Pet Peeves: Aka Things That Make You Go "Gah!"

[WritinMan]

4 hours ago, 2727 said:

How does everyone feel about people who leave hats on during the National Anthem? Offensive or don't care?

Offensive.

[WritinMan]

On 10/12/2018 at 1:41 AM, BookWoman56 said:

The absolute overkill on pumpkin spice-flavored food items needs to stop now. I walked into the grocery store, only to have my sensibilities assaulted by a huge display of pumpkin spice Cheerios. And if I was not hallucinating from the initial shock of the Cheerios, there was also a display of pumpkin spice Frosted Flakes. What in the actual fuck?

While at the local grocery store today, I saw several packages (over 12) of pumpkin brioche on the bargain rack. Overestimated the public's enthusiasm for that, hmmmm?

Edited October 16, 2018 by WritinMan

[theredhead77]

10 hours ago, 2727 said:

How does everyone feel about people who leave hats on during the National Anthem? Offensive or don't care?

Don't care. At a sporting event I won't take my hat off and I don't give a shit if the people around me do or don't. I'm more annoyed by people talking and screwing around instead of paying attention.

[DeLurker]

10 hours ago, Bastet said:

As an atheist, I have no dog in this race, but while I think miniskirts and tube tops aren't the way to go in church, I don't think requiring dresses and pantyhose is either.

I apologize if I offended anyone who does attend church in comfortable clothes - I did not mean to criticize you, but to make fun of myself really.  I started the church-wear part and that was commentary on something my prehistoric brain can't get rewired for - not a "these kids today".   I think it was something that was so drilled into all the kids of my generation, that even in college (where dress codes were very lax even by college standards) the kids who still attended mass did not go in casual clothes or shorts (and this was Florida).

For decades I have lived in envy of the people who can stroll out of their house in pajama bottoms to run errands.  I can't bring myself to do it, but I really really want to.  I can barely bring myself to go out in sweatpants.  I know my Mom can't see me from 1,100 miles away, but I'm sure her heart seizes up a little each time I do.

[Katy M]

14 hours ago, backformore said:

About hats -   I was brought up going to a catholic school, and every school day began with Mass.  The rule was that men and boys could NOT wear hats in church, but women and girls MUST.  I never understood the reasons behind it.  

For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.

 

But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved.

[Mindthinkr]

10 hours ago, 2727 said:

How does everyone feel about people who leave hats on during the National Anthem? Offensive or don't care?

Offensive. Members of my family have served (some still do) in our armed forces. I take our National Anthem seriously. I stand, am quiet, and put my hand over my heart. Even if at home watching a NASCAR race for instance. 

I will make my grandsons take off their hats at the dinner table whether we are eating in or out.  I don’t think that manners ever go out of style. 

[TattleTeeny]

What I wonder--in terms of churches, schools, whatever--is this: is it someones job to verify if women are even wearing pantyhose? They're typically leg-colored and I'm pretty sure running up to feel people is discouraged in such settings. 

[Katy M]

10 minutes ago, TattleTeeny said:

What I wonder--in terms of churches, schools, whatever--is this: is it someones job to verify if women are even wearing pantyhose? They're typically leg-colored and I'm pretty sure running up to feel people is discouraged in such settings. 

If there were a place where pantyhose were specifically required, and someone in authority wanted to check, they would ask the woman to snap them.  They wouldn't feel for themselves.

[Katy M]

I have two pet peeves regarding crying babies on planes, and neither one is the crying baby.

1. People complaining about babies crying.  They are in pain.  The parents may have a legitimate need to fly across the country.  Sorry, it sucks for the baby and the parent, too.  I'm not saying you have to like it. That would actually be more troubling if you enjoyed a distressed child.  But, it's just life.

2. People who say that if their parents had taken them on a plane when they were a baby they wouldn't cry, because they were taught to behave in public.  Really?  As a baby you were taught not to cry in public?  Your parents could make a fortune if they taught their technique.  Because unless your parents never took you out in public, or removed your vocal cords, I can guarantee you that you cried in public at some point in time.  Babies have zero other ways to communicate.

