a while, she should have had you in first.

[Naddig74]

I've always considered phones to be a pretty rude item in some ways.

If I want to talk to someone, say at work, and when I find them they are having a conversation with someone else, I would stand nearby and wait until the conversation was finished before beginning the new one.

When a phone rings it immediately demands your attention in an unignorable way. The equivalent in the scenario above of, instead of waiting politely, poking the person you want to speak to repeatedly in the shoulder until they break off the conversation just to get you to stop poking them.

[Piscivore]

...a film that simply blocks all mobile signals

Sorry for the diversion, but why aren't we requiring manufacturers to put this on all car windows?

[sthomson]

The person you are with is the one who IS there and the one you have to give primary attention to.

Your teacher was not "there" in any meaningful sense. She was not doing anything at the moment that required your attention. You hopefully were not part of her awareness at all.

The point of "good manners" is to make your acquaintances feel as comfortable and at-ease as possible, NOT to be absolutely rigidly correct in every situation. I don't know much about etiquette, but good manners dictates that one avoid disrupting the present proceedings, whether by excusing oneself and stepping in the hallway or simply ignoring the text in the first place.

What if you had to urgently go to the restroom? Would you have intruded on the conversation and asked for permission from both of them? Well... maybe you would have. In which case your classmates probably find you a bit eccentric already :D

[quarky]

Rude is the new polite.






(Oh, wait. I already said that.)



Memory loss is the new rude.

[Rasmus]

I've always considered phones to be a pretty rude item in some ways.

If I want to talk to someone, say at work, and when I find them they are having a conversation with someone else, I would stand nearby and wait until the conversation was finished before beginning the new one.

When a phone rings it immediately demands your attention in an unignorable way. The equivalent in the scenario above of, instead of waiting politely, poking the person you want to speak to repeatedly in the shoulder until they break off the conversation just to get you to stop poking them.

I do that ...

it's not the phone that is being rude, it's the people. Specifically, it's the people that have not managed to catch up with the fact that telephones have become a lot more prevalent and are being used a lot more often than they used to be.

It used to be that a phone call was automatically important simply by virtue of being made. Now, using a phone really is just like saying "Hi" to someone standing next to you. People must learn that they are not required to drop everything just because one of them damned things is ringing. They must learn that it is perfectly okay to not pick up a phone, set it to silent or - behold - turn it off.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Something kinda funny happened today.

I was out with a new acquaintance and went to a museum and a film with him. As we were leaving the movie theater after our film had ended, he got a text. He apologized to me but said his friend had texted him and he had to text back. He then couldn't text back because something on his phone wasn't working- so he asked me for permission to call his friend. I was surprised he asked and said "Of course".

And he had the courtesy to step a few paces off to the left, so as to not rudely and obliviously babble in my ear while standing right next to me- like a lot of people unfortunately do when you are one-on-one with them and they either get a call or make a call- and to keep it very short. Again, something a lot of people don't do.

I am quite charmed.

[bigred]

They were shocked and said that Americans have no manners whatsoever
Generally speaking, they are of course correct; we're an exceedingly thoughtless, obnoxious society and only getting worse. (Don't even get me started on all the cell phone junkie morons) But that said, I thought you were polite in asking and given the circumstances, weren't rude at all.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I wouldn't have even checked the text. Who would send a time sensitive message that way?

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

The situation: my friend had wanted to surprise me with something at the time. She didn't say what it was. Said it was a secret that she was working on and that it was something really special. It was something of a goodbye present since she was about to leave the US for her native country.

The panic text I got from her was that the surprise was supposed to be tickets to Cirque Du Soleil for her, her boyfriend and myself, that she was at the box office with her credit card and was buying tickets for it and that it had turned out that the entire show was totally sold out except for the next Thursday and at such-and-such a time only and she needed to know right away if I was free at that time so that she could buy three tickets or just two.

If this had been anything else, I'd have ignored it. However, those tickets cost hundreds of dollars even with the discount that she had, they can be hard to get, she and her boyfriend were soon leaving for their home country and she was really desperate to arrange our triple outing before they left so...

Before anyone says this, yes, I agree that it was quite poor planning and rather bad judgment on her part. To pull off a "surprise" that big and expensive, not even knowing if I could make it or not and all at the last minute was pretty bad thinking.

