"Rehearsing" email

[Faith Weber <weber -at- EASI -dot- ENET -dot- DEC -dot- COM>]

>Maybe you could try to mimic the talking-listening interaction more.  You
>could send a response like "<puzzled look>," or phrase your reply "I'm not
>completely certain what you meant by ...  Was it ... ?"  I guess you might
>still run the risk of being considered thick-headed by those who aren't
>as compulsive as we are about writing.

This is true, and I have used this technique quite a bit. Sometimes
it's also effective if I can't seem to get an answer to a question
after asking several times -- rather than waiting I'll just say
"My understanding of the situation is . . . and that's what I'm going
to write, unless I hear something different from you." At that point
if I am mistaken people tend to respond immediately. I guess stating
my own interpretation makes it clearer to the writer what I've
misinterpreted, if anything, and makes it easier for him or her to
explain. I don't care if they consider me thick-headed, because I
know I'm not, and I know most people I work with will eventually
figure that out.

I guess I wasn't only thinking of email. I was also thinking of
technical documents I'm asked to edit, electronic conferences, etc.
In some cases it just seems that writers see my pointing out their
error (however delicate I try to be about it) as being unnecessarily
picky. And let's face it, being picky about language is a big part of my
job! So compared with others' responses to their work I may very well
be too picky.

By the way, by "writers" I am really referring to "software engineers
who write", not professional writers (kids, don't try this at home!).

Faith
weber -at- easi -dot- enet -dot- dec -dot- com