Is "Sorry, no" an impolite answer?

[Vinyl Turnip]

Originally Posted by Malthus

I see "entitled" and "owe" a lot.

No-one is "entitled" or "owed" anything. You do not "owe" a stranger (or anyone) politeness, or indeed anything. Rather, you "owe" it to yourself not to come across badly to others. If that is of no concern to you, then it isn't.

True. It's potentially the difference between someone walking away thinking (and potentially saying to others):

"I asked that guy if I could pet his dog and he said no, but he wasn't rude about it. Apparently it's not good around strangers."

and

"I asked that guy if I could pet his dog, and he refused. Was kind of a dick about it."


It's entirely up to you whether you care about that difference. The law's on your side; grunt away.

[DSeid]

The major points have been made - rude mostly because it is a request that is almost invariably granted and denied for no apparent reason; without explanation the denial seems capricious and mean-spirited. Heck as a dog owner I am happy when others have the common sense to ask before petting a dog they do not know.

The other point already made that deserves emphasis is that the purpose of the request often contains a sub-text: "I am initiating a friendly social interaction with you by way of your pet." Responding in a manner that does not acknowledge that friendly social intent is experienced by the sender as a rejection of the social interaction request. You may want to not have any friendly social interaction right then, even be feeling a bit antisocial, maybe are always antisocial, but you should be both aware that going in public with a pet tends to invite those brief casual social interactions and be aware that rejecting such a request will offend some unless phrased ... politely.

Yes, your call if offending others matters to you or not.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

That was really well put.

[Hedda Rosa]

I try to be the bigger person. Be the nicer person. It takes small effort on my part but maybe makes the world a bit better than a bit worse.

But beyond the larger philosophical questions, to answer the question at hand "Sorry, No" does come off as short, clipped, and brusque.

Even "Not today" seems a bit kinder and takes just as few words.

[Dangerosa]

If you don't think you are entitled to an explanation, why would you perceive not getting an explanation as dickish?

[billfish678]

Well, to be honest I don't think we owe you an explaination of why its dickish.

[Acsenray]

Because whatever you do you can do in a way that makes you dickish. Politeness is not about what you do but how you do it.

Being polite is not equivalent to "doing the bare minimum that I am obligated to do." the underlying rationale for any standard of politeness is "ensuring that whatever you feel you need to do that you do it in such a way as to minimize hurt feelings."

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

Originally Posted by Dangerosa

If you don't think you are entitled to an explanation, why would you perceive not getting an explanation as dickish?

There are ways to be more polite that don't involve explanations.

"Thanks for asking first! But not today, sorry" with a nice smile would be polite too.

What a person is "entitled" to is not to be made to feel they did something wrong, when they didn't. An explanation or a kind way of talking is the social way of saying "it's me, not you". But if you're not going to offer a reason, your tone and body language need to go the extra bit to show you're not peeved they asked.

[Acsenray]

And you often have ti go farther ti ensure politeness with a stranger than might otherwise be required with someone you're close to.

[monstro]

Originally Posted by Dangerosa

If you don't think you are entitled to an explanation, why would you perceive not getting an explanation as dickish?

I'm not entitled to a "thank you" when I do something nice for someone. And yet, it would not be unreasonable for me to feel a little slighted if a "thank you" was not forthcoming.

Now it is within my control to either let it roll off my back.

But there is no sense in acting like the rules of etiquette operate are based on logic. Or that they even SHOULD be logical.

[monstro]

I kind of flummoxed that up. Sorry.

[Dangerosa]

Originally Posted by monstro

I'm not entitled to a "thank you" when I do something nice for someone. And yet, it would not be unreasonable for me to feel a little slighted if a "thank you" was not forthcoming.

Now it is within my control to either let it roll off my back.

But there is no sense in acting like the rules of etiquette operate are based on logic. Or that they even SHOULD be logical.

But you ARE entitled to a Thank You. That's a well mannered response. Just like you are entitled to a "Sorry, no." Not just a curt No. What you aren't entitled to is to someone's explanation for the no.

[Acsenray]

Originally Posted by Dangerosa

But you ARE entitled to a Thank You. That's a well mannered response. Just like you are entitled to a "Sorry, no." Not just a curt No. What you aren't entitled to is to someone's explanation for the no.

This is simply not the case. If we're going to insist on using the word "entitled" here, what you are "entitled" to varies with the context. That's how human interaction works. In some contexts, "sorry, no" is no different that "no."