The show was unbelievable, though, and we had an amazing time.

ETA: Her text said "LET ME KNOW RIGHT AWAY!" so I could sense her desperation.

[EvilSmurf]

A time-sensitive message that only requires a 2 or 3 letter reply. You've just strengthened my resolve that I would reply without even asking.

[Richard Masters]

Something kinda funny happened today.

I was out with a new acquaintance and went to a museum and a film with him. As we were leaving the movie theater after our film had ended, he got a text. He apologized to me but said his friend had texted him and he had to text back. He then couldn't text back because something on his phone wasn't working- so he asked me for permission to call his friend. I was surprised he asked and said "Of course".

And he had the courtesy to step a few paces off to the left, so as to not rudely and obliviously babble in my ear while standing right next to me- like a lot of people unfortunately do when you are one-on-one with them and they either get a call or make a call- and to keep it very short. Again, something a lot of people don't do.

I am quite charmed.

As you should be, but the situation is moderately different from the one you laid out in the OP.

[sthomson]

A time-sensitive message that only requires a 2 or 3 letter reply. You've just strengthened my resolve that I would reply without even asking.

In fact, it only takes 1 letter to reply on many cell phones, as "Yes" and "No" are often auto-filled answers when the Y or N are selected.

Heck, just a Y or an N is sufficient answer in text form.

Edited to add: I suppose "Y" on its own could be confused with "Why?"

[Vic Vega]

They were shocked and said that Americans have no manners whatsoever and that this would have been unacceptable in the home country.


Funny how it always comes down to something like this. :(


I've travelled all over the world and the manners of Americans are just as good as the manners of people anywhere else in the world. I'm not sure which Utopia your parents come from, but they should probably get to know more Americans. That way they may not feel the need to stereotype an entire nation of people. We have enough of that nonsense around here without having the parents of posters contribute to it.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

I've experienced a lot of rude cell phone behavior from young Europeans I know.

I once knew a young woman from Poland who, while we were out walking somewhere together, got a call from some American dude she met on the Internet and- no sorry, no asking for permission, no apology, no "It's important", no reaction whatsoever- picked it up and jabbered into the phone for literally 25 or 30 minutes with me right there next to her. Non stop. For what must have been 30 blocks.

It may not be an issue of nationality, it might be an issue of young people in general.

[Dr. Keith]

A time-sensitive message that only requires a 2 or 3 letter reply. You've just strengthened my resolve that I would reply without even asking.

Agreed.

It is rude to interrupt a conversation that does not include you simply to ask permission to momentarily excuse yourself from the conversation that does not include you. It is presumes that your presence or attention is at all important to the prof and the other student, which it wasn't at that moment.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

The professor could have noticed me texting and might have been offended that I had chosen to do personal things while in her office while her back was turned. As with the army, the general rule with being with a teacher in their office is that you are "at attention" even when they aren't looking straight at you. Even when you aren't directly engaged with them, you can't behave as though you were alone and on your own. She might have also interpreted my texting as impatience at having to wait, which it wasn't. This wasn't about presuming I was important or my attention was needed, it was about the fact that I was supposed to be patiently waiting for her. She was not offended at being asked, just surprised.

Yes, please forgive me for being too polite and considerate. I probably should have just gone ahead and texted- and will probably do so next time- but I only asked because I thought she might not like it. That was all.

[bigred]

I've travelled all over the world and the manners of Americans are just as good as the manners of people anywhere else in the world. I'm not sure which Utopia your parents come from, but they should probably get to know more Americans. That way they may not feel the need to stereotype an entire nation of people. We have enough of that nonsense around here without having the parents of posters contribute to it.
I've traveled all over the world too (although perhaps not as extensively as you) and while rudeness is hardly limited to America, disagree w/you - America is worse on the whole than most places, at least those I've been to.

[sthomson]

It may not be an issue of nationality, it might be an issue of young people in general.

Ah yes, the classic complaint of anyone, from any time and any generation. "Young people today just don't have manners". Usually followed by an "In my day..."

The professor could have noticed me texting and might have been offended that I had chosen to do personal things while in her office while her back was turned.

Then excuse yourself and step out.

As with the army, the general rule with being with a teacher in their office is that you are "at attention" even when they aren't looking straight at you. Even when you aren't directly engaged with them, you can't behave as though you were alone and on your own.

