The Secret to Disconnecting? Bring Back the 'Away' Message (wsj.com) 115
An anonymous reader shares a report: Over the last year, gadget and software makers have developed ways for users to better manage their relationship with technology. They make it easier to ignore notifications or quiet all but the most important stuff. But even the latest mobile OS updates don't address the entire problem. In this always-on era, we are assumed to be near our phones all the time, and there is no good way to signal to the world when we are not. There is no way to proclaim, "I'm not available, I won't see your notification, and I won't care until next Sunday." The solution isn't complicated. In fact, it has been around since the '90s. It is called an "away" message, and we need it now more than ever.
Most people's first experience with an away message came on AOL Instant Messenger. Those were the days before mobile, when you could only be online while sitting at the computer -- probably a wheezing beige colossus running Windows 95. Rather than log off every time you had to run to the store, AIM allowed you to change a small icon next to your name from green, which signified you were online and available, to red, which meant you were temporarily indisposed. [...] Away messages helped users understand why their buddies weren't responding. More important, away messages offered permission to actually go away. If someone needed you urgently, they would try another route, but mostly they would leave you alone. You weren't ignoring them on purpose; you were just gone.
Most people's first experience with an away message came on AOL Instant Messenger. Those were the days before mobile, when you could only be online while sitting at the computer -- probably a wheezing beige colossus running Windows 95. Rather than log off every time you had to run to the store, AIM allowed you to change a small icon next to your name from green, which signified you were online and available, to red, which meant you were temporarily indisposed. [...] Away messages helped users understand why their buddies weren't responding. More important, away messages offered permission to actually go away. If someone needed you urgently, they would try another route, but mostly they would leave you alone. You weren't ignoring them on purpose; you were just gone.
Funny, just not answering the phone.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Am I the only one that screens?
Am I the only person in the world that doesn't feel obligated to not only NOT answer every text and call as it comes in (if I'm otherwise occupied) immediately if at all?
Are that many people so hooked, that they can't put it down and leave it alone for hours at a time at least?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A buddy called me last night to meet for coffee.... Had my phone on silent and in the other room, and I was busy anyways.
He called SIX F***ING TIMES!!! Then he called my GF to see if I was all right...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Funny, just not answering the phone.... (Score:5, Funny)
No, he was calling to hook up because he had pretty good evidence that you were out of touch.
Re: (Score:2)
He might have genuinely been worried.
I have friends who respond so reliably that if they were to not respond for a couple hours I might actually genuinely worry they got into a car accident or were otherwise not okay. I'd probably not call-spam them into oblivion, though.
Re: (Score:2)
He was.... but I don't always answer my phone, either.
Re: (Score:2)
Are "helicopter friends" now a thing? This is a little creepy. Your friends are grown men and women, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone knows you have a cellphone so they'll call you anyway. I can set up a do-not-disturb period on my phone but Android has a pretty crappy method of managing who can get through that filter; if I include anyone from work in my contact list, they'll get through. I don't much want to turn it off as I could miss a call from the kids or wife. Any many/most phones don't have a go-to-voice-mail-w/o-ringing option so you're interrupted by the damned thing anyway. If it's going to ring 5-6 times before going
Re: (Score:2)
I get a version of this, but without the email reference. He often comes to my desk and just continues the conversation that he started in an email or Slack message that he sent just before getting up from his chair about 10 m away. Our encounters often start with a sensation of a blown short-term memory.
Re: (Score:2)
I like a nice unobtrusive, easy-to-ignore default ring tone for just that reason - if you're not in my contact list, or I just didn't decide you're worth interrupting my life for, I'll know there's a call coming in, and unless I'm bored you can leave a message if it's important. Friends and family get a different ring tone, since the odds are good that I'd like to talk to them. And my boss and office manager get their own, since they're unlikely to call unless it's important (not necessarily to me, but th
Re: (Score:2)
Android has a pretty crappy method of managing who can get through that filter; if I include anyone from work in my contact list, they'll get through.
With an Android phone, in the "do not disturb" section in settings, you can set it so that the "Favourites" group is the only group that will ring through do-not-disturb. That's the group of people that you've starred in your contacts and they're the ones that show up first in your contacts list, above the normal alphabetical order.
Put your family and importa
Re: (Score:2)
For me, it's "None of your goddamned business whether I'm at my computer or not, idle or not idle, playing whatever game or starting to surf the web (thanks startup pages), or the last website I visited (thanks web-page referral links), or whether I'm doing software development (thanks 3rd party applications that require you to log in."
