Is it dickish if i look at a message and then just leave it in

>>17760568
so ur one of those faggots huh. no wonder nobody replied to your thread, how's it feel cocksucker?

Yes. You're selfish.

>>17760568
sage this thread. go suck dick op.

>>17760601
>>17760605
back in the days people were more patient and would wait days or weeks for replies, what a privileged world we live in now where fags wants replies in seconds

>>17760626
and yet here u are asking for advice. check back in a few weeks and see what replies you get

a little bit. at least let them know you can't hang

>>17760638
to be fair that's not how 4chan works

>>17760626
>the way people did it in a different era should be understandable and acceptable for a group of people living in the current era, even though the people in the current era were not alive for the era during which people waited weeks for replies.

You bet! That's totally reasonable!

>>17760663
Funny how you nitpicked weeks but forget days since you both know instant messaging wasn't 200 years ago

I do this, it's a bit presumptuous that people think they're owed an immediate reply.

Also a great filter for crazy bitches, will drive them insane.

>>17760626
people don't write letters anymore unless its bill collector's or people in prison, faggot.

>>17760678
Instant messaging? I'm 31. Instant messaging is what I had when I was a teenager. That means the current crop of people in their late teens/early 20s were early elementary school children. So no, they weren't using instant messengers.

My gf keeps talking to me literally every day so when it annoys me i do this on purpose

>>17760568
When I was first messaging people as a teenager I told someone that I would have to do this and get back to them later or that I might take time to answer and noticed that they become more distant almost permanently if you do.

It's like being a good, honest person vs. using human psychology to have good, fast conversations in the future.

>>17760568
I don't think so, unless you do it on purpose to piss them off. I do it too because I check if it's something life threathening or otherwise important, and if not, I can get back to what I was already doing before the interruption. People need to realize that others have lives and things going on.
It's even worse with younger people because most of them are constantly on their phones addicted to social media.

>>17760568
I do this, it's fine op, if people want an instant answers they can call

>>17760568
A lot of it depends on context.

If you wife texts you "Mike and Tracey are coming over after work tonight" at 10am, it doesn't matter if it takes you six hours to reply.

If she texts you "My mum is coming over for dinner tonight, would you mind taking her home afterwards?", it warrants a faster response so that she can make whatever plans she needs to.

The whole point of text messages though is that you don't have to give an instant reply. If someone tries to convey something that needs immediate attention (eg "your house is on fire" or "my car's broken down can you come and get me") by text and they get left hanging, it's as much their fault for using the wrong method of communication as it is yours for not getting back to them.

No, it's not dickish. You have more things to do in life than respond to the messages of others. I do this all the time. I actually had my current gf tell me she likes the slower pace that I'll text at, it makes us both a lot more thoughtful about our conversation with one another rather than instant message-reply

>>17760568
You own your phone and you own your time. You can leave messages until it's convenient to read them, and answer them when it's convenient to answer them, and ignore them if you feel like it.