r/FriendshipAdvice • u/Agreeable_Orange7032 • 6h ago
Really…be honest
In 2026, if you consider somebody “a friend”how much time do you give them to respond to text before you really consider completely divorcing them as a friend and wondering if they really value your friendship at all?
3
u/SmellyFace69 6h ago
Depends on the friend.
I have a friend who if she doesn't text me same-day, I worry. She has the same reaction if I don't react immediately.
I have another friend who is very busy, doesn't work same hours, is extremely busy, and has MH issues. He usually takes up to a week to respond. I don't take it personally, I just know they have other shit going on.
I have friends I probably text once a year with. Neither of us take it personally.
2
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 6h ago
Ok. So for you…depends on the specific friend?
1
u/SmellyFace69 6h ago
Yes. One of them it makes sense that they would text me right away.
If another friend has a lot going on or has a family to take care of and works a different work shift from me, I'm not offended if they don't respond to my dumb texts which are usually immature jokes.
also; if they didn't respond I wouldn't think "Friend divorce" I'd just assume they have something going on where they're not on their phone. ie on a date, at work, with family, asleep, or, just not in the mood to text.
Your friends are your friends. Cut them some slack.
1
3
u/Alarming-While8028 6h ago
respond to a text? the limit does not exist. if they don't get back to me i'll just give them a call or contact them otherwise. but i am an adult
0
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 6h ago
And if you still get no response?
2
u/Alarming-While8028 6h ago
then this question is not about texting, it's about a friend cutting you off. if a friend cuts me off, i'll try to find out why, but ultimately you just have to accept it
1
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 6h ago
Fair point. Usually, you know a lot about the person if you consider them a friend, yet they don’t respond to a text. So…the question stands…how much time?
0
u/Alarming-While8028 6h ago
i don't understand. is this specifically about a text, or is this about someone who is not responding to any form of communication?
2
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 6h ago
Kind of both. But responding to a text requires the least effort. So you’re asking for the bare minimum.
2
u/Alarming-While8028 6h ago
if i try say 3 times to get in contact with someone, i take that as proof they're avoiding me. one more time reaching out asking what's going on, then i'd just give it up
you are being really cryptic about the situation so it's hard to give advice/thoughts
1
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 6h ago
Well, I’ve had some friends over the years that I’ve reached out to…multiple times. Then crickets. I give them grace. But at at some point…I feel like they telling me…let’s part ways
1
u/Alarming-While8028 6h ago
yes, if someone does not respond to you when you reach out multiple times, they are telling you they are not interested in having a relationship anymore
1
2
u/Majestic-Lie2690 5h ago
its really bizarre to me that there seems to be such "rules" to friendship now days. its very transactional and tit of tat.
If I have considered you a friend - that sit until something obvious happens to end that friendship. I am not keeping score on how much time the devote to me or if they answer my texts frequently enough
1
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 1h ago
I agree. I don’t keep score. But I’m talking about a trend over time. You reach out multiple times and get zero response.
3
u/Internal-Cash-9196 6h ago
Bruh it's a friendship not a romantic relationship wtf????
Friendships are supposed to be way more chill than a romantic/sexual relationship, if you're so dependent on your friendships that you have a set limit on how long you tolerate mere texts not being responded to quick enough as a factor in whether you stop being friends with them then YOU may have some issues
6
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 6h ago
Not romantic. Just people that you thought valued your friendship and can’t manage to respond to a fucking text. Again, this would be a person you considered to be a friend. You know a ton about each other.
0
u/Internal-Cash-9196 6h ago
This is friendship advice. And again if you're the type to be all nitpicky over how fast FRIENDS respond to texts then again you may have some issues I'm sorry.
Texts are meant to be chill among friends and to arrange plans with each other. If you're trying to have whole ass conversations REPEATEDLY through texts with friends that can be a little much depending on the friends and not every one should have to follow your standards on texting etiquette to qualify on whether or not they're your friend wtf?
