Gbaji wrote:
False dilemma. Again. I've already addressed this several times.
Gbaji wrote:
It's a false dilemma. It's never going to be a choice between me disrupting others by leaving the theater and me sending one or two texts. Anything that I can "fix" by sending a couple of text messages isn't something I need to deal with in real time. If it's important and time sensitive, I'll leave the theater and not come back until the issue is completely resolved. I'm not going to half-*** it by sitting in the theater potentially sending messages back and forth for an hour or more.
So, then you never answered the question, so stop pretending that you had and just answer the question.
Your argument doesn't even make sense. You're avoiding answering a question by saying it's a "false dilemma". If you refuse to answer the question, then just say so. Don't act like I'm asking you to divide by zero.
You're implying that a person can NOT only respond in 2-3 messages, that it HAS to be a full conversation. I already proven that false and I can do so again.
Person : "Hey, my pc took a dump and the meeting is in 45 mins, do you have a copy of our presentation"
You: "Yea, I burned a copy and placed it in my black folder in the third drawer of my desk"
Person "Thanks man, you're a life savor!"
You: "No, problem!"
That is a good example of something important but not necessarily important enough to get up and leave the theater. So, what is the least annoying action to do here? Partake in 4 texts (showing light in the theater) or get up and leave the theater (blocking the screen and causing people to adjust themselves)?
This is not a false dilemma.
Gbaji wrote:
Nope. This is the heart of the issue. I do not believe that there is anything so important that I must respond to it while watching a film, but to which I can respond merely by sending a text. If it's important enough for me to interrupt my movie-going experience (and that of everyone else's), I will leave the theater and call the person back. If they didn't leave a number for me to call, then it wasn't that important for them.
Well, that's just a difference of opinion. If you want to agree to disagree, then fine. I don't value a movie so much that I will ignore what's going on in REAL life. If the scenario above occurred, I would value that person having the presentation to brief way more important than a fragment of light that MIGHT annoy a grand total of 60 fragmented seconds of 2 a hour movie.
We can agree to disagree, but I question your judgement on determining what actually is important.
Gbaji wrote:
Want to know why I do this? Because in order for me to explain anything to someone that would be important enough for me to need to explain it to them, would take dozens of texts back and forth. Now maybe that's because my job is more technical than most, but in my experience, one 5 minute phone call can replace hours of texts back and forth. It's a vastly more effective communication medium.
That maybe true for you and your job, but that it isn't true for everyone else. Given that, you can't assume that to be true always.
Gbaji wrote:
So I can miss the movie? That seems... strange. More likely someone will justify that things are so important that they must text in the theater, but not want to miss the film, so they're willing to disrupt others viewing experience in order to maintain their own convenience. Yeah. That's a hell of a lot more likely. Don't you agree?
Nope.. Never see people go use the restroom or buy food/drinks from the concession stand? Yesterday, I saw a couple of people getting up, leaving and coming back. Buy everything you need and use the restroom before you enter the theater. If you gotta go, hold it till it's done.
The guy standing right in front of me literally blocking a part of the screen was thousands of pixels more annoying than the lights coming from the guys next to me.
Gbaji wrote:
Ok. Provide me an example of the last important text you sent while watching a movie in a theater. Since you said earlier that you have done this, I don't think it's unfair to ask what it was about.
I don't recall saying that. In any case, given the 3 year gap of not watching movies, I doubt I would remember it anyway if it were important.
Gbaji wrote:
Uh huh. And? What time sensitive emergencies arose which required that you respond to someone, but was still unimportant enough for you to do more than shoot back a text message while remaining in a theater watching a film? So if things fell apart, and you were responsible for things falling apart, you excused this with what? "No sir. I wasn't able to resolve the problem within the time needed. Well... I did send a text message to Jones telling him what to do. What was that sir? What was I doing? I was watching a film sir. Yes. I felt it was perfectly appropriate to continue watching the latest Harry Potter film rather than personally deal with this critical problem. Yeah. You'll have my resignation tomorrow".
You're confusing two arguments.
1. Texting something important, but not too important to have to leave the theater.
2. Being important enough to receive calls outside of the working hours.
You're combining the two.
Gbaji wrote:
Huh!? Where the hell did point #2 come from?
Almalieque wrote:
Eh, it's called being important. I assure you, no matter where you work or your position, if you're valuable to them, they will call you on your off time. You can make the decision to ignore them, but that goes back to your worth to the company. If you're in charge of something, and your subordinates call/text for something, ignoring it till the next day will only cause more damage.
Almalieque wrote:
So, no.. it is not the same thing. Not even close. If you're not being notified on that stuff till the next day, then either you, what happened and/or your position isn't important.
Hence why I said you were confusing two arguments. That was an entire different argument that I stated numerous times already. You, took my comments in reference to #2 and merged them with my comments with #1 creating a false argument that I never mentioned.
Gbaji wrote:
I just don't think that's a likely situation though.
Yet, I just gave you one in this post. Here's the thing though, I also mentioned texting "I'm sorry, in the theaters, I'll talk to you later". I think not telling a person that, but ignoring them is more inconsiderate to them than the people in the theater.