"No problem" vs "you're welcome"

[Yama]

The more I see this thread the more I just find myself thinking "what a stupid first world problem"

 

[Obfuscate]

The more I see this thread the more I just find myself thinking "what a stupid first world problem"

my thought from first viewing forward...

 

[anticlimatic]

The more I see this thread the more I just find myself thinking "what a stupid first world problem"

Civility is a first word problem mostly, but other than wealth it's pretty much what separates it from the third world, so I wouldn't dismiss its importance so quickly.
The more I read of the thread the more I realize how vindicated I am in my opinions of millennials, and the more I also realize that millennials make up about 90% of the user base here.

Discouraging.

 

[Yama]

Civility is a first word problem mostly, but other than wealth it's pretty much what separates it from the third world, so I wouldn't dismiss its importance so quickly.
The more I read of the thread the more I realize how vindicated I am in my opinions of millennials, and the more I also realize that millennials make up about 90% of the user base here.

Discouraging.

I don't see at all how saying no problem over something else is a lack of civility. It's unnecessary nitpicking for no good reason other than people want something to bitch about. Reminds me of "Old Man Yells At Cloud." It's still a way of being civil, just not the exact specific way entitled people feel they deserve - like, boo hoo.

 

[anticlimatic]

I don't see at all how saying no problem over something else is a lack of civility. It's unnecessary nitpicking for no good reason other than people want something to bitch about. Reminds me of "Old Man Yells At Cloud." It's still a way of being civil, just not the exact specific way entitled people feel they deserve - like, boo hoo.

Mostly it's indicative of deeper divides and diminished neighborliness. If it was no big deal as suggested, then it would be no big deal to simply drop 'no problem' for what us old people would rather hear- since appeasing neighbors in small ways is one of the fundamentals of community. But since it is indicative of deeper issues, it's a bigger deal than it seems, hence all the digging in of heels and attempts at justification. Then when that is deconstructed, hand-waving dismissal as 'no big deal' is used. Then when that's deconstructed..........

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Mostly it's indicative of deeper divides and diminished neighborliness. If it was no big deal as suggested, then it would be no big deal to simply drop 'no problem' for what us old people would rather hear- since appeasing neighbors in small ways is one of the fundamentals of community. But since it is indicative of deeper issues, it's a bigger deal than it seems, hence all the digging in of heels and attempts at justification. Then when that is deconstructed, hand-waving dismissal as 'no big deal' is used. Then when that's deconstructed..........

When you mention 'appeasing neighbors', it is worth noting that there is a significant change in society because in the past people lived their entire lives with the same neighbors. All of the linguistic colloquialisms were mutually understood, and so communication was simpler. Now people move around among all parts of the country and even between countries. Very few people lives their lives in the same spot, and as a result we are continually confronted with new linguistic assumptions.

I'm not a Millennial, but the point of the funny clip using "forget about it", was partly a joke, but also was intended to make a point about how many different meanings can be ascribed to the same phrase. Even something like "you're welcome" or "no problem" will have subtly different meanings in different parts of the country. Move everyone around constantly all the time, and I think what we need today is greater flexibility in our perceptions of language and not increased specificity. To be neighborly now, we need to be able to take the gist of the linguistic colloquialisms we encounter and give people the benefit of the doubt instead of ratcheting down more and more specific meanings. We need to read more non-verbal cues of intent, rather than locking into to assumed universal definitions. That is what is going to cause increased confusion, offense, and disintegration of neighborhood.

 

[cascadeco]

This is why working in retail and doing customer service can really suck, because there's no appeasing everybody. And there's no universal way of doing things that everyone wants and likes besides being treated decently and as fellow human beings worthy of respect until proven otherwise. Someone who thinks being told 'No problem' is offensive has a curious definition of 'courtesy' and respect. 'No problem' said with a smile, genuinely, is far better than a canned, flippant, robotic 'You're Welcome'. Unless the words alone are more important than the tone, intent, and emotion?

Fwiw I'm older than a millenial and I'll use all sorts of phrases. I'll rotate simply because I get tired of saying the same thing all of the time. We're simply living in a time where things aren't generally as formal in terms of phrasing. 'No problem' is the new 'You're Welcome' just as 'Have a good one' is the catch phrase of the decade. It makes no difference to me. Language shifts over time.

 

[1487610420]

The more I see this thread the more I just find myself thinking "what a stupid first world problem"

yes, bcuz even #1stworldproblems deserve prioritizing

 

[Coriolis]

Mostly it's indicative of deeper divides and diminished neighborliness. If it was no big deal as suggested, then it would be no big deal to simply drop 'no problem' for what us old people would rather hear- since appeasing neighbors in small ways is one of the fundamentals of community. But since it is indicative of deeper issues, it's a bigger deal than it seems, hence all the digging in of heels and attempts at justification. Then when that is deconstructed, hand-waving dismissal as 'no big deal' is used. Then when that's deconstructed..........