Re: (Score:2)
Bring Back the 'Away' Message -- not answering the phone
I was going to mention that. My cell phone insists on ringing during a call, temporarily interrupting it. That's a "call alert" or some such nonsense. I can disable it by dialing a prefix Every Single Time I call out but doesn't disable on answering a call.
I called the company (Verizon) about disabling this feature. "It's just a feature added into my phone's feature-set. No extra charge." "Can I get it removed?" No, but it's a free feature." "Can I *PAY* for it to be removed?" "No, we can't do that
In other words... (Score:2)
The Secret to Disconnecting? Put down the damn phone and walk away!
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You can have quality or availability, but not both. If you need both, pay for more employees.
We just got a new administrator who does not get this - at all. She even got angry when I tried to explain the concept to her.
Time to update the ol’ resume...
Re: (Score:2)
Not if you're Wall Street. Chalk this up to investors who demand that you're ALWAYS more profitable and ALWAYS have more market share than the previous quarter. Hell if you were a 100% no competition monopoly I'd think they'd STILL demand growth. It's a fundamental problem with unchecked capitalism. Greed overtakes everything else to the point everything else breaks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But, it does have a nifty "Busy" and "Do Not Disturb" setting. My boss was like "why are you always in those modes". To which I reply, "Oh, I can multi-task, but don't fret over any mistakes I might introduce"
You're at work, the normal state is that you're working not goofing off. Those settings are useful to say "Busy = This better be important" or "DND = This better be an emergency" but if you're constantly using them they mean nothing. If anything it makes you look like you're crying wolf or consider yourself too important to talk to mere mortals. If people bother you with stupid shit when you're available then take up what role you have and who should be contacting you and why. And if they don't have a reaso
Re: (Score:2)
Bully for you if you have a job where needless interruptions won't cause business problems, but many do. Sounds like they're being used as designed to me.
Re: (Score:1)
The one nice thing about having people use Skype/Teams on O365 is that Skype tracks your calendar and will put you in "busy" status when you have calendar items marked certain ways. It's been a real benefit to some of my staff since they can declare parts of their day in their calendar as "leave me alone" time blocks, like when they're coding.
Of course, you have to have pretty heavy buy-in to the O365 platform for this to be effective.
Re:Skype for Business (Score:4, Interesting)
you have to have pretty heavy buy-in to the O365 platform
It's not "buy-in" when you're talking about O365, it's "rent-in".
Re: (Score:2)
I prefer not having the busy/DND options and just ignoring stuff. The busy indicator just leaks information about your status and makes people upset when you appear to be available but don't answer.
Better to just keep them wondering if they are being ignored or you are in the bathroom or what. Might even encourage them to send an async message rather than demanding your attention immediately.
"If you don't receive a reply... (Score:3, Interesting)
It's because I'm away or simply because I don't want to answer. (You decide)."
That was my status message on my IM clients and I never used the "away" status. For some reason it worked, because it left to the sender with the responsibility of deciding what was the actual reason for not receiving an answer. And because that simple reason no-one ever felt offended because no-one wanted to think that I do not want to answer.
I think we have a really deep cultural problem, fueled by the IM applications were there is an "expectation" of being available all the time... With the message status confirmations is even worse. Sometimes you simply cannot answer (I.E.: you check your phone in the middle of a meeting and is nothing of importance so you can answer after the meeting is finished).
We need to learn again to not to expect an immediate answer.
Re: (Score:2)
>"I think we have a really deep cultural problem, fueled by the IM applications were there is an "expectation" of being available all the time.."
Yes, that, and also not understanding the better ways to contact individuals based on who they are and what the topic/content is. The example I give is repeatedly trying to educate my family NOT to text me with things that don't REQUIRE reasonably fast response:
1) General info and/or long, and can wait: Send Email.
2) Specific questions or info that need a resp
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I think we have a really deep cultural problem, fueled by the IM applications were there is an "expectation" of being available all the time...
You don' t need a "status" message, just don't run the program. If you're running an IM client, then why shouldn't someone assume you are accepting IMs? If you're not running the IM client, then it is pretty obvious that you aren't available.
Re: (Score:2)
It's because I'm away or simply because I don't want to answer. (You decide)."
That was my status message on my IM clients and I never used the "away" status. For some reason it worked, because it left to the sender with the responsibility of deciding what was the actual reason for not receiving an answer. And because that simple reason no-one ever felt offended because no-one wanted to think that I do not want to answer.
I find this to be pointless. People trying to contact you fall into two basic categories, someone who always respects my time and someone who never respects my time. The former will not bother me unless it's important if I'm busy, the later doesn't care as they think their problem is more important than anything else. The later will bug you until you respond and really should be told to sod off at an earlier opportunity before they get too emotionally invested.