[TattleTeeny]

3 hours ago, Katy M said:

If there were a place where pantyhose were specifically required, and someone in authority wanted to check, they would ask the woman to snap them.  They wouldn't feel for themselves.

But what if I said no, I don't want to snap them? I can't be made to do that as much as I can't be made to prove I have a bra on!

Honestly, if someone takes comfort in being a devoted parishioner or whatever, people need to stop caring about clothes (unless, I guess, it's part of the religion's actual rules).

And I have said it before, but unless there's a certain specific reason that I need to be dressed up for a plane trip, my concern is not freezing to death and being exposed to as few germy surfaces as possible! I'll wear a damn muumuu on the plane if I want to, haha!

Edited October 16, 2018 by TattleTeeny

[Katy M]

24 minutes ago, TattleTeeny said:

But what if I said no, I don't want to snap them? I can't be made to do that as much as I can't be made to prove I have a bra on!

Honestly, if someone takes comfort in being a devoted parishioner or whatever, people need to stop caring about clothes (unless, I guess, it's part of the religion's actual rules).

I've honestly never been anywhere that has a rule requiring pantyhose.  but, I think that is how they did it back in the '50s and '60s. 

[TattleTeeny]

47 minutes ago, Katy M said:

I've honestly never been anywhere that has a rule requiring pantyhose.  but, I think that is how they did it back in the '50s and '60s. 

Same here, thank goodness! While I do have a drawer full of opaque black tights, actual pantyhose are a PEEVE AND A HALF! Plus, I am a maniac; nothing that wispy and sheer is surviving even 30 minutes with me, man.

[Bastet]

14 hours ago, 2727 said:

How does everyone feel about people who leave hats on during the National Anthem? Offensive or don't care?

Don't care. 

[HazelEyes4325]

5 hours ago, TattleTeeny said:

What I wonder--in terms of churches, schools, whatever--is this: is it someones job to verify if women are even wearing pantyhose? They're typically leg-colored and I'm pretty sure running up to feel people is discouraged in such settings. 

I think I was the one who brought up the pantyhose and I should probably elaborate on it.  There wasn't a "church rule" about it, but there sure was a "mom rule" about it.  And, if I was able to get past mom, there were plenty of church ladies who would call me on it.  This was very much the sort of church where you were expected to wear your Sunday best and you would get some serious side-eye if you didn't...but that was from other members of the congregation.

On the flip side, in the church I now attend (same denomination), the Rector's husband wears shorts and Hawaiian print shirts every Sunday, and shoes (flip flops) some Sundays*... So, you know, things change...

*And I do not live in a place that has shorts-weather year around...

Edited October 16, 2018 by HazelEyes4325

[janestclair]

As a high school teacher, I do have to fight the urge to tell teenagers to take their hats off in public (and put away their cell phones, hah) but otherwise I really don't care.  It's just been ingrained in my mind as part of the dress code so I can't help myself.  It's like a reflex. I do think people should take their hat off for the anthem, and anywhere professional.  

I loathe pantyhose, so I never wear them.  Ditto for skirts.  We never had a dress code to go to Catholic church,  except for some reason I remember my mom telling us we couldn't have bare shoulders.  It's been years since I've set foot in a church though, so I may be misremembering that. 

I'm glad I work in a school that has a slightly more casual dress code for teachers. I do know some that require ties for the guys and skirts/heels for all the women and no sandals or capris.  We are allowed jeans on Friday and any footwear we desire.  Who the hell wants to stand in and teach in heels all day?  Screw that.  I can't even imagine that dress code being remotely practical for an elementary school teacher.

[TattleTeeny]

In the '90s, when I worked at Barnes & Noble, we couldn't wear jeans or sneakers, and guys had to wear ties (and hence, an outfit that warranted a tie). It was a pain in the ass for a job that could be very "get your hands dirty" with all the crawling and climbing involved.  