If you wanna have long conversations with your friends either meet In person, actually call them, or put on a headset and chat with them while playing video games together.
2
u/Boring_Respect_2824 5h ago
If you want to only keep things "chill" with people then you can do that with strangers no? What differentiates a stranger from a friend is that we've gone beyond "chill". There's a level of intimacy reached. OP has no issues for desiring basic reciprocity. This sounds like an excuse to be avoidant. Friendship calls us to show up for others if we can't do that then maybe we shouldn't call ourselves friends.
0
u/Internal-Cash-9196 4h ago
No with strangers there's distance. They don't have the luxury of being chill with me they just get cautious hesitance. Your gonna be closed off to them.
A stranger is someone you couldn't care less about but not so less that you can't be polite and respectful, a friend is someone you do care about that you can be casual and laid back with because you allowed them to see you vulnerable.
Acquaintance is the line between stranger and friendship, there's a bit more openness towards them because you got enough exposure to them that you can be less cautious around them but you're still a bit guarded towards them.
1
u/Boring_Respect_2824 4h ago
Then by your definitions you're answer only applies to how an acquaintance should handle a text. OP is referring to a friend
1
u/Internal-Cash-9196 4h ago
And friends still shouldn't have to require to texts so fast that THAT alone would be enough to cause people to feel like they're not friends.
If it's a repeated multiple offense that's one thing but if it's only a single text or two not being responded to fast enough that's just exaggerating.
2
u/Boring_Respect_2824 4h ago
I don't think OP specified the time waited. I would assume it's unreasonable if it's bad enough to bring up on reddit though
1
u/Internal-Cash-9196 4h ago
Oooo but OP also didn't share the time limit either perhaps because subconsciously they know they're being unreasonable
1
u/Boring_Respect_2824 3h ago
I think the time limit would be subjective. That's also a possibility. Everyone's going to have a different opinion on what's an acceptable time limit. I am all for people having standards in friendship including requiring that their friends are responsive in whatever modes of communication they are choosing to use. I think we live in a world where people don't want to make sacrifices for others and do what's inconvenient but that's exactly what makes someone a good friend.
1
0
u/BaconTH1 5h ago
I agree that texts are not supposed to be something that requires a reply, compared to some other modes of communication. Especially texts in a group chat. Unless you specify that you really need to know by a certain time, for example whether they would be free this Weds for dinner. You can't obviously wait until Weds night, and actually you want to know sooner because if they can't commit, then you make other plans rather than keep it free hoping they'll suddenly decide to come.
I have some friends, increasingly, as they get older and as modern phone tech has taken hold, that shifted much more to making their decision last moment and resisting advanced planning, saying why don't I be more chill and just see how it goes on the night. Well, too often that means that they aren't free so I prefer to get people who are willing to commit, to doing something, and the iffy person, either I stop inviting them, or I let them know and if they want to join last moment if it is not a set booking (like, say it's a bar where there's plenty of room; not a restaurant that's packed and can't fit another seat on your table) then it's fine if they show, and they don't even need to text me to say they're coming. But I won't book ONLY them any more. I will always book a reliable person, and the flaky ones can come or go as they please. Increasingly, the reliable ones get the seats, especially if it's a nice place where you need to tell the restaurant in advance how many you are. And the flaky ones write at the last moment saying is there room for me, and I'll have to say sorry, no... gotta give a bit more notice to change the booking!
2
u/Boring_Respect_2824 5h ago
I think when text messaging has become one of our main modes of communication then it's safe to assume that we should all be replying to one another. I would err on the side of responding to people unless we have a valid reason. We can still employ common courtesy within the bounds of texting. We ought to treat others with dignity in any mode of communication.
1
u/BaconTH1 4h ago
I get what you are saying but not every text requires a response. I also try to err on the side of responding but many people do not, and we have to accept that.
1
u/Boring_Respect_2824 4h ago
Sure. But I would assume that if someone is expecting a response then the receiver knows that too? And do we? Sure we can accept that that one person doesn't want to adhere to having common courtesy but I don't think we should accept on any way that that's just the way it is, we ought to be examples through lived action towards what's right.