I think we have a really deep cultural problem, fueled by the IM applications were there is an "expectation" of being available all the time... With the message status confirmations is even worse. Sometimes you simply cannot answer (I.E.: you check your phone in the middle of a meeting and is nothing of importance so you can answer after the meeting is finished).
IM isn't responsible for this, its a bad work c
Valid point, maybe but not THAT necessary.... (Score:3)
I agree that most modern chat clients lack the traditional "Away" message and mechanism. But you can still do things like set "Do Not DIsturb" on your iPhone or Mac (complete with the ability for selected people to punch through that anyway, if needed).
And like someone else pointed out .... simply not responding is like letting your telephone ring and not picking it up. You didn't have to have a recorded message pick up to tell them you're not available to talk. A lack of a response is sufficient.
Re: (Score:2)
Which solves the problem of not being disturbed by the call, but does not solve the problem of telling the other person "I'm not taking calls right now." A lack of response could be "not taking calls, will call back" or it could be 100 other things.
Re: (Score:1)
You Should already have an Obvious Solution (Score:3)
Personally, when I'm not at work, I mute the ringer and put the phone on its charger in another room. A previous post noted just don't answer. I know people who power down their phones when they want some personal time.
If you can't stay away from the phone or it must be by you at ALL TIMES, then I think the problem is more addiction related than there being the need for the manufacturer/OS developer to come up with an "away" message.
Sigh. Paywalled arwticle. (Score:2)
Oh, wait, what am I saying?
This is /.
I don't need to read TFA or the summary to make expert comments!
Since the 90's? Are you kidding me? (Score:3)
The vacation message was an old tradition when I got my first Internet account in about 1986. They've been around at least since the sixties. Granted, not many people got them back then, but I'm sorry, I just can't let the idea that AOL of all people invented them pass without comment. AOL was the beginning of the end of the collegial Internet, where we respected each other and didn't spam each other, and vacation messages _worked_. AOL's vacation messages were spammy and created mail loops, which really sucked.
I guess it's kind of funny that AOL is now ancient history—at the time it was the latest new disaster. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh yeah, definitely. But we didn't spam each other. There were standards. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Me too.
Re: (Score:2)
Me too
Re: (Score:2)
Me too!
(for the uninitiated, one could find threads with dozens or more peoples saying me too. It was *always* attached to an OP asking "where's the porn?". This was right after AOL integrated USENET.
gudTiemz
Re: (Score:2)
He's not talking about email, vacation messages, or AOL vacation messages.
Re: (Score:2)
I know, he's talking about AIM, and it had presence notification, which was a nice thing, which I'm pretty sure they didn't invent. But the principle is the same whether it's a vacation message or a presence indicator. And AOL's vacation messages really did suck.
well in this office when you set to away you n pto (Score:2)
well in this office when you set to away you need the pto to cover it and Yeeeeaaaahh, I'm gonna need you to come in on Saturday.
I use away in Microsoft Teams and Skype... (Score:1)
Not pro-active enough (Score:5, Insightful)
We need more than just an away message feature.
We need a proactive "I do not respond to notifications, texts, or other attempts to gain my attention" message.
I am sick as fuck at the constant "Site $FOO wants to send you notifications, ?" I get on the internet these days. NO, I DO NOT WANT YOUR NOTIFICATIONS, I NEVER ASKED TO BE NOTIFIED ABOUT ANYTHING FROM YOU, I AM JUST PASSIVELY READING YOUR SITE. LEAVE ME TO READ IN PEACE.
It gets even worse when these sites detect "oh, you are using a mobile device according to your agent string! I will try some underhanded assfuckery to try to get your device to start automatically accepting notifications! Because we just KNOW YOU WILL LOVE THAT!" and start hammering my device as long as I have the browser open.
No, I want a feature that I can turn on, system wide, on all my devices that sets the default mode of "NO, DO NOT WANT, DO NOT SEND OR TRY FUCKERY TO BE ABLE TO SEND." Optionally with a password locked means to whitelist certain things.
Sadly, the powers that be in the universe seem hell bent on ensuring that every nanosecond of time is being spent being accosted by an endless and relentless torrent of "HEY HEY HEY LISTEN HEY HEY HEY!" from site operators, advertisers, and application developers, all trying to squeeze profit from the forced eyeball time.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You can turn that notifications thingy off in FF, probably Chrome too.
For Firefox, open:
about:config
then set:
dom.webnotifications.enabled
to:
false
Re: (Score:2)
"HEY HEY HEY LISTEN HEY HEY HEY!"
Fucking Navi.