Edited October 16, 2018 by TattleTeeny

[JTMacc99]

18 hours ago, HazelEyes4325 said:

This was very much the sort of church where you were expected to wear your Sunday best and you would get some serious side-eye if you didn't...but that was from other members of the congregation.

I pretty much gave up on attending church because of that kind of judgmental behavior. Can't stand it. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

I realize that there is an opioid crisis going, but I'm pissed that patient comfort has gone out the window.

Look, I normally have a high threshold for pain- I even refused to take my painkillers after my reconstruction because reasons and being stupid. That said, I still want the good drugs when I'm in agony. As is the case right now.

I fractured my pinky last week when closing my umbrella. I thought I had just sprained it- but I also thought I dislocated it- as I saw the bone at an odd angle at the first SNAP! Then saw it snap back into place with the second SNAP!  It felt sore and I had a brief to cite-check so I had no time to go to ER. I Worked through the pain like an idiot. I jury-rigged a huge splint in the office to put around my finger. But by the end of the day I was dizzy with the waves of pain going down to my wrist.

I went to Urgent Care-and with the tiny X-ray they discovered I had fractured the joint. They buddied my ring finger with my pinky, wrapped it in gauze and bound it with that latex thingie. And put me in a hand brace. And told me to see an orthopedic doctor for a FULL X-ray. But the doctor as nice as he was didn’t give me the good drugs!!!!?????? The prescription version of Aleve (500mg Naproxen) didn’t and isn’t cutting it. I asked for the good drugs but was shut down. I still had one pill of Hydrocodone from my surgery in January, so at least I had some relief that night. The earliest to see an orthopedic is this Friday. My pinky and now hand is throbbing and no amount of over the counter is helping!?????

I’m not a pill popping addict, but seriously, do I have to be hemorrhaging to get the Vicodin or Percocet??? Thankfully my attorneys are very understanding that I’m not My usually speedy self. It might as well have been my right hand I injured since I can’t do jack shit with the hindersome brace on my left hand.????

Edited October 17, 2018 by GHScorpiosRule

[Mindthinkr]

@GHScorpiosRule Yes, the abusers of opioids have ruined it for people with problems now. I know of a MD, who when he performs an ortho surgery, will only give the patient 12 pills of Vicodin. Doesn’t matter if the break and repair is on your pinky or having your hip replaced. Some Drs began to over medicate as it became a business for them to supply people’s addictions. Now Drs fear a pill audit to see how many they are prescribing. They seek out the “bad” Doctors and take away the licenses. They are scared of staying within limits or giving out as little as possible to the suffering. I’m sorry that you have to deal with so much pain. After all you have been through they should know by now that you are not an addict (pill seeker) and give you some doses to last you until your ortho appointment. Feel better soon. 

[2727]

Makes me aggro when people commenting about TV constantly misspell the names of characters/real people on the show. They are reading the names spelled correctly over and over by others and sometimes they're even in the topic title!

Maddening case in point: The ConnOrs.

[Wings]

On 9/28/2018 at 9:29 AM, DeLurker said:

haven't told him yet because I was too freakin' angry to say it without multiple curse words and I'd need to borrow some from someone more proficient and colorful to get my level of peeve across.

I give good rant.  Always feel free to PM me.  I am very creative. :^) 

[Moose135]

1 hour ago, 2727 said:

Maddening case in point: The ConnOrs.

Are people spelling it that way, or do you think it should be spelled that way?  Because it is The Conners with an E:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8595140/

[2727]

People are misspelling it. It's the title of the damned show. It's on screen. It's in all the articles. It's been spelled with an "E" for 20+ years. And somehow, people don't absorb it.

Edited October 17, 2018 by 2727

[Bastet]

That has been driving me crazy all day, too, @2727. 

[Moose135]

I hadn't really noticed people doing that, @2727, so I wasn't sure which way you were going with your peeve.  Sorry for the confusion.

Edited October 17, 2018 by Moose135

[TattleTeeny]

I feel the same way the the RHoBJ threads with "the Guidices," or worse, "the Guidice's." Or any reality show where people's names are literally shown multiple times.

