Texting: Stupidity of Read Receipts. Only needed for work/military purpose.

[Bird Larry]

I've dealt with this so much with day gaming and night gaming. Women reply horribly with read receipts. 

Recently, in Korea, the monopolistic message company called 'Kakaotalk' had its data center crashed and crumbled having all Korean civilians inept in writing through texts in their social groups. For a day, nobody was able to send messages because afterall, the company monopolized the Korean industry. 

Kakaotalk does not give options on whether one can or cannot turn off read receipts. Since using 'unseen' apps that helps people read messages without having it labeled "read" I found people respond much more comfortably, freely.

With "read" on the line always being spied on by the other, one cannot write with adequate time, both parties are incapable of having a conversation that is without hypocrisy. Speech needs time and space. People are prone to insecurity and vulnerability, and they spy on other people's body language, which makes communication impossible, sterile. 

In my experience, meeting countless people socializing in clubs and in the streets, I've found 80% of people at least cannot deal with read receipts in a healthy way. Once it is labeled read, and it is not replied in 10 minutes, the other person imagines all kinds of stupidities. Not only the insecure one, but also the secure one gets into the same spiral with the insignificant one. Both parties are dragged into the ground, both parties become sterile and dumb in conversation. 

Whatsapp at least gives us options to discard read receipts. Texting, writing is essential in relationship. Anybody who underestimates the value of texting does not understand a thing about how the world works. 

I guess unless the recipient is working in a military organization, having read receipts in their texting is totally understandable. In fact, needed. But in friendships, family, and dating, it's utterly totally useless. Even the most normal person cannot handle read receipts.

 

[something_else]

I don't think having them or not having them would actually alter anyone's texting that much.

It's frustrating because getting left on read is frustrating. It's much nicer to just get blanked with absolutely no response than it is to get left on read.

After it happens to you a lot you stop caring. Or if you have enough abundance you stop caring.

On WhatsApp you can use your phone's notifications to read messages without actually marking them as read, and you can also hold down on the convo (on iPhone) to temporarily view it without marking it as read. On Snapchat you can swipe and hold into the convo to read it without marking it as read. Which I know a lot of people do. So there are ways around read receipts if you really need that.

Ultimately when it comes to a girl though, whether there are read receipts or not isn't going to change whether she's attracted to you or not. It simply determines how frustrating it is to your lizard brain when she rejects you by leaving you on read.

[Bird Larry]

@something_else no. It's the other way around, not how you think everybody is. 

You've just never left somebody on read and answered a day later.

Edited October 17, 2022 by Bird Larry

[something_else]

1 hour ago, Bird Larry said:

@something_else no. It's the other way around, not how you think everybody is. 

You've just never left somebody on read and answered a day later.

I've left people on read and not responded. Most of the time it's because there was clearly no chemistry and I wasn't interested in the person and they probably felt the same way. I don't see why you'd bother reading a message and then not just replying pretty quick.

The excuse of "sometimes I'm busy" which I've heard as a criticism of read receipts is irrelevant because you just wait until you're not busy to open the message to begin with. IMO that actually encourages you to be slightly more organic in your conversations rather than spending ages constructing messages. Texting is supposed to be organic and off the cuff most of the time

If a person freaks out about you leaving them on read for whatever reason then that's their issue. With girls it might even help you although that's a tad manipulative.

I just don't see how it's that big of an issue

[Tyler Robinson]

13 minutes ago, something_else said:

I've left people on read and not responded. Most of the time it's because there was clearly no chemistry and I wasn't interested in the person and they probably felt the same way. I don't see why you'd bother reading a message and then not just replying pretty quick.

The excuse of "sometimes I'm busy" which I've heard as a criticism of read receipts is irrelevant because you just wait until you're not busy to open the message to begin with. IMO that actually encourages you to be slightly more organic in your conversations rather than spending ages constructing messages. Texting is supposed to be organic and off the cuff most of the time

If a person freaks out about you leaving them on read for whatever reason then that's their issue. With girls it might even help you although that's a tad manipulative.