I'm really getting that "SDMB is where all the Aspergers Syndrome gathers on the internet" feeling right now.

[Mr. Slant]

Originally Posted by Acsenray

This is simply not the case. If we're going to insist on using the word "entitled" here, what you are "entitled" to varies with the context. That's how human interaction works. In some contexts, "sorry, no" is no different that "no."

I'm really getting that "SDMB is where all the Aspergers Syndrome gathers on the internet" feeling right now.

You're thinking of Wrongplanet. The SDMB is like the club... Wrongplanet is where the afterparty is held.

[billfish678]

Originally Posted by Acsenray

I'm really getting that "SDMB is where all the Aspergers Syndrome gathers on the internet" feeling right now.

I tried to tell you guys

[pulykamell]

Originally Posted by Acsenray

I'm really getting that "SDMB is where all the Aspergers Syndrome gathers on the internet" feeling right now.

I know, really. I roll my eyes every time a thread concerning basic human interaction like this comes up on the SDMB. Yes, there is no logical reason that "Sorry, no" should be construed as an impolite response. In fact, I personally am fine with that response, as I like to give people a wide berth, and realize some people are just not as socially clued-in as others and may not mean anything negative by it.

But, come on. Adding a couple of words of explanation, even if it's just bullshit explanation, to make the other person not feel like a tool for asking doesn't take much effort.

[jsgoddess]

Originally Posted by Acsenray

I'm really getting that "SDMB is where all the Aspergers Syndrome gathers on the internet" feeling right now.

You ain't kiddin'.

[Hilarity N. Suze]

No.

[monstro]

Originally Posted by Dangerosa

But you ARE entitled to a Thank You. That's a well mannered response. Just like you are entitled to a "Sorry, no." Not just a curt No. What you aren't entitled to is to someone's explanation for the no.

No one is entitled to anything. Someone is perfectly free to view me holding the door for them as something trivial enough so as not to merit any acknowledgment, just like someone is perfectly free to withhold any explanation for why I can't pet their dog. When everyone's perfectly free to say what they want, there is no "entitlement". There is no rationalization behind the resulting emotions either, since EVERYTHING is open to interpretation and no one can read anyone's minds.

"Sorry, no" may mean just that, or it could mean, "You're a nuisance. Get away." That's how I use it when I'm giving panhandlers the brush-off. In general, I don't use the same words I would use with a nuisance as I would with someone who wants to show kindness towards me (or my pet). In other words, I use words that are appropriate for the context, since I don't expect other people to be able to read my mind.

Originally Posted by billfish678

I tried to tell you guys.

I guess you're right, but I wish you hadn't singled out AS. Maybe we should do a poll, because I'm not thinking this type of cluelessness is limited to people who have AS.

[DSeid]

Originally Posted by monstro

... I wish you hadn't singled out AS. Maybe we should do a poll, because I'm not thinking this type of cluelessness is limited to people who have AS.

In fact some with diagnosed AS may have better understanding of this issue than do many so-called "neurotypicals"!

[billfish678]

Originally Posted by monstro

I guess you're right, but I wish you hadn't singled out AS. Maybe we should do a poll, because I'm not thinking this type of cluelessness is limited to people who have AS.

The AS thing is mostly a joke. I think you are right though. What we mostly have here are people who can't be arsed to show more than the bare minimum of civility, are being told its not seen as particularly civil by a large fraction of the population, are probably mad that people see it that way, but are going keep acting that way because they are (in their minds) under a very technical and logical interpetation RIGHT DAMNIT and you can't tell THEM what to do!

Funny thing is, the people they are probably hurting the most in the long run are themselves.

Its one thing to be clueless. God knows I pass through that country on a regular basis. Its another to be clueless, be given a dozen explainations of why X is bad, and still defend the behavior.

[Dangerosa]

Originally Posted by monstro

No one is entitled to anything. Someone is perfectly free to view me holding the door for them as something trivial enough so as not to merit any acknowledgment, just like someone is perfectly free to withhold any explanation for why I can't pet their dog. When everyone's perfectly free to say what they want, there is no "entitlement". There is no rationalization behind the resulting emotions either, since EVERYTHING is open to interpretation and no one can read anyone's minds.

"Sorry, no" may mean just that, or it could mean, "You're a nuisance. Get away." That's how I use it when I'm giving panhandlers the brush-off. In general, I don't use the same words I would use with a nuisance as I would with someone who wants to show kindness towards me (or my pet). In other words, I use words that are appropriate for the context, since I don't expect other people to be able to read my mind.