Edited October 18, 2018 by TattleTeeny

[GHScorpiosRule]

The constant misspellings are PREVALENT throughout the site. I just thought I would be accused of being a nitpicking Grammar Nazi, so I've maintained my silence. I vent enough about the other grammar mistakes I see as it is.

So glad I had my regular doctor appointment before the Orthopedic. He gave me a script for the GOOD DRUGS!!!! Now I will be able to sleep through the night until my pinky is healed.?

[topanga]

43 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

The constant misspellings are PREVALENT throughout the site. I just thought I would be accused of being a nitpicking Grammar Nazi, so I've maintained my silence. I vent enough about the other grammar mistakes I see as it is.

So glad I had my regular doctor appointment before the Orthopedic. He gave me a script for the GOOD DRUGS!!!! Now I will be able to sleep through the night until my pinky is healed.?

Good for you. Many doctors are afraid to prescribe narcotics when they’re needed, all because of the bad apples who overprescribe them. 

I’m a grammar snob too, but I hate it when posters on this thread will quote someone’s post and then write, 

“You said, The Connors, and its’s actually The Conners. Sorry. That was just bugging me.” 

Wouldn’t it have been a better use of words to write a real post and spell The Conners correctly? And if they wanted to be snarky, they could add ‘with an e.’

[KittyMom4]

On 10/17/2018 at 10:45 AM, JTMacc99 said:

I pretty much gave up on attending church because of that kind of judgmental behavior. Can't stand it. 

Me too, when I was going through my divorce my Catholic parents, instead of being concerned about my well-being and the well-being of my children, made sure to point out I would never be able to marry in the church again. Really? That's what matters to you?? My ex-husband was an adulterer and verbally abusive but you're worried my next marriage won't be blessed by the church?  Hypocrites. 

[KittyMom4]

My pet peeve today: People who misinterpret conversations they are not a part of, or physical interactions they "think" they saw, and do their pearl-clutching soapbox complaint that could seriously jeopardize someone's career! the #metoo movement has made everyone a little edgy, and I am strongly behind reporting any incidents where sexual harassment is happening, HOWEVER, I am not behind someone throwing around the term 'sexual harassment' about an interaction between 2 people who were not known to you, and you could not possibly know the relationship between them. 

[theredhead77]

57 minutes ago, GoodieGirl said:

HOWEVER, I am not behind someone throwing around the term 'sexual harassment' about an interaction between 2 people who were not known to you, and you could not possibly know the relationship between them. 

Co-signed!

[Katy M]

I just stopped for gas on my way back home.  There was a car at the first pump, so I pulled in behind them.  We both started pumping about the same time.  I finished up a few seconds before them and got in my car to wait for them to move.  The pumps are only one car width and maybe a foot from the sidewalk, so you can't drive around. Anyway, they finish pumping and one of them goes off towards the bathroom.  I assume the other lady will pull forward and around to the side to wait for her friend.  Nope, she waits at the pump.  Woman comes back from the bathroom and goes to the car and pulls out some fast food bags and goes over to the trash.  I think, OK, they'll leave now.  Nope.  Still sitting there. A couple of minutes later, the car that was on the other side of the pump leaves, so I back up and drive through there, and then the car finally starts up.  Was she waiting for me to move?  That makes zero sense to me, because there's no room for me to drive around.  Going forward would have taken her to the exit.  I just don't get it.

[BookWoman56]

@Katy M, in addition to not getting why they waited until you had pulled around on the other side before they left, I fail to understand why the one person waited until the gas was pumped before heading to the bathroom. Surely it doesn't take two people to handle pumping the gas. Even if the person who headed for the bathroom afterward was the one who needed to pay for the gas, the payment has to be done before fueling starts, and she could have paid and left the other person to pump while she went to the bathroom. However, this kind of thing happens to me occasionally when I am at the gas station, and to me it's just the gas station equivalent of my innate ability to select the one aisle at the grocery store where despite the person in front of me having only a dozen items, that person's transaction will somehow be so complicated as to require a lot of back and forth between the customer and the cashier, and in the end a manager will have to come over to resolve things. All this while the person in the next aisle over has a full cart and whizzes through checkout.

