"Best" what?

These things may be somewhat culturally determined (including office/corporate culture). To me, "best" reads as mindless as any other.

In fact, they all read as mindless to me, probably because in most cases they literally are mindless. You choose one and write it automatically in nearly every message.

That's not to say they're useless. Politeness in social interactions is filled with formulaic, almost ritualistics niceties. I just don't think there's all that much difference in meaning between these common formulaic responses.

Take care,

Another Internet Rando

“Best” is the worst. Like it’s the best you’ve got. And there is no interest or room for negotiation, development or debate. “Thanks” likewise isn’t very good and sounds too impersonal and somewhat dismissive. I started using “thank you” for a more sincere, serious tone in business communication. I use it because “regards” irks me for some reason.

Originally, "My best wishes to you and yours".

> I just don't think there's all that much difference in meaning between these common formulaic responses.

My father agrees, and for a time his standard greeting to colleagues were these words:

"Friendly Noise"

I've tried it a few times. I get strange looks at first, but people adopt.

On moving to the UK and for the first time using English "full time" it took me longer than it should have to get used to "how are you?" as merely a "friendly noise".

At first I found it incredibly rude how people would ask me a question and then keep walking while I stopped to start answering their question.

Funnily "How are you?" used to be an actual question in the UK. The shift to it being a generic greeting you don't answer is relatively new and I think an americanism. I remember having the same reaction when I went to Uni 11 years ago, It was a Scottish Uni but something like 15-20% of students were american. They'd ask that passing by and I'd stop to answer leading to several awkward encounters.

That said even when it was a question it was expected that you replied something along the lines of "I'm good thanks, you?". Unless it was a good friend you never replied negatively, though if you had good news it was fine to expand.

I absolutely think you're right that it's an Americanism. I actually worked at Yahoo in London when I started noticing it, about 18 years ago, and the office was full of Americans and they were most prone to using it.

> That said even when it was a question it was expected that you replied something along the lines of "I'm good thanks, you?". Unless it was a good friend you never replied negatively, though if you had good news it was fine to expand.

Yeah, that was my expectation as well - the answer needs to be adjusted to how close you are, and so it's mostly relatively perfunctory. But occasionally you get more detail than you bargained for.

It has to say something about a society where we ask about someone's well-being with absolutely no intention (and often no interest) in receiving an answer.

Perhaps it was originally just superficial politeness as well, and so over time the process was abbreviated to match the empty intent.

Well, because it's not a question.

I know that now, hence why that is the first thing my comment makes clear.

The point was that it's not at all obvious that it's not a question to someone not used to it being used as a greeting, given that it's worded as a question, and the intonation is given as a question, and given that many places in the world you wouldn't say the equivalent unless you're actually asking a question.

English feels to me to be pretty extreme relative to other languages with respect to the sheer number of terms that have been reduced to "friendly noises" and stripped of all meaning, to the point that it leads to the number of comments in this thread discussing the nuances of terms the sender most of the time has put no thought into.

I still tend to feel someone who throws out a "friendly noise" like this are usually being rude by using a question as a greeting, because whether you like it or not, it's implicitly acknowledging you don't really care, and so I avoid using it.

I wonder why this is. I only speak english so don't have other languages to compare it to. But we use a lot of idioms too, is that also less common in other languages? Could it be because of the wide range of cultures that speak English as their first and only language?

I know there are other languages as or more widely natively spoken (Spanish and Mandarin come to mind) but isn't it common for native speakers of those languages to also natively speak local languages and/or dialects. Could the number of "friendly noises" and idioms in English be because most english speakers only speak english?

In your specific case (ie coming to the UK) you've also the interesting thing where lots of americanisms have been adopted here, while still Britishisms remain. Different regions of Britain also strongly maintain a lot of their own "isms" (Scottish-isms for example) and we still tend to use them with other brits out of local pride. So depending where you are in the UK (London would be the extreme example) you'd likely hear Americanisms and Britishisms on a daily basis plus various region specific isms if you were often around people from those areas.

Idioms are common in every language I know (about 4-5 depending on which you count that I speak reasonably, and a few more I can read with some effort).

> Could the number of "friendly noises" and idioms in English be because most english speakers only speak english?