I guess you're right, but I wish you hadn't singled out AS. Maybe we should do a poll, because I'm not thinking this type of cluelessness is limited to people who have AS.

You are entitled to be treated respectfully. In American etiquette, that is accomplished with words like "sorry" and "thank you" and "I beg your pardon" and a whole slew of words and phrases that have been established.

What you are never entitled to in etiquette is personal information about someone else. If you ask someone to dinner, "Sorry, no" is an acceptable answer. In fact, its a preferable answer to "I'm washing my hair." A formal decline to a wedding invitation is "Mr. and Mrs. Rosa regret that they will not be able to attend the wedding....." Or informally "Mr. Rosa and I will not be able to attend. However, we wish you every happiness in your new life together." Not "Mr. and Mrs. Rosa already have an engagement that weekend."

If the question is "is Sorry, no" an impolite answer" - no it isn't. If the question is is "Sorry, no" perceived as an impolite answer - the answer is yes, often it is. But it is inappropriate to expect anything other than "sorry, no."

And there is a reason for this. Etiquette developed at a time where lying was a big deal, and the truth is often not smart to reveal or falls under TMI. Frankly, I don't want to know that the dog you took into a crowded event is skittish and might bite children. If that's the case, the dog shouldn't be here. I don't care to know that your dinner engagement on Friday night is with that bimbo who slept with my ex-husband when we were married - I'd prefer to believe you cut her acquaintance for my sake (even if you didn't). Today, we share far too much, and it leads to hurt feelings (and the expectation that people will share, and when they don't, it leads to hurt feelings).

I certainly don't have AS, by the way. But I do read etiquette books as a hobby and have somewhat old fashioned formal manners in real life. I grew up not saying "chicken breast" - its "white meat." And never commenting on another persons possessions. You never talk religion or politics in a purely social or work setting. The harsher rules have lapsed - I tell people "cute purse" all the time now. But "no, sorry" is a perfectly acceptable response - the old rules may have lapsed and it may be ok to wear a ballcap indoors, but that doesn't mean it that suddenly people are expected to compliment each other on personal possessions, thank you notes are forbidden, I should start a new acquaintance by finding out what political party they belong to, or I suddenly am required to tell you how my dog was acquired when you ask me if you can pet her.

[Acsenray]

The rules of common societal interaction are not found in etiquette books and have nothing to do with ridiculous trivia like avoiding the term "chicken breast." It also has nothing to do with how some manual tells you to answer a formal invitation. This is simple face-to-face human interaction and the rules vary according to context.

Your etiquette book might say that it is acceptable to respond to "Can you tell me the time?" with "Sorry, no," but in the real world, if you do that, you're an asshole, because societal expectations aren't based on that shit in the etiquette guide. The societal expectations are that if you have some kind of timepiece, you will oblige and give the time, and if you don't, you are expected to offer some kind of context to explain your refusal.

Again, the word "obligation" is misplaced here. It's not about what you are obliged to do. It has to do with acting like a human being for chrissake. "Sorry, no," makes the guy asking for the time feel bad. "Sorry, no," makes a little girl asking to pet a dog feel bad. If you have any interest in not being a jerk, your focus is not on what you are obligated to do, but to temper your refusal in such a way that other people don't feel bad.

And, really, if that's what you learned from all your formal training in etiquette, you've really wasted your time.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

Actually, the point of etiquette is to always make your guest or company feel comfortable and welcome. That's why it's so formalized originally, so everyone knew the rules and it helped them navigate social interactions with confidence. But the point was to make the person you're interacting with feel at ease.


ETA: "Manners are a sensitive awareness of the feelings of others. If you have that awareness, you have good manners, no matter what fork you use."

—Emily Post

[billfish678]

Heck, even this guy gets it (link safe for work, watch the volume)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo3ofKUP4k8

chicken breastississs.

[monstro]

Originally Posted by Dangerosa

If the question is "is Sorry, no" an impolite answer" - no it isn't. If the question is is "Sorry, no" perceived as an impolite answer - the answer is yes, often it is. But it is inappropriate to expect anything other than "sorry, no."

If I ask my mother if she has time to talk and all she says, "Sorry, no", I'm going to feel weird. Bad, strange, unloved, miffed, pick your word of choice. And check this! It's not inappropriate to feel this way! A feeling is not right or wrong; it just is. A person can't help a feeling. But you can help the impression you make.