[Katy M]

9 hours ago, BookWoman56 said:

I fail to understand why the one person waited until the gas was pumped before heading to the bathroom.

That's a good question. I wasn't paying attention to them while I was pumping, so maybe she was inside buying snacks.  They were from MN, while I live in New England, so they were apparently on a long trip. 

[2727]

I rarely can be bothered to write product reviews on Amazon but in this instance felt like I had worthwhile info to pass along so put together a lengthy review including photos. Submitted and got a message that reviews were closed. Bah. You could have mentioned that before I started!

So minor but so easily fixed.

A friend got the Amazon ban hammer and is unable to write any reviews. She'd only submitted three over many years and couldn't get an answer from customer support on what she had done or how to get it rescinded. Their user review system is totally fubar.

(If folks don't know, there are sites that rate the accuracy of reviews, for what it's worth. Who knows, their algorithms may be just as wonky as Amazon's.)

[BookWoman56]

New peeve: Having someone (who is related by marriage but with whom I speak maybe twice a year) include me in some group on FB in which Messenger keeps notifying me of everybody's responses, and the original post is essentially stating the person's mother (who is very old and has been in extremely bad health for at least a decade) is now ill enough for hospice, and asking everyone in the group she created to validate her and her siblings' decision to sign a DNR. For the past couple of hours, notifications have been coming in like crazy as various people respond to her message, to the point I had to reset my notification preferences on my phone. Look, it sucks that this person's mother is about to die, but it comes off as her making her mother's death all about the need to have everyone approve the family's decision on the DNR. A simple status update explaining what's going on with her mother would have been sufficient for those of us who are actually not close friends/family. People who want to offer  prayers could do so. People like me who don't pray could have expressed condolences on the impending death of this person's mother. I have no problem with someone expressing grief, but I just don't think creating a FB group and sending all of them messages is the way to go, especially when at least a couple of us in that group have never met her mother, and again, the focus of the message seems less about the mother having only a few days to a couple of weeks left, and more about asking everyone to tell her she did the right thing regarding the DNR. This is not an urgent situation; this is something that has been expected for a while now, with this final round of illness simply being the last in a long line of major health problems. 

This ties into my general peeve about people who use social media to fish for compliments or sympathy, and share all their family drama online. It's possible to relate news about events that friends/family would want to hear about without being overly dramatic. 

[theredhead77]

@BookWoman56 you can leave the chat, or mute the responses. Within the message there should be a menu, or "settings" and under that is mute.

[BookWoman56]

1 hour ago, theredhead77 said:

@BookWoman56 you can leave the chat, or mute the responses. Within the message there should be a menu, or "settings" and under that is mute.

Thanks for the tip. I don't use FB enough to be familiar with a lot of the chat functions and so forth. At some point I saw that there were ~150 people in the chat, and that some had left it, so I don't think I was alone in not wanting to get alerted every single time somebody else replied. 

ETA: Yes, thanks again, I left the chat despite the warning from FB that I would no longer be able to receive group messages and that the participants would see that I had left. I definitely don't want to keep getting message notifications and don't care if others saw that I left. 

Edited October 20, 2018 by BookWoman56

[theredhead77]

Just now, BookWoman56 said:

Thanks for the tip. I don't use FB enough to be familiar with a lot of the chat functions and so forth. At some point I saw that there were ~150 people in the chat, and that some had left it, so I don't think I was alone in not wanting to get alerted every single time somebody else replied. 

I figured. I hope that helped you either mute or leave.

[bilgistic]

WHY would anyone need 150 people to weigh in on their mother's end-of-life plan?!?