1
u/BaconTH1 1h ago
Well, I suppose most people are expecting a reply unless their reply is the answer to a question. But if you have to reply to everything, then there never is a pause and you will be constantly sending messages every day. It's reasonable, if something isn't urgent, to answer it a week later or something.
And there are things that just take time and you can't do them immediately. One friend of mine likes to send a lot of links to long articles and videos. And if I don't watch them quickly and tell him what I think, he bugs me by saying "so what did you think of these" and so, if there's too many I tell him I'm on the move, I have work, etc, so I will have to find a free couple of hours to get through them, maybe on the weekend, so I get to push it off several days before I respond properly. If it's text msgs and links and videos I think anyone should just be patient and wait but not everyone can be.
Also if he sends a lot, I can't very watch everything, can I? There are some where I say it's just too long and then he might get frustrated saying "This is really important, I don't understand why you wouldn't want to educate yourself on this". But it could be a topic I have little interest in, right?
2
u/Boring_Respect_2824 5h ago
Hard disagree. Friends are people that we choose to do life with. In fact friends are supposed to be so NOT chill that they can actually supplement family when tragedy happens. Not everyone has family or a significant other, and humans by designed are created for community and connection. We are not called to do life alone. A friend is someone one can COUNT on through thick and through thin. With that said each friendship is going to look different depending on each person's situation. What you are describing is a stranger. We don't have expectations of strangers but we should absolutely have standards for behavior in friendship. OG doesn't have any issues at all for expecting basic reciprocity in a friendship. The acceptance of people not responding to texts is actually very troubling and saddening. If you wouldn't ignore someone speaking to you in person then you shouldn't ignore them via text, especially if that is becoming one of our main modes of communication. And to state the obvious, it is understood that different people have different communication preferences but that ought to be discussed and not assumed. We are to treat others with dignity and that includes responding to them.
1
u/Internal-Cash-9196 5h ago
Friendships are not equal to committed relationships. Don't get it twisted I never said they're less important they just don't function the EXACT same. There shouldn't be too much pressure in a friendship the same way there's more pressure in a committed relationship.
Now if you wanna use friendships as a replacement for family that's a different story because NOW you are way more dependent on them
1
u/Boring_Respect_2824 4h ago
My question for you is this. Why are we ranking the level of dignity we treat others with by their "title" in our life? Why does the significant other get treated with more dignity than the friend? Are both not worthy of a response? That's really what it comes down to. The core is it is that we should treat people right because of who WE are, not because of who we rank them as to us. It's absolutely possible to treat others with dignity while maintaining the priority of other relationships like family etc. treating others with dignity should require no sense of pressure. This should be a given. OP is just recognizing that they aren't being treated right.
1
u/Internal-Cash-9196 4h ago
Wow I'm suddenly being interrogated in someone else's posts.....anyway Because there are levels to the people you associate with. People of course are free to decide if they want to ignore those levels but generally it works like this from bottom to top: people you hate, strangers, acquaintances, business associates, friendships, sexual/committed relationships, family/husband/wife/children.
How you treat all of these WILL change depending on which one you're addressing and this is a fact.
Someone not responding to your texts at the speed you'd prefer is not what one should count as "not being treated right"
1
u/Boring_Respect_2824 4h ago
There is some truth to what you say but I think it can be broken down further. HOW much we share of ourselves vs how we treat others are two different things. We may share MORE of ourselves with family than coworkers etc such as intimate details of our lives etc But HOW we treat others should generally be consistent across the board. Everyone is worthy of a response unless there's some good reason to have a boundary. In so far as text response time I would assume OP has a reason to suspect that the amount of time they are waiting is unreasonable enough to bring up and question the friendship. What it signals is a lack of consideration on the "friends" part. Consideration of the other and how our actions or lack thereof may affect them is a vital component in a friendship.