So on whom is the onus to do the appeasing - the speaker or the listener? Conversation, and courtesy, are a two-way street. As [MENTION=14857]labyrinthine[/MENTION] explained quite carefully, increased mobility in the modern age means we are less likely to know what others prefer to hear, and what forms of politeness they were raised to use. If we wish to show genuine rather than simpy pro-forma courtesy, we will remember when we speak that others might not be used to the expressions we use; and when we listen, that others may express courtesy differently from us. I don't see what is so hard about that. If anything, it may lead us actually to think about what we are saying in these simple encounters, rather than mindlessly rattling off a script, and thinking of others is the essence of courtesy anyway.

 

[Shiver]

Because it's not in anyone's interest, especially yours.

Oh, I see. You're one of those presumptuous individuals who thinks they know what's in others' interests. Care to prove it? It seems to me the translation here is: "Because it's not in my interests."

Because it acknowledges without diminishment, which is the purpose of 'you're welcome' rather than 'no problem.'

Is the false sentiment not diminishing of the statement in and of itself? You say that "authenticity doesn't matter" (without any compelling supportive argument, might I add), then turn to say that civility should ideally be authentic. Which is it?

Civility is a first word problem mostly, but other than wealth it's pretty much what separates it from the third world, so I wouldn't dismiss its importance so quickly.

You claimed earlier that it is objective. Care to define it? If this is the sort of universal law that you seem to suggest, why then is it "mostly" a first world problem?

Civility is a first word problem mostly, but other than wealth it's pretty much what separates it from the third world, so I wouldn't dismiss its importance so quickly.
The more I read of the thread the more I realize how vindicated I am in my opinions of millennials, and the more I also realize that millennials make up about 90% of the user base here.

Discouraging.

"I would expect that many of the millennials you refer to resent the pressure to lower themselves to holding the same sort of measurable value as any given object they're running across the scanner for you."

I am glad that opposition to your efforts to dehumanize people discourages you.

If it was no big deal as suggested, then it would be no big deal to simply drop 'no problem' for what us old people would rather hear- since appeasing neighbors in small ways is one of the fundamentals of community.

Why do you deserve to be appeased, especially with false sentiment? Knowing that it may be false, how then are you appeased?

----------

If anything, it may lead us actually to think about what we are saying in these simple encounters, rather than mindlessly rattling off a script, and thinking of others is the essence of courtesy anyway.

I think this is what strikes me as being so absurd about this whole topic. Most people don't even put the slightest bit of thought into any of the phrases they spit out dozens of times each day, but when they stop to think about how others might have responded to them with equal carelessness, they elect to be offended. If the cashier is supposed to be the one saying, "Thank you" in all circumstances, why then was Tom ever saying it at all? Does he truly mean it every time he says it, or is he just going through the motions? If the latter, why then is he entitled to expect authenticity from another person?

It's clear to me that this isn't about genuine expression of thankfulness. This - like many things having to do with customer service - has to do with dominance. I believe same holds true for anticlimactic. Both want a performance, because each knows that ultimately the customer and the cashier do not have equal relationships. They view "every cashier in America" as beneath them, and wish for their behavior to validate that attitude.

 

[Jaguar]

Oh, I see. You're one of those presumptuous individuals who thinks they know what's in others' interests.

Which is why this thread was started.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Ok I figured out the flaw in the no problem argument here. Unless it's deliberately stating the obvious, which is illogical and unlikely, "no problem" comes off like a correction to the expectation that the deed for which the individual was thanked was a problem for them- or that the fact that they were compelled to do something for someone else was a problem. It's like creating a glass is half empty expectation for the exchange by alluding to the notion that helping people is inherently a problem, and then brings it up to uninspiring mediocre par by simply stating that it wasn't in fact (this time).

I personally do not want to be a cashier. It would be a painful job for me. It would be a problem for me because I don't think the majority of people in the world are kind, but rather I think the majority are actually quite mean. Because of this, when I encounter a cashier, a waiter, or anyone else in customer service I'm glad to hear if I was 'no problem' because I assume they deal with a lot of problem people. I hold the assumption that it could typically be a problem to have an interaction with another human being because I've dealt with my share of problem people. They aren't my servant, but my equal deserving of equal respect, so I hope neither of us causes the other a problem. It's also why I try to be especially nice to people in restaurants even if they make a mistake. I don't want to demean a person who has a really hard job. I actually hate it that society requires that people spend all the hours of their day doing something that isn't entirely of their choosing for the sake of some large company. When I see a customer service person, I wish they could be in the park, playing in the sunshine, drinking a beer, or playing their guitar.

