Why can't people read?!

[auserna]

It's bad enough when an OP on MN says, "I'm widowed, in my 40s, with two children aged 3 and 5. I'm struggling to keep on top of the housework and can't afford to pay for a cleaner," and the first three replies say, "Why can't your DH do his share of the housework," then, "How old are your children? Can't they help?" and, "Why don't you get a cleaner?" but people who are actually answering emails as part of their job, especially if their job is specifically administration, should surely be able to register more than the first sentence! I am so fed up of sending emails with a few related queries - which I clearly number or put in separate paragraphs - and only getting an answer to the first one if I'm lucky.

I wrote to someone recently and, in a new paragraph said, "Separately, could you also advise on..." Totally ignored. And it was not a long email by any means.

Another was along the lines of, "Please could you let me know the procedure for reserving Meeting Room B on a Tuesday?" and the answer came back, "As advised in our staff guidelines, Meeting Room A can be booked on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays."

Anyone else find this? And find it infuriating? Or should I henceforth limit myself to one-sentence emails and words of one syllable or fewer?

Yes it does, but in big organisations like HMRC where the staff are "marked" on number of emails/calls answered, it doesn't matter to them whether they actually deal with all the points raised correctly, it's just a matter of hitting targets. It's why this "target" culture embedded in organisations like HMRC and NHS cause more harm than good - the managers can claim how brilliant they are, because they're only working to one metric, i.e. number of calls answered or hours/days waiting (in NHS), and not whether the actual problem was rectified. In fact sometimes, like the NHS, it's better for the performance statistics if patients are fobbed off if they can be fobbed off quickly, i.e. hours in A&E, days waiting for GP appointment, etc., as that's the metric, and not whether the health issue is resolved or not! There's also the aspect that in contact centres, it'll be someone else who picks up the call/email/visit next time, so the original person won't have to deal with the consequences of not doing the job properly in the first place!

Plus they insist on teaching "inference" rather than understanding the facts as written.

@Talkingtomyhouseplants

I find this all the time OP - people also can’t be bothered to look up information for themselves.

Yes!!

Almost every week I get an email/phone call from a client asking me for their national insurance number! They're just too lazy to look for it themselves and too thick to make a note of it on their smartphone (or diary or calendar). Stupid thing is that they're the one who gave it me in the first place so they must have had it to hand at one time.

Same with asking how much tax they owe on payment day, despite me having written/emailed at least twice (sometime 3 times) beforehand and them also having received at least one reminder/statement from HMRC. And of course, then asking what HMRC's bank details are, despite them having used it for the last several years and their bank details always being on my letters/emails and on the HMRC statements/reminders.

Then they whinge when they notice an extra 5 minutes on the next bill for the email replying to their question? If they don't want to pay another few pounds then stop being so lazy and stop asking questions you could easily find the answer to yourselves!

@auserna I remember an account of a boy who had been challenged to find a method to add up all the numbers from 1 to 100. It didn't give the method, so I decided to work it out for myself. This was the apogee of my mathematical achievements!

(100 x 50) +50

I did, yes.
There were probably about 40.
He's room temperature, he's kicked his oxygen habit, he's dead dave were a few of them and I ended the whole thing with Elvis has left the building.

Which is exactly what I did so there is no excuse, but congrats on proving the point by also failing to read 🤣🤣🤣

Thank you !

Its really very funny that its actually happening on this thread

Actually my point was to send the emails the other way around, so the instructions are at the top and then the thing they refer to immediately underneath.

Did you work that out yourself or do you know it?!

The equation though is n(n+1)/2. Anyone who can develop the equation for themselves is very bloody clever imo. (And I had to do applied statistics at university ffs. Probably wasted.)

I worked it out for myself after doing that reading comprehension. I was either 8 or 9 at the time.

I worked it out. 100+0=100, 99+1=100, 98+2=100 and so on until you have 50 pairs of numbers adding up to 100 and as 50 is the only one that doesn't have a pair, you have to add it at the end

If communicating with randos on facebook frustrates you so much, why do it?

Yes, that was exactly my method, too. Obviously you can then extrapolate in order to add all the numbers from 1 to any other number.

We had a similar question in our pub quiz this week but it was what do the numbers on a roulette wheel add up to!

Not read through the thread, but the average reading age of an adult in the UK is 10.

Which may be why things get missed etc.