I don't know. My experience is that a lot of languages tends to have a much more formal hierarchy of terms to use for greetings, while English is all over the place. I think maybe part of the challenge is that English is used by people spread out much more and with very varying degree of experience with the language, including people using it as a second language, and so it's in some respect more internally diverse. It also lacks a strong effort to direct the language.

E.g. I'm Norwegian, and Norwegian has an official organ that gives government and the public advice on the evolution of the language, and language reforms have regularly passed as acts of parliament. French has Académie Française. For a lot of languages there are these official or semi-official organisations that sets out how the language will be taught at schools and what the official use should be like. It doesn't stop proliferation of variants (Norwegian authorities have more than once had to admit defeat and undo language reforms that failed to catch on, or just adjust the language to reflect use rather than vice versa), but it does tend to tame it somewhat.

When I first started learning French a quarter of a century ago, one of my classes was "mercantile French" which included lessons on French business correspondence, and one of the things that stuck with me was how much more formal it was (at least back then) in terms of greetings and signoffs and formatting than English correspondence. I'm taking a refresher course for my French these days, and the perceived more formalistic determination of level of formality is quite interesting.

> you've also the interesting thing where lots of americanisms have been adopted here

Yeah, in this case it may well be part of it.

How do you do?

In defense of using thanks for everything, the "thanks" (at least in my case) is meant more as a "Thanks for taking the time to read this email" and less "Thanks for reading this email" Time is the valuable part there, and someone dedicated the bit of it they have on this earth to read my email.

Why does thanks read as “mindless and insincere” but best “always works?”

Superficially, they seem about the same.

Yours, &c., nuclearnice

Because thanking someone means you're grateful for something they did or that you'll hope they'll do. It doesn't really apply to every email.

In contrast, expressing best wishes always makes sense unless you hate the recipient's guts and want them to know it.

Thanks, civilized

(See? It makes no sense.)

Every message you send is implicitly requesting something though - the time and attention of the person reading it.

Time is one of the most precious commodities we have - it seems appropriate to thank people for spending it on you.

Thanks, variaga

One thing is clear to me, everyone signing off on their comments is kinda nice.

Yours truly, DG

Agree, it brings a proper closing to the individual discourse.

Regards, The Lannisters

I can't stand "Best" as a closer. "Best wishes" is OK, as is "Best regards" but "Best" on its own is going to get your email into the "deal with it later" queue.

"Best" is standard practice with Germans, and shows a degree of intimacy-- implying the two parties know each other well enough that an abbreviation is fine.

Given my interactions, I'd be cautious dead-queueing an email on this criteria.

"Best", to me, sounds like if someone said "Have a day!". It feels like something's missing.

Totally agree but instead I use "Regards". Always works and I never have to think about it.

Regards,

Another guy on the internet

My English teacher thought that "Regards" sounds rude (like starting your emails with "John," instead of "Dear John,") and that one should always use "Best regards" instead.

Seems like there's a lot of nuance here.

The previous workplace of mine sets the signatures of my email to start with "Kind regards", and I continue to use it after I left that workplace. I now take a freelance job, and if the contact person isn't really nice to me, I would simply sign "Regards" (not "Kind", as my mood isn't really kind). Glad to hear that it can be viewed as a less polite form.

If someone is rude to me, I go the other way & up passive aggressiveness to 'Kindest regards'.

I don't read regards as fundamentally rude but I do read it as very cold and formal, which can come off in as rude or passive aggressive depending on the context.

I wouldn't bat an eye if a letter from my bank or a formal HR communication signed off with "Regards". But if a colleague from another team or a senior leader ended an email with "Regards" I would find that rude.

That said I've spent the last two years working in the public sector and have come to learn that the standards for communication and presentation are very different here. I'd still consider it rude from a colleague who worked in my directorate (it's a tech directorate) but if it was from someone outside my directorate I'd give them the benefit of the doubt. Though in those cases I also tend to be aggressively informal/casual in my responses.

> Whether I'm promoting you, firing you, reporting up on progress or problems, "best" always works.

“Best” is shorthand for wishing the other person well. Using it while firing someone could be seen (to use your words) as “mindless and weird”, a meaningless and reflexive dismissal which may rub the recipient the wrong way (“if you cared about what’s best for me, you wouldn’t have fired me”).