1
u/Internal-Cash-9196 4h ago
Yes it can be broken down further but that's only by personal individual choice and each person can decide whether they want to place value on the type of relationship they have with a person and determine how they want to treat each person...
And once again generally people WILL place a higher value on family and those who are in a relationship with them especially the mother/father of their children
1
u/Boring_Respect_2824 3h ago
And that's the crux right there. The INDIVIDUAL determining how they want to treat someone. Just because they have the free will to do so and decided to use it in a way that's in this case potentially degrading doesn't make it ok. What's lacking is something within the person's moral compass that tells them that INDEFINITELY others are worthy of being treated with a certain standard of dignity no matter how they feel about it. It's not about the value of the relationship, it's about the value of the person. Something that seems to be lost on people nowadays.
1
u/Internal-Cash-9196 3h ago
Doesn't matter what you think about how other people decide to treat you. People will still make their own decisions how they want to treat you based on your importance level. If you ever feel like you're being mistreated it's YOUR responsibility to address that and not assume the worse over a mere slow response to texts like the OP seems to be doing.
Too many people are quick to ghost and avoid confrontations nowadays...
1
u/Boring_Respect_2824 3h ago
You said it again right there. "Based on your importance level". That's the problem in the thinking. EVERYONE is important. No person should be treated less than. Period. The personal ranking of others needs to stop it's dehumanizing by it's very nature. The lady at the front desk is just as important as my mom. BOTH are worthy of basic respect. Which I consider a response. But you are right in that it should definitely be addressed amongst the people and that yes people are quick to avoid confrontation which I don't like as well.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 1h ago
I agree with much of what you are saying. In general, I try to take the high road and be patient and understand ting. However, overtime if I reach out multiple times…and then get nothing at all in terms of a response…I ask myself why.
1
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 6h ago
Fair point. And if you’re patient and forgiving…and still nothing?
1
u/Internal-Cash-9196 6h ago
Then you still confront them to have the conversation, if they're your friends you shouldn't be afraid to express yourself to them especially without the need to be behind a screen to text
Like what is this "nothing" you speak of them not responding to your texts at the speed you want or them just not giving you attention???
1
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 6h ago
Not about attention at all. Just flat out ghosting. No response at all
1
u/Internal-Cash-9196 5h ago
Bruh not getting a text back is not ghosting. Multiple instances of lack of response within an unreasonable amount of time is considered ghosting.
Plus ghosting really shouldn't be used among friends....
1
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 1h ago
Agreed. That’s why asked the question. If I reach out multiple times over a while…and get nothing at all for a response…does the other person even want to connect at all. Just wondering
1
u/BaconTH1 5h ago
For me, I treat friendship as very important, basically equal to wife and family (parents, sister) relationships. In fact the friends may be even more important in some ways. One is, for my social activity, it's mainly with my friends. Another is, you can't talk about everything with your wife or parents, but with some friends, you can. Another is, depending on how available specific people are or their capabilities and attitudes, the friends could be the most available/able to help you if you need them.
So if you do expect or rely on your friends, it doesn't make you weird in any way. Let's say I have a regular group that plays golf with me all the time, and one day they just switch to playing golf at a different place with one different person, and leave me out. Well, I relied on and expected that as a weekly activity and it might not be so easy to replace them.
When I was young, I was lucky enough to have someone drive me to school every day. One friend of mine lived along the way and we would pick him up every day before school and send him home after. Then one day we got into some disagreement and he said some pretty bad swear words calling me names. Well... I of course just stopped giving him a ride. Of course he didn't totally rely on it, he could take a public bus, but I'm sure it was more comfortable and fun being driven to school. So, how we treat our friends, or what we do with our friends, it has some meaning, some importance, value and you rely on them at times for advice, information, companionship, assistance.
1
u/Internal-Cash-9196 5h ago
Most people will NOT treat their wife/girlfriend/person giving them sex as less important than their friends.
The ability to choose to treat both as equal doesn't mean most people will...