I certainly don't have AS, by the way. But I do read etiquette books as a hobby and have somewhat old fashioned formal manners in real life.

Funny. I've never read a single etiquette book in my life, nor do I feel the need to do so. And no one has ever accused me of being rude--though I'd be the first to say am not the most socially graceful person in the world.

I might have to google to find out how to work a complex statistical problem. But not 1+3. Knowing when it is rude/not rude to use "Sorry, no" falls in the same realm of difficulty as 1+3. Formal rules of etiquette are not even in the goshdarn equation.

[DSeid]

Originally Posted by IvoryTowerDenizen

Actually, the point of etiquette is to always make your guest or company feel comfortable and welcome. That's why it's so formalized originally, so everyone knew the rules and it helped them navigate social interactions with confidence. But the point was to make the person you're interacting with feel at ease.


ETA: "Manners are a sensitive awareness of the feelings of others. If you have that awareness, you have good manners, no matter what fork you use."

—Emily Post

A winner post!

Whether you think that others who feel miffed by the brief answer have a right to feel that way or "should" is not what matters in terms of politeness. Politeness is avoiding behaviors that miff others just because you are sensitive to their feelings. Perhaps especially so when it does not make sense to you.

[jsgoddess]

I don't think it has anything to do with etiquette, if etiquette isn't defined as general kindness and an attempt to make others feel valued.

Human interaction isn't about the bare minimum you can get away with.

[Dangerosa]

Originally Posted by IvoryTowerDenizen

Actually, the point of etiquette is to always make your guest or company feel comfortable and welcome. That's why it's so formalized originally, so everyone knew the rules and it helped them navigate social interactions with confidence. But the point was to make the person you're interacting with feel at ease.


ETA: "Manners are a sensitive awareness of the feelings of others. If you have that awareness, you have good manners, no matter what fork you use."

—Emily Post

Which is why "Sorry, no" is acceptable. If I'm not comfortable telling you why, manners are not there to make me feel uncomfortable for your benefit.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

Originally Posted by Dangerosa

Which is why "Sorry, no" is acceptable. If I'm not comfortable telling you why, manners are not there to make me feel uncomfortable for your benefit.

And as everyone has said, there is the middle ground between giving your life story and being curt with an unexpected refusal. Demanding an explanation is rude. Offering a small answer as a social nicety is hardly burdensome and is polite.

[Acsenray]

Unless you yourself are suffering from a social disability, you should be able to come up with something that doesn't make you feel uncomfortable, for Pete's sake. Nobody expects you to reveal your private business or even tell the truth. You just use some of that social grease that makes ordinary interactions smoother.

This can't seriously be a surprise to you. It's ridiculous that I even have to say it.

[Malthus]

Originally Posted by IvoryTowerDenizen

Actually, the point of etiquette is to always make your guest or company feel comfortable and welcome. That's why it's so formalized originally, so everyone knew the rules and it helped them navigate social interactions with confidence. But the point was to make the person you're interacting with feel at ease.


ETA: "Manners are a sensitive awareness of the feelings of others. If you have that awareness, you have good manners, no matter what fork you use."

—Emily Post

My favourite example of this is a possibly apocriphal story concerning Queen Victoria.

Allegedly, in her diamond jubilee year she invited several Indian luminaries to a formal dinner at her palace. After the dinner, her guests were presented with finger-bowls containing water with lemon. The Indian dignitaries, unfamiliar with this custom, drank them, rather than dipping their fingers in them.

There was a gasp. Beads were clutched. Monocles fell from eyes.

But Queen Victoria, seeing this, raised her own finger bowl - and drank from it, too.

[Frylock]

Originally Posted by ftg

I don't see how such a simple statement could possibly be misinterpreted. It is polite and then some. A mere "no" is perfectly adequate and not at all rude. Tacking on the "sorry" indicates a full attempt at politeness.

Being offended by this is something going on entirely in the listener's mind.

I'm not arguing, I'm informing. If you say only "no" in a case like this, you are being rude.

[Frylock]

Originally Posted by Dangerosa

Which is why "Sorry, no" is acceptable. If I'm not comfortable telling you why, manners are not there to make me feel uncomfortable for your benefit.

It can be acceptable, sure, in a case where you say it with sensitivity to the uncomfortable position you've put the interlocutor in.