What school do you attend that is even close to army-levels of formality? I have never met an American professor that expected this level of formality, and if they did I would be surprised. What if you are in a room with multiple professors having multiple conversations at once? How do you pay attention to all of them? Do you interrupt every conversation to insist that they validate your decision to answer a text message?

Furthermore, if it would be rude to divert your attention, why did you read the message in the first place? Surely fiddling with your phone is already the height of rudeness.

She was not offended at being asked, just surprised.

Of course she was surprised. It is completely out of the norm. I would be surprised if someone asked permission to do something as common and everyday as stepping out to take a call or fiddling with their phone for less than the second it takes to reply to a message.

I've traveled all over the world too (although perhaps not as extensively as you) and while rudeness is hardly limited to America, disagree w/you - America is worse on the whole than most places, at least those I've been to.

What's rude in one place can be polite in another, and vice versa. I find these generalities to be very tedious. "America" itself is a big continent, and as I have traveled extensively I find that manners are, everywhere, a function of culture - there are very, very few universals.

[NewtonTrino]

How quaint. I must be one of the rude ones because it would never even occur to me to ask permission or not text in that situation. To me replying to a txt is something I will do in the middle of a conversation.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Of course she was surprised. It is completely out of the norm. I would be surprised if someone asked permission to do something as common and everyday as stepping out to take a call or fiddling with their phone for less than the second it takes to reply to a message.


Again- I snuck a quick peak at it in the first place because she wasn't looking, she had been busy for a while, I assumed it would be nothing and intended to put it away in a second. As it turned out, good thing I did look at it.

When it wasn't nothing, I weighed whether to just answer or inform her that I got a text and ask if I could answer it. I decided it would be better to ask. Better safe than sorry. You do this when you are face to face with someone so it isn't a stretch to ask someone when you are in their close presence, even if they aren't talking to you just at that moment.

She was just a foot or so away so she might well have looked over and noticed and either disliked someone clicking in her ear (though my phone isn't loud, she still might have heard it) or have gotten the wrong impression- or both. Had I been at a distance, I'd have just replied. In an office full of people, each waiting for their turn, I obviously wouldn't have asked but I was pretty much one on one with her in an empty office with no one there but the three of us.

Yes, I was probably too formal, too cautious and too conservative but she is authority, she is an adult, she is an elderly person, I was her guest and I was there to ask her for a favor.

[Richard Masters]

Again- I snuck a quick peak at it in the first place because she wasn't looking, she had been busy for a while, I assumed it would be nothing and intended to put it away in a second. As it turned out, good thing I did look at it.

When it wasn't nothing, I weighed whether to just answer or inform her that I got a text and ask if I could answer it. I decided it would be better to ask. Better safe than sorry. You do this when you are face to face with someone so it isn't a stretch to ask someone when you are in their close presence, even if they aren't talking to you just at that moment.

She was just a foot or so away so she might well have looked over and noticed and either disliked someone clicking in her ear (though my phone isn't loud, she still might have heard it) or have gotten the wrong impression- or both. Had I been at a distance, I'd have just replied. In an office full of people, each waiting for their turn, I obviously wouldn't have asked but I was pretty much one on one with her in an empty office with no one there but the three of us.

Yes, I was probably too formal, too cautious and too conservative but she is authority, she is an adult, she is an elderly person, I was her guest and I was there to ask her for a favor.

1) Do you think you get anxious in social situations?
2) Are your parents considered social elite in their country of origin?

[ZirconBlue]

To me replying to a txt is something I will do in the middle of a conversation.

Now that is rude.

[NewtonTrino]

Now that is rude.

No matter what the context? Most normal people that I hang with are pretty technology enabled so I think a new code of behavior is being created that recognizes that you can do more than one thing at once.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

1) Do you think you get anxious in social situations?
2) Are your parents considered social elite in their country of origin?

Sometimes, yes.

Upper middle class, I suppose.


They are also from a conservative Roman Catholic nation where teachers are very highly respected (though that is changing over there).

[ZirconBlue]

No matter what the context? Most normal people that I hang with are pretty technology enabled so I think a new code of behavior is being created that recognizes that you can do more than one thing at once.