I just don't see how it's that big of an issue

Not meaning to oftend you. But recently a guy on the forum was ghosted by his ex. And it was unbearable and he talked about suicide. His messages were left on read. I was ghosted by my ex too. It felt like a mental shock. So I could understand what he was going through. I felt so much pity for him, I cried so badly. I even offered myself to him as a rebound that he could use to get over his ex for a few weeks. It was that bad. He thanked me later for serving as a temporary girlfriend and for giving him emotional support. It's okay to not read or reply stuff if it's a casual date and you know that person since a few days to a week. But in a relationship that's, beyond two months, ghosting, leaving on read, blocking etc, even dumping by text, basically not giving proper closure to the other person, I see these behaviors as reckless and uncaring of the other's emotional states. 

[something_else]

21 minutes ago, Tyler Robinson said:

Not meaning to oftend you. But recently a guy on the forum was ghosted by his ex. And it was unbearable and he talked about suicide. His messages were left on read. I was ghosted by my ex too. It felt like a mental shock. So I could understand what he was going through. I felt so much pity for him, I cried so badly. I even offered myself to him as a rebound that he could use to get over his ex for a few weeks. It was that bad. He thanked me later for serving as a temporary girlfriend and for giving him emotional support. It's okay to not read or reply stuff if it's a casual date and you know that person since a few days to a week. But in a relationship that's, beyond two months, ghosting, leaving on read, blocking etc, even dumping by text, basically not giving proper closure to the other person, I see these behaviors as reckless and uncaring of the other's emotional states. 

This isn't even a read-receipts issue. This is separate. Read-receipts could not exist and the person in this context could just have stopped replying out of nowhere and it would have created the same result.

Being left on read hurts like hell until you get desensitized to it. But yes that is all in the context of the initial phase of a relationship where there is little commitment or trust and you are just starting to message each other. Obviously doing that to someone you have already established a relationship with is toxic and wrong. I don't think anyone disagrees on that. But it's a much rarer and separate issue. For a guy you're going to get ghosted and left on read by like 85%+ of the girls you start texting so you have to become desensitized to it.

[Tyler Robinson]

1 minute ago, something_else said:

This isn't even a read-receipts issue. This is separate. Read-receipts could not exist and the person in this context could just have stopped replying out of nowhere and it would have created the same result.

Being left on read hurts like hell until you get desensitized to it. But yes that is all in the context of the initial phase of a relationship where there is little commitment or trust and you are just starting to message each other. Obviously doing that to someone you have already established a relationship with is toxic and wrong. I don't think anyone disagrees on that. But it's a much rarer and separate issue. For a guy you're going to get ghosted and left on read by like 85%+ of the girls you start texting so you have to become desensitized to it.

That must suck. Sorry. I feel you. But I have rejected guys. It's something I don't know what to do about. I always feel guilty later. 

 

[something_else]

28 minutes ago, Tyler Robinson said:

That must suck. Sorry. I feel you. But I have rejected guys. It's something I don't know what to do about. I always feel guilty later. 

 

You shouldn't feel guilty. Guys mostly need to learn to accept this and not care rather than getting upset by it

[Bird Larry]

.

18 hours ago, something_else said:

I've left people on read and not responded. Most of the time it's because there was clearly no chemistry and I wasn't interested in the person and they probably felt the same way. I don't see why you'd bother reading a message and then not just replying pretty quick.

You require the other person to reply with a message in a minute after reading. 

If that's your idea of communication then you must have a lot of awkward conversations in your life. 

Edited October 18, 2022 by Bird Larry

[something_else]

12 hours ago, Bird Larry said:

.

You require the other person to reply with a message in a minute after reading. 

If that's your idea of communication then you must have a lot of awkward conversations in your life. 

I don't require it. It doesn't bother me if they take longer to reply. But, as a general rule the kind of conversations I'm having with girls are not ones where I'm putting more than a few seconds thought into each message, and it's the same from the girl.

[Bird Larry]

@something_else I guess then all your message conversations are without thought. 

Edited October 18, 2022 by Bird Larry

[something_else]

11 minutes ago, Bird Larry said:

@something_else I guess then all your message conversations are without thought. 

With, girls pretty much. I've found the more thought I put into messages the less interesting girls find me over text. Texting with girls should be fun and light-hearted, not serious. If I'm discussing philosophy or spirituality or something with a friend, talking with work colleagues, or talking on a forum I put a bit more thought in.

[Bird Larry]

@something_else I guess then with you texting with girls, you are fun, light-hearted, and not serious. 

[something_else]

3 minutes ago, Bird Larry said:

@something_else I guess then with you texting with girls, you are fun, light-hearted, and not serious. 

Uhh, yes?

[Bird Larry]

@something_else Congratulations.