
Skype Etiquette - malte
http://techcrunch.com/2010/08/22/skype-etiquette/
======
bshep
Should really be 'IM Etiquette', this has happened to me, and I'm sure many
others, in other IM networks as well.

He hits the nail on the head on the rest of the article though.

~~~
masklinn
I have found quite the opposite. Most of his gripes would be easily fixed by
matching his usage of the software to his issues/requirements for them, and
about half of it either barely sensical whining or a desire to fundamentally
change 90% of the human population (which is not going to happen).

~~~
knowtheory
The goal of a post on etiquette, _IS_ to change the behavior of others.

As much as i dislike Arrington, he's absolutely correct on this. And as the
comment above notes, this is just as applicable for communication on IRC as it
is for Skype (well save for the video bit).

As Arrington's posts are applicable to basically every IM protocol, i'm
confused as to how you think Arrington's (and my) "gripes would be easily
fixed by matching [...] usage [...] to [the] issues/requirements for them".

This is basically a spam filtering problem, and you're blaming the guy getting
spammed.

~~~
masklinn
> This is basically a spam filtering problem, and you're blaming the guy
> getting spammed.

Only the gripe displayed in the video (and #2 on his list) is a spam issue,
and it's trivially fixed by disabling auditory alerts, which are not only
generally useless but systematically annoying.

Let's check the other ones:

> It’s not a conversation until both sides are engaged.

Maybe it's not a conversation at all, and just an RFI or whatever.
Furthermore, if you're not available _set your status to one that matches
instead of marking yourself as available at all time_.

You can even default your status to "Not Available" or "Do Not Disturb". That
way, people won't assume you're available... which is what you're saying by
using the "Available" status.

Waiting for a SYN/ACK on IMs is entirely useless and highly counter-
productive, you can ACK when you reply. In fact it's very annoying because I'm
out taking a shit and instead of asking whatever you need and going on with
your life as I come back and reply, you're either waiting in front of your
screen for my ACK, or you're gone doing something else and by the time you
come back I've ACKed and then I'm gone again, resetting the whole process.

If you want to converse, use VOIP.

> Don’t just jump right into a phone call. It’s polite to send a chat message
> first saying “online? time for a quick Skype call?” It’s annoying when the
> Skype phone starts ringing randomly.

it doesn't ring randomly, it rings when somebody calls, because they have
something to tell you in person. Don't want to answer the call? Then don't

> And all I wanted was a little bit of quiet.

See again, use your status already, if you're not available _say you aren't_.

> Video calls are not a God given right. Just because you want to do video
> right now doesn’t mean I want to.

Settings > Video > Show that I have video to > no one.

> Don’t assume confidentiality.

That has nothing to etiquette, it only has to do with not being retarded.

~~~
randallsquared
_If you want to converse, use VOIP._

Why not "if you want to converse, go visit them"? Most of the time when I want
to converse, I want to use text rather than deal with all the baggage of audio
and trying to manage social context -- context which is mostly absent in text.

~~~
masklinn
> Why not "if you want to converse, go visit them"?

Because you can't hit a button and be at their doorstep. With skype, calling
and texting have the same technical cost.

~~~
randallsquared
If you _could_ hit a button and be at their doorstep, the vast majority of
reasons to chat rather than going to visit them would still apply, though,
right? Going to visit someone has a major overhead, socially. A quarter hour
of conversation, at the least, before you can politely get to the subject of
the visit, etc. Phone conversations have some of the same costs to a lesser
degree: it's quite rude not to devote your full attention to the call (or
appear to do so), and there might well still be a few minutes of overhead.
With IM, you can almost just start talking. It cuts through all the extra junk
around actually having the interesting part of the conversation with a person,
but you can still have an actual conversation (even while you both do other
things as the other person types), which is important for discussing things at
length.

Basically, I would say that calling and texting have very different social
costs, but calling and visiting are much closer that way, and that this is why
it's almost always better to text than call, even for extended conversations.

------
kscaldef
I agree with most of the points, but the first is a little iffy. I'd rather
have someone just skype me their question than chase each other around all day
doing the "yt?" ... 15 min later ... "yes" ... 20 min later ... "sorry, I'm
back now. you still there?" ... dance.

~~~
brown9-2
The most annoying IM in the world might be "Can I ask you a question?"