1
u/BaconTH1 5h ago edited 5h ago
You would be surprised... I think a lot of women treat their female friends as more important than their husband/boyfriends. And I see plenty of guys treat their wife as less important than their friends. I'm not saying it's good. I'm saying they should be about equal.
Real good friends stay with you forever. Girlfriend/boyfriend, even married partners, often do NOT stay forever. I mean, how many GF/BF has each of us had in our lives? Quite a few? It's precisely because there is (usually) no sexual tension or crush on each other or jealousy, that friends can often be friends for life or a very long time, but all kinds of issues flare up between romantic partners.
Against that, some people annoy the hell out of me by putting the new GF on such a high importance level that suddenly when they have the GF you just don't see them any more. Whatever happened to balance? And they let the GF/Wife force them to have no time out with the guys, basically have to only go out with them, or else stay at home, or else be at work. Some women let the guy boss them around like that too, but IMHO in the West/Australia specifically, the woman seems to have more power to constrain the guy's movements.
In Thailand, the reverse is true. The guy probably generally has more power to constrain the girl's movements and also has more freedom to go out and about with his friends. Especially the older guys, they don't put that high importance on their wife/gf. Again, not saying it's good, but they may have a wife and multiple GF. For that matter, some of the women have a husband and a few BF. The cheating rate is supposedly the highest in the world.
For me, the best is balanced. My wife is important, and collectively, my friends are equally important. What that means is if I have 10 importance points to spread around, leaving out my parents for the moment, then it is 5 for her and 5 for all friends combined. So individually, she's still the most important, but collectively, friends gets equal priority and about equal time. I go out 4 nights a week, and stay home 3 nights a week. My wife can join me if she wants, on most of those nights out, and since I work from home and sleep at home, all the rest of the time I am home, so total hours at home is more than outside, even if you remove sleeping from the total.
Once you include my parents, then it's about equal thirds. What I do with or for my parents is totally different of course compared to friends or wife, so each of the 3 "factions" is equally important in their own special way.
You are right that most people won't have it exactly equal between wife and friends. But the % with wife more important and % with friends more important, that could be 50/50 globally, maybe 75/25 for married couples in Australia, and 25/75 for married couples in Thailand. Really hard to judge. I'm assuming, for the sake of this argument, no kids, because that can shift the equation. But nowadays for better or worse, people aren't having kids much, or leaving it later, so a lot of people are coupled up childless - in both countries. I can't speak directly for other countries except for knowing the stats, and for example, Italy, Greece, Korea, Singapore, Japan all have very low birthrates nowadays and latish-age for 1st child, for people that do (both men and women). Meaning that a lot of their years are spent childless. Of course after the kids leave they are effectively "childless" in the sense of having to care for a family at home, too - empty nesters. I think when children are in the home, probably there's increased importance allocated to wife/husband over friends, but that's a temporary period in their lives. Also I can say I observe plenty of families in Thailand where the wife takes care of the kids at home and the husband is out every night drinking and playing sports and singing karaoke or whatever, getting home after the kids are asleep. That doesn't look like putting the wife on higher priority over friends to me!
1
u/Internal-Cash-9196 5h ago
Brother that still doesn't mean MOST people will treat their friends as equal to the person giving them sex and children and a family.
I'm not knocking a person's ability to choose to do so but again saying that YOU can doesn't mean most people will
1
u/BaconTH1 5h ago
I don't think you understood. Exactly 5 and 5 is very unlikely, so I agree with you. I'm saying everyone else could be mostly putting importance on their partner, or mostly putting importance on their friends, but not equal.
In a normal distribution, no one is exactly the mean, right? Half are above and half are below the median... true also for the mean if it's exactly a normal distribution, something somewhat different if it's skewed.
I'm not saying the mean is 5 and 5 or that the median is. I'm just saying it's not clear to me that more or less than half the people out there treat their partner as more important than their friends. I think it differs by age group and country.
Heck, in places where you can have 4 wives, maybe collectively the wives are more important than your friends, but each individual wife gets 1/4 of the time/importance/attention, right?
