Consider they're at least somewhat aware this conversation would be subpoenaed during a lawsuit should the acquisition go sour. Musk's "can we talk on the phone?" means "tell me more, but without the evidence trail"
Every time someone wanted to have a call with me, it was so they could push me into something with their whining, or so they could misinterpret what was said without me being able to point at a timestamped sentence. For these reasons I always refuse calls about anything important - and never had any problems solving various business issues over text.
Above signal flags, text is almost the lowest possible bandwidth form of human-human conversion. It will take you an hour to write something that you could explain to someone in 5 minutes via voice.
Even if you do manage to find the time to write all down, you quickly hit problem 2.
Text is shit for communicating any form of sentiment or emotional valence, which is a pretty critical part of communication, especially when you’re getting into the nuanced ends of any particular topic.
"Emotional valence" is a sublime way of putting it.
Text is an excellent way of transmitting information. Do this, go there, this is the answer, etc. But unless you have a deep, long-lasting connection with the other person, text will lose a lot.
So much of what's on YouTube is so irritating to me because it's 10 minutes of mostly filler to transmit a few facts that could be read in a minute or less. But I'll listen to a 3 hour conversation between two people who are passionate about history or Lego or whatever and not think anything of it. The emotional valence makes it worthwhile.
That you’ve never felt this way does not preclude that others may.
Texts do not convey emotion. Allow verification of nuanced points with simple interjections and interrogatives. The limitation of threads of conversation to simplify discourse through a more direct dialog and rebuttals.
I have had relationships due specifically because texts are really incomplete and poor means of conversation and the other side fails to pick up and acknowledge the severity of the situations I was trying to describe.
I'm not choosing the people, there's no overflow of opportunities where I live. Almost always it seems like the ones who handle money/hold political power are toxic, and I need to protect myself from them. Never had any such issue with my friends, so I doubt it's really just about me.
You have my sympathy. I once worked in an organizational culture that produced toxic behavior. I was privileged with enough experience, savings, and alternative options to get out quickly.
If I was forced to work in places where I could not trust that my coworkers and I have each other's backs I feel like I would be very bitter.
It would appear by implication that you would see meetings as always less useful than documents. This is clearly not true. Calls and meetings are almost always better for working through nuanced issues.
Yes I'd never let any serious business issue be solved on a meeting. Tech talk etc, sure. Money is involved? Never. Or rather, sure, let's discuss - but then we send a written record of exactly what was agreed.
Yes, there are some narrow cases where audit trails are important, but that doesn't apply to most situations, certainly not those where you're both thinking out loud and trying to come to some common understanding or whatever. It seems you allowed some personal grievance get the better of you because in this particular context, your characterization does not apply.