~~~
lars512
Questions have context. Explaining them is easier if someone's there
interactively prodding for missing context you failed to give. "Can I ask you
a question?" == "Got a moment to chat interactively?"

~~~
brown
Agree, but willingness to answer also has context. I'm almost always willing
to answer simple questions such as "Where can I find XYZ?" I have to be in
proper mental state to answer more complex questions such as "Can we discuss
the large and complex proposal I sent via email yesterday?"

This is all amplified when you have virtual teams. Those more complex
conversations are more manageable when you are face to face. People can
express how busy they are and how focused they are. IM doesn't have that
luxury.

"Can I ask you a question?", in my personal experience, is usually a trap. If
it was an easy question, the other person would have just asked it. Therefore,
it's probably going to be a complex question that will take time and focus.

------
zacharypinter
I find it interesting to compare how I use Skype with how I use a regular
phone. With skype, I always IM the person first (usually just saying "skype?")
to see if they're available for a discussion. With regular phones, I'm used to
just calling.

The skype approach seems far more preferable. My guess is that as SMS/IM/VOIP
becomes more ubiquitous the standard etiquette will be to ask before calling.

~~~
masklinn
> The skype approach seems far more preferable. My guess is that as
> SMS/IM/VOIP becomes more ubiquitous the standard etiquette will be to ask
> before calling.

That makes sense for services where voice is a peripheral system (MSN, iChat,
...) but I fail to see what sense it makes for Skype, which is first and
foremost a VOIP system, with instant messaging tacked on.

If you don't want VOIP as a primary communication device, here's an idea:
don't use a VOIP service as you primary communication network. Use some other
IM, and when somebody requests a voice communication and you allow for it, you
start the call (from a skype account set as invisible)

~~~
sprout
The segmentation between voice, sms, im, and video is obnoxious. Some sort of
open XMPP is ideal. I don't want a different contact name for every medium. (I
may want separate contact info for other purposes, but not for something
that's a technical distinction like video vs. voice.)

------
morganpyne
Once of my biggest pet peeves with Skype is the way presence notification
permissions are handled. The default way to make contact with somebody seems
to be "add them to my contact list" which then initiates a message exchange of
"Can I see when you are online". The problem with this is that and once
granted, presence notification permissions live on the other person's computer
and _cannot be revoked_. Removing them from your contact list does not prevent
them seeing your online status and blocking them outright is the only
solution. This is overkill however since I may wish to be able to receive
calls/chats from them still but don't want to broadcast my online presence to
them.

While I can of course change my status to invisible, this is a global setting
and affects all my contacts. I now live in a permanent state of lurking on
Skype, because so many business contacts have initiated contact with the "can
I see you online" and would have taken offense if I simply said no.

In short, I would love to see better presence notification options in Skype
including the ability to revoke permissions and to partition people into
groups and assign a corresponding status to each group.

------
kmfrk
I will never understand why people will want to use alert sounds in the first
place. I'm happy I still retain most of my functional hearing after enabling
alert sounds in Messenger inadvertently while wearing headphones.

------
hebejebelus
I've never seen anyone abuse the enter button like he describes. On the other
hand, if they did, I'd block them before they finished their second message.

~~~
illumin8
Watch the video in the article. It is truly ridiculous what the person he is
chatting with does, and I can completely understand why he would block them.

~~~
ugh
(As Arrington writes in the comments, that’s a re-enactment, not a real
conversation. I have seen people do that, though.)

------
ErrantX
"It’s annoying when the Skype phone starts ringing randomly"

You mean like, uh, when someone phones you normally? my counter view is that I
hate it when people send me a chat saying "hey are you free for a phone call".
Am I signed into Skype? Yes. That means I am probably able to take your call.
Sheesh :)

~~~
mseebach
Just because Skype replicates most of the functionality of a phone, it's not
required that we import the bad parts from the phone.

I guess the difference is really whether you consider Skype an IM that's also
a phone, or a phone that has IM. You're in the last camp, Arrington (and
myself, for that matter) is in the first.

~~~
ErrantX
I'm not entirely in disagreement - but I dislike the idea of it becoming
ettiquette. Me pressing call _is_ the bit where I check if you're available.

Part of the problem is that it's not always simple to silence a Skype call
(like you could a phone) if you're busy. But then you also have the option,
unlike a phone, of marking yourself as busy.

That last bit is, for me, the better innovation :)

(BTW constantly asking permission is a common grip of mine; "can I ask a
question?" is one of the most annoying things in the world :))

------
RK
Maybe I interact with a different group of people, but I always use Google
Talk/XMPP as my IM service and Skype only for VOIP/video.

------
chrischen
They need to let people see each other's message as they type it. Then people
will start doing paragraphs... hopefully.

------
AlexC04
Skype Etiquette #4(b) \- Wear pants.

------
troymc
Maybe some people think the space bar and the Enter/Return key "do the same
thing" so they push the one that's most convenient?

------
unscene
HEY IS ANYONE GOING TO COMMENT? HELLO, ARE YOU GOING TO COMMENT? WHY AREN'T
YOU COMMENTING? GOD YOU'RE AN ASSHOLE! FINE BYE.