[BookWoman56]

@bilgistic, I have no fucking idea. Most of the people responding are members of the church she attends, as far as I can tell, so that makes me think this sort of thing is not uncommon within her church group. She is prone to sharing her own health issues, plus those of her family, fairly often and asking for prayers. And again, if she'd just done it by posting a status update or something, it wouldn't have been so bad because then I might have gotten one random notification from FB that she had posted, depending on which particular algorithm FB was using today, because those types of notifications are extremely inconsistent. But this was sent via the Messenger function in FB, which to my way of thinking is essentially a private message. If it were her messaging just a couple of people, okay. But I lost count of how many alerts I got via my phone and then every damn time I was online on my personal laptop, the freaking alerts from FB would pop up until I followed @theredhead77's tip and left the group chat. I'm going to assume that many other people were getting the constant alerts as well, which I find annoying as fuck. I'm not going to respond to her original message; I'll wait until her mother dies and then offer my condolences. It's not my role to validate the decision she and her siblings made about the DNR.

I understand that doing the DNR can be a very emotionally painful moment; when my oldest sister was dying earlier this year, the hospital didn't give her any pain meds for most of a day because she had to be not under the influence to sign her own DNR, but she also appointed my other older sister as her medical representative to make any decisions on her behalf if she was unable to make them herself. We all talked about it, but my sister knew she was dying and absolutely did not want any extra measures taken to prolong her life, which was pretty much agony by that point. Both my other older sister and I were in complete agreement with her decision, but it was still tough to hear the decision being made. It was an acknowledgment by all of us that she was in fact imminently dying. (It was very similar to when my father was dying of West Nile, and the hospital called me because I was still listed as his medical rep, to ask about what measures to take, and that was the point at which I realized that although the doctors were still holding out a little bit of hope that he would recover, he wasn't going to.)  With my oldest sister's decision, neither my other older sister nor I had the slightest desire to broadcast the decision about the DNR to everybody on FB. I texted my brother to give him the daily update and mentioned that the DNR had been signed. End of discussion. We all knew that was the best option and didn't need other people to tell us we were doing the right thing.

[JTMacc99]

3 hours ago, BookWoman56 said:

I'm going to assume that many other people were getting the constant alerts as well, which I find annoying as fuck.

I am part of a group text for my daughter’s fall softball team. The coach will send things like “practice will be from 5:00 to 6:45 tonight” or “the game is cancelled today due to field conditions”.

It is actually very helpful.

What is NOT helpful is multiple replies buzzing my phone with “Thank you!” ?

[janestclair]

5 hours ago, JTMacc99 said:

I am part of a group text for my daughter’s fall softball team. The coach will send things like “practice will be from 5:00 to 6:45 tonight” or “the game is cancelled today due to field conditions”.

It is actually very helpful.

What is NOT helpful is multiple replies buzzing my phone with “Thank you!” ?

That also happens when someone sends an email to an entire distribution list, and morons "reply all" instead of replying to the person who sent the email.  It makes my blood boil.  

[Mindthinkr]

5 minutes ago, janestclair said:

That also happens when someone sends an email to an entire distribution list, and morons "reply all" instead of replying to the person who sent the email.  It makes my blood boil.  

I did this yesterday. I will now be more mindful of doing that as I didn’t realize it was such a peeve. I learned something. Better late than never. 

[DeLurker]

The city planners (or whoever does these things) do not believe in straight rounds where I live.  And they believe that all green spaces lining and in between roads should be filled with trees - not bushes, not shrubbery, not any form of horticulture less than 20 feet tall.

On the plus side, it does make a nice sound barrier from the busier streets. 

On the down side, when you hear a siren, it takes a while before you can clearly determine which direction it is coming from and whether you are going to be in the way (remember, linear vehicle passageways are verboten).  Also, turns into smaller neighborhoods from the major nonlinear vehicle passageways usually have separate turn lanes (nice, huh?) but appropriately sized since they are not expected to generate long lines of cars at crunch time daily - mine is max 3 cars.*  But because many of these pop up right after a bend in the road, someone is often riding your arse as you slow down so you can make the shift.  You can't see around corners so you don't know if there is already a car in the queue which would mean you have to basically go from 45 mph to 0 in 2 car lengths to not hit the car.