No. There's a new code of behavior that people think they can do more than one thing at once. People aren't nearly as good at multitasking as they think they are. In general, if you're talking to me, I'd appreciate it if you'd actually pay attention to me.

[stephenenelson]

Eeney, you're right to ask the question, because you're caught in the middle of a social change, at least in the US.

Five to ten years ago, I don't think there would be any question that you should ask before using your cell phone, even if it's to send a text message. Granted, with a text message, it's kind of on the far extreme, since it's hard to imagine such an activity being disruptive in a well-lit room, but it's a change in social context. You're no longer paying attention to the people in front of you, and so the change should be signaled.

That's changing. My wife thinks nothing of answering a cell phone call in the middle of a conversation. (Granted, she's a doctor, and her cell phone calls are kind of important.) Most of my friends happily stop chatting to do a quick wikipedia lookup. We're kind of in the post-context age.

You were looking out for other people's feelings and making sure you weren't being offensive, so I say right on.

[Richard Masters]

Sometimes, yes.

Upper middle class, I suppose.


They are also from a conservative Roman Catholic nation where teachers are very highly respected (though that is changing over there).

I used to walk very quietly to my boss's office and knock on the door, even if it was closed. I used to be very formal about it, and he would get very annoyed that I wasn't more direct when I needed something from him. It's got something to do with my early upbringing, namely that people with authority (elders, bosses, teachers) are to be respected and pleased. Manners (not money) are what separated the upper from the lower classes according to my grandparents. And my social anxiety fuels my adherence to these standards. The situation you presented, the way you described it, and your reaction to your parents reminded me of that.

[bigred]

What's rude in one place can be polite in another, and vice versa. I find these generalities to be very tedious. "America" itself is a big continent, and as I have traveled extensively I find that manners are, everywhere, a function of culture - there are very, very few universals.
For the most part, America is much more the same than diff wherever you go and only gets more so as time goes on and or country (and world) get "smaller." So for the most part, this is not correct. For the most part, rude is rude, wherever you go. (Again speaking of America, not the whole world, where what you say applies more)


How quaint. I must be one of the rude ones because it would never even occur to me to ask permission or not text in that situation. To me replying to a txt is something I will do in the middle of a conversation.
Your honor, Exhibit A. Not that that's exactly rare nowdays. Being polite and/or considerate towards people you're with/around is often considered quaint by many people today, esp when it comes to "texting" or flapping one's gums others' presence.

This kind of thing is exactly why I didn't become a teacher. I'd end up in jail for throttling some obnoxious snotty little brat who's in desperate need of it.

[bigred]

Yes, I was probably too formal, too cautious and too conservative but she is authority, she is an adult, she is an elderly person, I was her guest and I was there to ask her for a favor.
So you erred on the side of caution. Refreshing. Hell, shocking. :clap:

[bigred]

t people with authority (elders, bosses, teachers) are to be respected and pleased. Manners (not money) are what separated the upper from the lower classes
gasp

Dinosaur! Get that cell phone out and start jabbering about nothing in particular! er unless you're alone that is, then just fire up the ipod/iwhatever and crank up some weak excuse for music. ;)

[Naddig74]

I've been hunting in vain for a link to the recent report that concluded that (in the UK) older people are on the whole ruder than young people.

Anyone with better GoogleFu can find it?

[Richard Masters]

I used to walk very quietly to my boss's office and knock on the door, even if it was closed open. I used to be very formal about it, and he would get very annoyed that I wasn't more direct when I needed something from him.

Oops. Fixed that for myself.

[Soapy Sam]

No. There's a new code of behavior that people think they can do more than one thing at once. People aren't nearly as good at multitasking as they think they are. In general, if you're talking to me, I'd appreciate it if you'd actually pay attention to me.

I agree. Example:- A & B are working together. The phone rings and A answers.
B , realising from context that the caller is C, attempts to tell A that he (B) needs to talk with C, or to have A ask or tell C something.

A hangs up. B, now annoyed, promptly picks up the phone and calls C, whereupon A asks why B didn't ask for the phone before.

A completely failed to communicate with B, because he was concentrating on the call from C.


Yet ask A if he can safely drive in traffic and talk on the phone and he will be righteously indignant in his assurances.

People are very much poorer at communication multitasking than they think.