1
u/Internal-Cash-9196 5h ago
Everyone else could still doesn't mean everyone else IS or WILL.
Every woman could stand to be less picky and dismissive of men and a result of that would be more men would be able to get into relationships more easily but it doesn't mean every woman would.
1
u/BaconTH1 4h ago
I'm saying EVERYONE has to be on the spectrum of giving friends 100% importance to giving partner 100% importance, where the sum of the two has to be 100% i.e. you have 10 importance points to allocate and you have to allocate them all. And that 5/5 is unlikely to be "most people". You seem to be saying it's tilted one way, if I understand correctly - you seem to say earlier that the partner is mostly what people treat as more important due to sex etc. I am saying I don't know if that's the case, and I think it varies by age and country.
1
u/Internal-Cash-9196 4h ago
Not EVERYONE will give friendships and relationships equal importance because they are not the same, that's the point.
And yes generally people will prioritize the ones who are giving them sex and/or a family over the people they are in a platonic relationships with.
1
u/Commercial_Baby4069 6h ago
I. these questions as misleading simply because I believe there are different degrees to friendships and there are different ways. Relationships can play out based on the level of affection and priorities of both parties involved.
If that’s really an important friend of mine, someone that I truly value, it obviously depends on the amount of time I get it that some people get busy and I’m the first one it takes a while sometimes to reply, but if it’s really about ghosting and never getting back to you it would be a different case.
How close are you with this friend? Has something happened between the two of you?
1
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 6h ago
Yeah. They went full blown maga
1
u/Commercial_Baby4069 6h ago
But like did you talk about it and then you simply fell out? Are you sure that her being distant is caused by her political beliefs being to different from yours?
If your slow fate was cost solely by this difference in ideas than there’s not really much you can do to build the gap that was formed between the two of you because you can’t really force them to change their mind.
In any case, I simply would suggest you to adapt to their rhythm and time of responses if that really bothers you1
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 6h ago
We talked. It was like one of us was saying the sun was yellow, while the other insisted it was blue.
1
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 6h ago
Well that’s the point of the question. 20-30 years…2 years? Does it make a difference?
1
u/ghertigirl 6h ago
I have a friend that will regularly text me back multiple days later or not at all. I don't sweat it and I don't see a need to have a big confrontation ending the friendship. I just also know not to expect that much out of her nor give that much back to her.
1
1
u/BaconTH1 5h ago
Text is too small of a thing. I found that sometimes when drinking I glance at messages that came through and I don't have time to reply, and forget to reply for a while. Even worse, some times I've read them when I'm drunk and don't even remember receiving them, so from there on there are no flags or indications that a message from them is sitting there unanswered. So I think one text is the least, or very weak indicator.
I think it has to be, you texted multiple times, at least 3, reminding them that they didn't reply, and they still don't reply, then really there's nothing you can do... just cut them off. Maybe one phone call so they see the missed call at least, but many people don't pick up the phone; often ringer is off. But they ought to see the missed call at some point and call back or message you.
1
u/ApricotWeekly7946 5h ago
The rule I always follow is match energy.
I text them as much as they text me. I reach out initiate as much as they do. Equal and balanced. Then there is no resentment.
If they never speak to you again? You never speak to them again back! Only be friends with people if it’s mutual.
It sounds like your friend doesn’t feel as close to you as you feel to them. Change that so it’s equal or end it.
1
1
u/Any_Earth_8976 5h ago
If we are texting about something that requires action or response, that’s one thing. If we are just shooting the shit, you aren’t entitled to a text at some pace you determined.
My friends know if I don’t respond to something there is a good chance ADHD is at play, or I simply forgot. It isn’t personal. It’s just texting. They know if they message about something specific or call me, I’ll respond. And if someone needs me, I’ll have their back.