* The area also doesn't believe in sidewalks in residential neighborhoods, just along the more major streets.  So all over this community, you have kids and adults crossing at crosswalks to get to the sidewalks to walk to school, go to parks (there are actually a shit ton of parks and playgrounds), walk your dog, ...so you also have to worry about someone being in the crosswalk (rightly or wrongly) when you come around a blind corner.

[Bastet]

4 hours ago, janestclair said:

That also happens when someone sends an email to an entire distribution list, and morons "reply all" instead of replying to the person who sent the email.  It makes my blood boil. 

Mine too.  I wish "reply all" had a feature where when you clicked on it, a box popped up asking, "Are you sure?  Does everyone who received the original email really need to read what you're about to write?" and you couldn't actually reply to all until you clicked on that.  People would probably just mindlessly click through, but maybe it would cut down the replies a little.

[auntlada]

10 hours ago, Mindthinkr said:

I did this yesterday. I will now be more mindful of doing that as I didn’t realize it was such a peeve. I learned something. Better late than never. 

There are times when other people do need to know your response. There are other times when they do not, particularly if it's a large group and your response is a snarky remark to the original sender. (I'm using the editorial you, of course.) People at my work hit reply all to tell a meeting organizer if they can be at the meeting. It drives me crazy because I don't need to know what time is good for them. The organizer will take care of that.

[NutMeg]

There are also times when you want everyone to see the answer that should only been seen by one person, and you pretend it was an Oooops. Or you send a very private message to all by mistake. Very often found in fiction (movies, series, books), both, although I hear it happens in real life too.

I don't think I've been guilty of either, or maybe just for real minor stuff. I'd love to once do it deliberately (the nasty reply to a nasty message sent to all recipients, cc-ed and bcc-ed). I could see so many fictional scenarios where it would work perfectly, but I'm probably not ready to burn bridges big time.

[BookWoman56]

I'm not teaching online any more, but last year when I still was teaching what amounted to a business writing course for college students, I always posted a cautionary tale about the potential for problems with Reply All. A former colleague nearly lost her job because she accidentally hit Reply All. A manager had sent an email that included yet another example of the manager's incompetence, and my friend intended to make a snarky comment pointing out that incompetence, but only to a couple of colleagues that she knew shared the same opinion of this manager. But of course when she hit Reply All, her snarky comments also went to the manager, who was quite unhappy about it. My former colleague did not actually lose her job, although it was a close call, but she did not get a raise that year and neither did she get the usual annual bonus, which at this company tended to be in the 10-12% range, so that was quite a financial blow. I agree with @Bastet that there should be a pop-up asking you if you really need to copy everybody on the distribution list when you are replying. And yes, there are times when everybody does need to see the responses, but for responses that are not really substantive, such as "Yes, I'll attend" or "So sorry for your loss," there's no real need for everyone to be copied on the reply. 

At a previous job, there would sometimes be a group email sent out to inform people of a software glitch or something similar, and then various people would respond using Reply All, and then various other people would get hacked off and reply to everyone, requesting people not to use Reply All, followed by some people still not getting the hint and continuing to reply to every one of the 300 or so people in that specific department. Meanwhile, the rest of us were busy deleting the 50 or so emails that we'd been included on because of the Reply All function. 

[bilgistic]

20 hours ago, Bastet said:

Mine too.  I wish "reply all" had a feature where when you clicked on it, a box popped up asking, "Are you sure?  Does everyone who received the original email really need to read what you're about to write?" and you couldn't actually reply to all until you clicked on that.  People would probably just mindlessly click through, but maybe it would cut down the replies a little.

This isn't that, but here's an Outlook plugin that "adds a few buttons to the Outlook ribbon to prevent people from replying to all the recipients of your message or forwarding it".

These functions already exist within the settings of any new Outlook email message, but you have to hunt for them.

Edited October 21, 2018 by bilgistic