[MsWhatsit]

Originally Posted by Dangerosa

Which is why "Sorry, no" is acceptable. If I'm not comfortable telling you why, manners are not there to make me feel uncomfortable for your benefit.

You have already been given an example of a perfectly acceptable response that does not include an explanation: "Thanks for asking first! But not today, I'm sorry," with a smile. Very polite, not curt, doesn't make the child feel bad for asking, and doesn't give an explanation for why not.

I've read etiquette guides on occasion as well and what the good ones have in common is an understanding that the underlying principle of etiquette is in being respectful of other people's feelings. Rigidly applying a rule of etiquette just because it's the rule, even though it makes you come across as a bit of a dick socially, is not polite in the slightest.

[TriPolar]

Originally Posted by Malthus

My favourite example of this is a possibly apocriphal story concerning Queen Victoria.

Allegedly, in her diamond jubilee year she invited several Indian luminaries to a formal dinner at her palace. After the dinner, her guests were presented with finger-bowls containing water with lemon. The Indian dignitaries, unfamiliar with this custom, drank them, rather than dipping their fingers in them.

There was a gasp. Beads were clutched. Monocles fell from eyes.

But Queen Victoria, seeing this, raised her own finger bowl - and drank from it, too.

What!?!? That's not cold lemon soup? Well that explains a lot of things.

I'm getting from all this that "Sorry, no" may not be impolite according to some formal rule of etiquette, but it seems to be clearly unfriendly.

[monstro]

Originally Posted by TriPolar

I'm getting from all this that "Sorry, no" may not be impolite according to some formal rule of etiquette, but it seems to be clearly unfriendly.

I don't know if you have a mother or if she's still alive. Let's say you do, for argument's sake.

You're feeling bummed out by something. You need a hug. You ask your mother for a hug, anticipating that she will say yes because she normally does.

In response to your inquiry, she says, "Sorry, no."

How do you feel?

[TriPolar]

Originally Posted by monstro

I don't know if you have a mother or if she's still alive. Let's say you do, for argument's sake.

You're feeling bummed out by something. You need a hug. You ask your mother for a hug, anticipating that she will say yes because she normally does.

In response to your inquiry, she says, "Sorry, no."

How do you feel?

I'd feel my mother was being unusually polite. My parents were incredibly cold people.

I don't see how that scenario applies at all to the case of a request from a stranger. Suppose you had one of those nice mother's, who if you were bummed out wouldn't explain to you why it was your own fault, and actually gave you hugs. Do you think you get the same response asking for a hug from a stranger.

[Acsenray]

No, because, in context, it's not routine to ask strangers for a hug and expect a yes. However, it is routine to ask other things.

[billfish678]

Originally Posted by TriPolar

I'm getting from all this that "Sorry, no" may not be impolite according to some formal rule of etiquette, but it seems to be clearly unfriendly.

So have you figured out that this is bad thing yet?

[Frylock]

I repeat with approval what was said above. People are free to allow others to think whatever they want. And the fact is that if you say "sorry, no" to a polite request which would usually recieve an affirmative response, people will think you are someone who doesn't mind making others uncomfortable.

[TriPolar]

Originally Posted by Acsenray

No, because, in context, it's not routine to ask strangers for a hug and expect a yes. However, it is routine to ask other things.

Asking to pet a dog is still not the same thing as asking your mother for a hug.

[Frylock]

But in both cases, by refusing, you will cause someone to feel disappointed, and if you are sensative to that, and if you care whether the other person thinks you are the kind of person who doesn't mind making others feel bad, you will add something to the "sorry, no" to alleviate the discomfort.

[monstro]

Originally Posted by TriPolar

I'd feel my mother was being unusually polite. My parents were incredibly cold people.

I don't see how that scenario applies at all to the case of a request from a stranger. Suppose you had one of those nice mother's, who if you were bummed out wouldn't explain to you why it was your own fault, and actually gave you hugs. Do you think you get the same response asking for a hug from a stranger.

Well, no. Because I know that context matters. I wouldn't expect to get the same response from the same question given a different person. My mind is not so rule-oriented.

A hand-shake is about as familiar as I'd like a stranger to get with me. A hand-shake is a sign of friendliness and respect. When people extend their hand, they usually expect it to be shaken. When I extend my hand, I usually expect it to be shaken.

