Posts Tagged ‘pet peeve’

“Do you want to fast track your…” what?

October 27th, 2009

I received an email today that began with a question:

Are you looking to fast track your degree?

What does that mean? I had to look it up

“fast track”

a rapid means of achieving a goal; “they saw independence as the fast track to democracy”; “he took a fast track to the top of the corporate …

Ah no thanks, I’m quite happy with the pace that my degree is going.

“Fast track” isn’t a colloquially used term. You’ll never find two friends talking to each other asking, “hey you wanna fast track…”, or “dude, are you going to fast track that or what?” It probably came straight out of a corporate ‘vision statement’ brainstorming session, so it sounds foreign to us.

Emails that open with a question are intended to provoke a “yes” answer, but in most cases, it sounds more like annoying marketing speak. Not the good kind of marketing speak. The good kind of marketing speak sounds authentic, like a recommendation from a friend–someone you can trust. No, this is a failed attempt at marketing because it emulates the bad kind of marketing. The bad kind of marketing is the stereotype we have of marketing and sales people. The scheming, lying, dishonest, blood sucking, scum filled rodents in this service oriented economy. They’re the people who send you spam, the people who are trying to sell you drugs that you don’t want, the people who pretend to be your friend at school and abandon you when you needed them, the people who made your baby cry.

Why do emails that start with questions like this trigger such strong emotions of distrust? Maybe it’s because we’re exposed to far too much of this from spam and advertising. “Are you looking for the perfect vacation”, “what are you waiting for?”, “feeling depressed?”, “are you ready to get back to school?”. As a result, we’ve instinctively learned to respond with “No, and go away!”

Another reason that emails like this provoke these feelings might be that the sender didn’t have permission to ask. They’re questions that require you to think and make a decision. Some of them are personal, and they’re not the kind of questions that you would ask someone during the first meeting. Subconsciously your mind is saying “how dare you ask me that, I barely know you!”. Asking a personal question first without an introduction is a bad way to greet someone. Asking, “what time is it?” to a stranger is ok because it has a factual answer, and the person asking really wants to know. Your answering it is helping some else. Helping others is a good feeling. Even then, that question is usually proceeded by a request for permission ”excuse me, what time is it?”. On the other hand, a personal question, even one like “How are  you?”, feels intrusive when it’s asked by a stranger. It provokes the response, “who are you to care?”, and in the context of a spam message, a positive response to it is like an invitation for more spam. Most people don’t like that.

A much better way to send that email would have been to use a more human greeting.

Hi Charles,

I’m from [blah] and we’re doing [this]. It might be interesting to you because you’re a computing student. etc etc..

There. That wasn’t so hard was it? It’s much more authentic, like a greeting from a real human, not a marketing drone.

Quay

July 21st, 2009

Whenever I see this word, my mental voice says ‘kway’. Why is it pronounced ‘key’? Words should be spelled the way they are pronounced, and words should be pronounced the way they are spelled. English is complexed enough as it is, why make it more complex than necessary? Language is a medium of communication, so it should be only as complex as necessary to convey ideas. It can have some extra features like synonyms because they help distinguish subtle differences in meaning and allow alternatives for creative expression, but features like arbitrary pronounciation rules add no value to a language.

If you designed a language today with a goal of efficiency in mind, I wonder what it would be like. Mathematics is an efficient language, but it’s a language for logic, not natural expression. In fact, it’s a horrible language for natural expression. It needs more ambiguity. A little bit of ambiguity is good in a language because it allows you to be creative, make puns, double entendres, and metaphors. Theres little room for that in mathematics.

An efficient natural language should allow anyone to express what they are feeling, their ideas, a set of instructions, an argument, and any form of verbal communication as easily as possible, but it needs to be flexible enough for a poet, a novelist, and any creative linguist to create verbal art like ones we have today, or better yet, allow poems to be even easier to write. Imagine a language that makes writing palindromes easy? Or a language where all words ends with similar sounds which make rhyming easy. What about a language where the accent on a vowel convey an emotion?

There are countless interesting features this language could have, the trick is finding a set of features that work well together. Whatever language features it has, let’s not have spelling “exceptions” that make English such a horrible second language to learn. When you are spending more time learning about spelling exceptions and silent letters than learning to communicate with that language, there’s something wrong. If you’re not a native speaker who grew up with these arbitrary rules, you’ll notice them. If you speak another language such as Spanish where pronounciation is almost never a problem, you’ll notice.

This is one of my pet peeves, unfortunately, there’s little I can do about it, but it does make me want to learn more languages!

pet peeve #1 generic email titles

June 7th, 2009

People who like to send email with generic titles like “help”, “hi”, and “question” should be stabbed in the index finger with a spoon.

That is all.