Do You Respond To Feedback?

I always respond to the positive feedback.

If it's negative feedback, I take it into consideration for a lot of the factors listed above. A profane (or anonymous) tirade gets you nothing. A well-reasoned critique gets you a well-reasoned response, as soon as humanly possible.

 

If it's negative, I'll usually sit on it for a night. That way, I don't respond with emotion. I try to get to all the positive feedback, as well as the negative. But sometimes it's easier said than done.

 

I see no obligation in responding to anything profane or otherwise nasty.

 

I enjoy responding. I tell them healthy debate is OK, and you don't have to have the same opinions I do. But I also remind them that if they read my story, and it provoked an emotional response, then I did my job. As for the people who send me compliments, let's just say that's one of the motivators that keeps me going still in this biz.

 

I reply 95 percent of the time. Even if they're acting like profane or irrational jerks, I often write back with something like, "thank you for your humorous comments."
It's amazing how often I reply to a ranter/raver and he writes back all apologetic and thanking me for responding. I'm always stunned at how people write back to me saying, I can't believe you took the time to write to little old me."

 

I have the same feeling on negative feedback as many -- if it's profane and just inane I probably won't -- but one thing I'll always respond to is feedback that points out a mistake. If they're right and I'm wrong I make sure to thank them politely for pointing it out and thank them for reading. I think there's nothing worse than not being accountable.

 

One thing that still makes an impression on me even though it's been YEARS later was a response I got when I wrote to a Diamondback columnist. I thought her column was very poorly reasoned and I outlined why I thought that.

She wrote me back THANKING me for basically taking her to the woodshed (which I tried to do as politely as possible) and for pointing out the weaknesses in her column.

It's as unforgettable a response as I've ever had, and that includes lengthy e-mails from readers giving me kudos for a point I've made.

 

My favorite ... this is how Chicago Sun-Times columnist Neil Steinberg responded to some disagreeable e-mails.

Dear Reader:
I received your e-mail message. Sadly, I no longer permit myself the pleasure of personally responding to snide remarks from dissatisfied individuals, as doing so inevitably leads to time-wasting arguments and annoying exchanges of insults. Since such encounters often end with the reader complaining to my boss, it seems that this is what rude writers really want to do all along -- to provoke me so they can satisfy some inner schoolyard desire to squeal. You may do so now by e-mailing the editor in chief, Michael Cooke, at mcooke@suntimes.com, though I should point out this is a form letter, so his reaction probably won't have the sense of fresh outrage you desire.
Otherwise, I would like to point out -- since so many fail to grasp this point -- that the piece of writing that upset you is a column of opinion, that the opinion being expressed is mine alone, and the fact that you disagree with or were insulted by my opinion really is not important, at least not to me. This is not a dialogue, this is a lecture, and you are supposed to sit in your seat and listen, or leave, not stand up and heckle.
I do not write the column for people who disagree with me, nor am I concerned with trying to convince them of the falsity of their worldview at a one-on-one level. I've done that for years, and it's a waste of time, both mine and theirs, since such readers are not typically open to ideas other than their own, and cannot even entertain the notion that they may be wrong.
Not that I am pleased to have upset you. Believe me, I would have preferred your letter to have been one of praise -- most are -- but that doesn't seem to have been the case.
If you have cancelled your subscription, I am sorry for that too, though I am also confident, as you wade through the arid world of the competition and the barren void of television, that you will eventually soften and start reading the Sun-Times again, and would remind you that you can always skip my column; that's why it always has my name and picture on the top, as a subtle clue.
While I cannot sincerely thank you for writing, I do hope that, as your life progresses, you eventually come to realize just how wrong you were in disagreeing with me in such a rude fashion. If there were a shred of politeness or sense in your e-mail you would not be receiving this letter, but as you are, I would urge you to re-examine your life, and suggest that you reach out to all the people you have no doubt hurt with your brusque and offensive manner and beg their forgiveness. Though utterly indifferent to your taunts, I will myself set a good example by forgiving you now. It can be a terrible world, and I'm sure you have reasons for being the way you are.
Best regards, Neil Steinberg

 

I'm not in position to receive comments at my paper, but when that changes, I think I'll respond to those who give a name and contact info, and have a reasonable point to make.

 

There's been times I've wanted to respond to comments on the website, but I don't. Ever, never, ever.

Emails and phone calls I return for the most part. As some others mentioned, if the email is profane or overly derogatory, I leave it alone.

 

WFW.