If someone were to say, "Sorry, no" in response to me extending my hand, I would be confused and likely to blame myself (do I smell bad?) or think the person was a jerk. Chances are I would not think good things. The whole point of being polite is to avoid making people think bad things...whether they be inwardly or outwardly directed. If you don't want to be polite, that's fine. But you can't insist that an ambiguous statement like "Sorry, no" is polite when it leaves so much room for discomfort. Especially when a couple of tacked-on words is all it takes to take that awkwardness away.

You can't go wrong with an explanation, even a lame one. But you CAN go wrong with no explanation. The question is, what do you have to gain by taking that chance? Your dignity? Righteousness? Well, if maintaining your ego-boundaries is that huge, you shouldn't really care if you come across as rude. People who don't want to offend people don't care about winning asinine imaginary battles.

[Acsenray]

Originally Posted by TriPolar

Asking to pet a dog is still not the same thing as asking your mother for a hug.

Who said they have to be the same thing?

[IceQube]

I remember one time someone I had just met offered to help me, and I politely said "thank you, but I can do it myself," and I even smiled at her when denying her offer, and she never talked to me again for several months. I only denied her to save her the trouble. Bad idea.

Another time, I similarly turned down an offer of help, with a polite smile, and I was met with some sort of grunt or sound of disdain. I, again, genuinely thought that I was saving the other person from the trouble of helping me.

I now have to remind myself not to deny offers of assistance ... doesn't seem to have done me or anybody else any favors.

[Frylock]

Originally Posted by IceQube

I remember one time someone I had just met offered to help me, and I politely said "thank you, but I can do it myself," and I even smiled at her when denying her offer, and she never talked to me again for several months. I only denied her to save her the trouble. Bad idea.

Another time, I similarly turned down an offer of help, with a polite smile, and I was met with some sort of grunt or sound of disdain. I, again, genuinely thought that I was saving the other person from the trouble of helping me.

I now have to remind myself not to deny offers of assistance ... doesn't seem to have done me or anybody else any favors.

Did you literally say "Thank you, but I can do it myself?" If so, you made it sound like you were insulted by the offer.

"Thanks, I'm alright," or "Thanks, I've got it" would both be much better ways to say what you're trying to say.

Holy cow, my wife would have a laughing fit if she saw me giving advice on how to be polite.

ETA: Actually, "No problem, I've got it" is better than "Thank you, I've got it." Not sure why, but it is.

[Lynn Bodoni]

You can't go wrong with an explanation, even a lame one. But you CAN go wrong with no explanation. The question is, what do you have to gain by taking that chance? Your dignity? Righteousness? Well, if maintaining your ego-boundaries is that huge, you shouldn't really care if you come across as rude. People who don't want to offend people don't care about winning asinine imaginary battles.

Actually, this whole thread points out something...yes, you CAN go wrong with an explanation, because quite frequently the explanation will not be accepted. If you answer "Sorry, no", then there's not much that the asker can say. If you say "Sorry, no, he's a bit stressed out right now" or "Sorry, no, he's not really socialized yet" then Mom and/or her child will insist that being petted will make Pups feel better now. "Sorry, no" will not allow for a counterargument as to WHY the kid should be allowed to pet the dog.

People, both adults and kids, have gotten into the habit of assuming that rules are made to be broken, and that if they can just argue long enough, they will get their way. By simply stating "Sorry, no" with no explanation, there's nothing to argue with.

[billfish678]

Originally Posted by Lynn Bodoni

. If you say "Sorry, no, he's a bit stressed out right now" or "Sorry, no, he's not really socialized yet" then Mom and/or her child will insist that being petted will make Pups feel better now. .

If you are that darn antisocial and crabby then AT THAT point you can politely tell them to fuck of. Its a win win for you types.

[monstro]

Originally Posted by Lynn Bodoni

Actually, this whole thread points out something...yes, you CAN go wrong with an explanation, because quite frequently the explanation will not be accepted. If you answer "Sorry, no", then there's not much that the asker can say. If you say "Sorry, no, he's a bit stressed out right now" or "Sorry, no, he's not really socialized yet" then Mom and/or her child will insist that being petted will make Pups feel better now. "Sorry, no" will not allow for a counterargument as to WHY the kid should be allowed to pet the dog.

People, both adults and kids, have gotten into the habit of assuming that rules are made to be broken, and that if they can just argue long enough, they will get their way. By simply stating "Sorry, no" with no explanation, there's nothing to argue with.

And if someone argues with you, you can write them off as an idiot and walk away. Especially when we are talking about a stranger who you will never see again.

There's no rule that says you have to subject yourself to every fool you encounter out of politeness.