Oh look it's the lame-ass filter. Yep, slashdot is still incompetent
Re: (Score:2)
I am sick as fuck at the constant "Site $FOO wants to send you notifications, ?"
Yes. A bunch of sites have those every time I log in. And also the 'please accept our coockies' prompt. And also the 'please disable adblock' prompt. That's waiting for 3 popups to appear and be clicked on. Waste of time. Is there some Firefox plugin to get rid of those ?
Re: (Score:2)
Is there an app for this? (Score:2)
Is there no app that would allow you, with the push of one button, to set all your mesaging, email, etc to predefined statuses? "Away from my desk", or "out to lunch", etc..
Seems like a relatively easy thing to do.
Maybe I will do it...
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't easy because there is a variety of modes for communication. Many don't allow API access.
-For voice calls, they need to be re-routed to an Away recording
-SMS will have to be blocked with an auto-response. These seems like the easiest one to do.
-Facebook Messenger, and many others: No API access. Messages will queue on the server.
Re: (Score:2)
OT: Hey, I work at a law firm. I never knew there was an app for their appearances.
Personally, I just use a mirror. But...
IANAL
/away isn't there for a reason (Score:2)
You may find you like it and are more relaxed with it on, since you can politely tell everyone 'get lost I'm busy'.
Social media and the online ecosystems don't want that, since it takes away from their product (which is you).
Mine is simpler (Score:2)
Self-Discipline.
Re: (Score:2)
Look around you. Most people dont understand self discipline, even as a concept, any more. Its just noise to these kids, a phrase thay recognize but dont truly understand
Don't just blame the kids, bucko! We *invented* this shit.
Good, point. Can't see it happening though. (Score:2)
Yes, we do need this more now than ever.
It always struck me as strange that we had IM clients on our computers for so long, then there was this strange lag while we got something comparable on smartphones. Then when we did, it was like we started from scratch.
Regardless, I don't think it will happen. The world has gone notification-mad, there's barely an app (or website) out there that doesn't want to notify you of something. That's clearly because they need your attention to help monetize the platform (
Good idea! (Score:2)
My phone already has a feature that if it's connected to my vehicle's Bluetooth, it will auto-respond to any text messages informing the sender that I'm driving and cannot respond.
It'd be great to have just an away button I can tap, or part of the do-not-disturb functionality, so yeah, we need an 'away' button that will auto-respond just like my driving thing does.
Obviously the software can already do this, just need some more controls over it.
Re: (Score:2)
My phone already has a feature that if it's connected to my vehicle's Bluetooth, it will auto-respond to any text messages informing the sender that I'm driving and cannot respond.
Cool. So someone else who is driving breaks the law and texts you, and you both get punished by having 8313 incoming SMS after your two-hour drive.
Better yet, you get pulled over for a minor infraction and the officer thinks you've been texting in violation of the law. He looks at your SMS history and sees 8313 outgoing text messages while you've been driving.
That's like a huge fine at least in Oregon.
Re: (Score:2)
So someone else who is driving breaks the law and texts you, and you both get punished by having 8313 incoming SMS after your two-hour drive.
No. No court is that stupid, sorry buddy. The text message even says 'Auto-response' in it. Don't be stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
No. No court is that stupid, sorry buddy.
The court might look at the content of the messages and decide they were all auto-responses, BUT THE COP WHO WRITES THE TICKET probably will not. You've fallen into the trap of thinking that something is not illegal and you won't get punished for it as long as a court eventually finds you not guilty. You're spending an awful lot of time and money waiting for that final verdict. If you're one of the first people who hits the top offender category (X many times in Y years) you may even get a nice newspaper st
Re: (Score:2)
Why would a cop care what port I was using? (TCP/UDP - EMC2 (Legato) Networker or Sun Solcitice Backup (Official) [7937-9936])
Wrong problem (Score:2)
If after 20 years of ubiquitous text messaging some senders haven't left behind the expectation of immediacy, that's their problem. Pandering to them by giving them presence information won't help.
Out of my mind (Score:2)
Back in 15 minutes.
but i am not away (Score:2)
I actually need to wear away message IRL so people won't bother me.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't bath.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
not really a solution (Score:1)
Not just away! (Score:2)
Invisibilty, do not disturb, idled, custom status, etc.
But that was another time (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And when it comes, they will have spent years brain-washing^W^Wadvertizing^Wpersuading^W"informing" 'tweeners that they simply *must* have the latest chip installed into their face. It will come in pretty, customizable colors, matched to their mood, with cute little "Hello Pussy" and other cartoon images. It will be always on, always fun!
funny I found a older solution to the problem (Score:1)