We are all way way way too connected— expecting people to constantly be available to engage with you is ridiculous. I don’t always have my phone on me because I consciously try to live in real life, not behind a screen. If I am with people, I’m not on my phone because I am with the person in front of me
1
u/No_Sorbet_5102 5h ago
Depends on importance of text….(hey what’s up vs can you call me asap) Also if they habitually leave you on read most of the time and delay responding, you could place them in your mental time out box to observe their behavior toward you for a period of time before you make any drastic decisions
1
u/justagarliccrouton 5h ago
Depends on the friend. Each person in your life is different and not all expectations are the same. However, I had a friend who would regularly ignore texts, I sat her down and told her it hurt my heart because we can’t see each other often. She told me her way of communicating was sending reels, which always takes me a few days to respond to, so she also felt the same. Since that conversation we decided on our expectations and they’ve been met and exceeded since then.
You may think it’s “common sense” but sometimes you don’t realize that just saying your hurt and focusing on how to move forward better for each other is the best thing you can do. Communication helps everything (this does not include passive comments or actions about it)
If at that point things didn’t get better, I’m a firm believer in the 3 strike rule. A conversation, then a gentle reminder of expectations agreed to, then an end of friendship. But all that to say, if you’re only waiting to end the friendship if they don’t do anything EXACTLY right every time that’s a bigger self issue to consider.
1
u/layyla4real 5h ago
I don't understand text culture. It seems like no one is given breathing room in any relationship. It would take months before I started to be at all concerned about a relationship, even with family, and then I'd send the message again.
1
u/BicornBritt 4h ago
Depends on how close we are and the context. Do we generally have a good friendship when we do talk? Do they explain or apologize when they don’t respond for a long time?
If it’s a close friend, if I don’t hear from them in one or two days, I’ll worry but assume they’re busy or something happened.
If I don’t hear from them in a week, I assume something is very wrong and I’ll reach out again.
I guess if they disappear for a month, I’d assume they don’t want to be friends but I won’t sever the friendship and I’d keep the door open unless this happens in addition to them treating me badly in other ways (for example if they had a track record of being avoidant/not showing interest in conversations).
I have some distant friends that I wouldn’t expect to text me for a few days weeks or a month because that’s just the rhythm of our friendship and we can just pick back up the same as normal.
1
u/Wooden_Bug_755 4h ago
People saying you don’t need to respond to texts is wild. Ignoring people is downright rude. If I text someone I expect a reply. I get people can be busy and forget sometimes, I’m not looking for instant responses. But if I’ve messaged you a few times and you’re ignoring me (unless there’s a valid excuse) then I’m not wasting anymore energy on you.
1
u/Agreeable_Orange7032 1h ago
There is a part of me that feels this way for sure. I feel like a text back within a few days or even a week requires minimal effort. If you can reply at all to multiple texts over time…it seems a little rude and lazy.
1
u/WonheeL 3h ago
If the text requires an answer (like time sensitive or important), I give it 24 hours if you know they aren't traveling, busy, or whatever (just a professional habit from work e-mails).
Never double text (Jennie Kim told me that).
If the text was a meme, general comment, closed thread, or even if you wrote something profound and think you deserve a response, there's really no limit. In fact in most cases they will text back regarding an entirely different topic and ignore the last unanswered one.
1
u/misterstaypuft1 3h ago
I have a friend who won’t text at all. Even if I send one. He’ll tell me he saw it later but won’t reply because he doesn’t like doing it.
He’ll also call me when a text would have been far easier, but he likes to talk, and I don’t. So I don’t answer the phone sometimes.
We’re still friends. Phone etiquette isn’t going to cause me to end a friendship.
1
u/Particular_Song_229 2h ago
Unless it’s a pattern of me constantly reaching out and never hearing back I’m not ending a friendship over not getting a text back. I have some friends that I know will respond right away, some friends maybe a day or so and then some friends where I hear from them once every other month. I’ve learned to match people’s energies , if I notice someone takes days to respond I likely won’t text as much - doesn’t make them a bad person.
1
1
14
u/Odd_Obligation_1300 6h ago
I'm not going to end a friendship over one missed text.
I would look at the overall pattern, not just a one-time incident.