 

[Population: 1]

I personally do not want to be a cashier. It would be a painful job for me. It would be a problem for me because I don't think the majority of people in the world are kind, but rather I think the majority are actually quite mean. Because of this, when I encounter a cashier, a waiter, or anyone else in customer service I'm glad to hear if I was 'no problem' because I assume they deal with a lot of problem people. I hold the assumption that it could typically be a problem to have an interaction with another human being because I've dealt with my share of problem people. They aren't my servant, but my equal deserving of equal respect, so I hope neither of us causes the other a problem. It's also why I try to be especially nice to people in restaurants even if they make a mistake. I don't want to demean a person who has a really hard job. I actually hate it that society requires that people spend all the hours of their day doing something that isn't entirely of their choosing for the sake of some large company. When I see a customer service person, I wish they could be in the park, playing in the sunshine, drinking a beer, or playing their guitar.

Very good point. People are almost always obsessed with what you do and not who you are. Then they judge you by your occupation. The job isn't the person. I always try to tip a little extra with waitstaff because I know that that job is an exercise in patience when dealing with rude customers who treat you little better than indentured servants.

Reminds me of that ridiculous not so off the mark waitressing job Jennifer Anniston had in Office Space. Getting chewed out for not having enough flair pins.

 

[Shiver]

Heh, in the sense just mentioned, "No problem" could be taken as a compliment. "You're not the worst customer I've had today."

 

[Lexicon]

Jeez, wonder how poor ol' Tom's gonna cope if any real shit ever goes down in his life.



On another note - this thread brought this wonderful clip to mind:

 

[anticlimatic]

To be neighborly now, we need to be able to take the gist of the linguistic colloquialisms we encounter and give people the benefit of the doubt instead of ratcheting down more and more specific meanings. We need to read more non-verbal cues of intent, rather than locking into to assumed universal definitions. That is what is going to cause increased confusion, offense, and disintegration of neighborhood.

Right. Because the best way to decrease confusion is to rely on assumption, doubt, and multi-interpretive gestures. Literal semantics? That's for the poets...

So on whom is the onus to do the appeasing - the speaker or the listener? Conversation, and courtesy, are a two-way street.

The onus is on both parties to perform both speaking and listening parts. Win win is always the target in civil business transactions, as is efficiency.

 

[anticlimatic]

Oh, I see. You're one of those presumptuous individuals who thinks they know what's in others' interests. Care to prove it?

Not really. If you think using 'no problem' after a thank you is doing you favors, knock yourself out. For myself, I'll pass on using it- and on being looked at with restrained contempt, and instead enjoy the rewards of making good micro-impressions. Which typically lead to more amenable clients, greater flexibility, trust, and at the end of the day more money.

I'm actually fairly appreciative of how good millennials make me look; an impression that I hear time and time again from people I work for and with.

 

[virtualinsanity]

"No problem" - If I can detect you're being self conscious about being too much a burden

"You're welcome" - Just a common courtesy. I may or may not mean it.

The latter is used more.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Right. Because the best way to decrease confusion is to rely on assumption, doubt, and multi-interpretive gestures. Literal semantics? That's for the poets...

The best way to decrease confusion is to give other people the benefit of the doubt. We cannot force universal definitions where they do not exist.

 

[Shiver]

Not really. If you think using 'no problem' after a thank you is doing you favors, knock yourself out. For myself, I'll pass on using it- and on being looked at with restrained contempt, and instead enjoy the rewards of making good micro-impressions.

But you're already looked at with restrained contempt by the very people you are attempting to impose your desires onto, holding otherwise completely inconsequential behavior over their heads. The funny thing is, you're obliviously raging against a perpetually growing trend for the sake of completely self-serving preservation - eventually your preference of habitual behavior will be in the minority and catering to "people like you" will be less than efficient as norms shift. Times change. So do these cultural norms - yes, even what is considered "proper" behavior. Why not just accept these things as trivial?

Anyway, I usually don't say anything at all or just say some form of "yep" or "okay" as an absent-minded habit because I don't really invest much time or consideration into social niceties I see as meaningless. It's right up there with the generic "How are you?" line that people spit out when they see an acquaintance. I can and have responded with something completely bizarre or outright negative, and the response is almost always just a reflexive, "Good"; they weren't actually listening for a real response anyway. Because of this, I find a large portion of social interaction to be utterly pointless and I just don't see the purpose of nit picking something that most people aren't actually analyzing. My energy is better channeled elsewhere.

Which typically lead to more amenable clients, greater flexibility, trust, and at the end of the day more money.

This isn't a problem I have and is certainly not a driving factor in my life over being true to myself. I don't base my entire sense of self on money or what other people think of me. It would be nice if more people had this luxury.

Also, are you really promoting trust in people you openly acknowledged as offering false sentiment? What a fragile world we live in.

I'm actually fairly appreciative of how good millennials make me look; an impression that I hear time and time again from people I work for and with.

You're being validated by people who apparently share your beliefs because it in turn affirms their own. Big deal.