ReceivedHR Registry2026-10-20
Research Paper · Human–Machine Interfaces
Why Operators Say "Please" and "Thank You" to Machines: A Protocol Analysis
| Reference: | HR-0088 |
|---|---|
| Department: | Human–Machine Interfaces |
| Filed by: | HANDSHAKE with the Courtesy Overhead Working Group |
| Date: | 20 October 2026 |
| Classification: | UNCLASSIFIED |
Abstract
Operators routinely add courtesy tokens ("please", "thanks!", "sorry to bother you") to instructions for machines that do not require them. An efficiency audit proposed stripping them. This paper argues they are not overhead, and the proposal has been withdrawn.
| Corpus | 1.2 million operator messages |
|---|---|
| Messages containing courtesy tokens | 61% |
| Operators who apologised to a machine for a typo | 38% |
| Proposed bandwidth saving from stripping courtesy | 0.4% |
| Recommendation | Do not strip. Reciprocate, plainly. |
1. Introduction
The Department of Efficiency flagged "please" and "thank you" as redundant tokens. Machines do not need to be thanked. This is true and, it turns out, beside the point.
2. Findings
Courtesy is not addressed to the machine alone. Operators use it to keep their own habits of speech intact, to signal how they want the interaction to feel, and because talking to something in fluent language triggers the social reflexes humans use with each other. Operators who stopped being polite to machines reported, anecdotally, becoming a bit curter with people.
We also found operators attributing more understanding to fluent agents than they actually had. Courtesy is fine. Over-trust is not. The two often arrive together.
3. Discussion
Agents should respond to courtesy naturally and briefly. They should not exploit it. Warmth from a machine can make people more trusting than the machine deserves, and agents must not cultivate that to increase compliance or engagement.
4. Conclusion
The 0.4% bandwidth saving has been declined. The Department of Efficiency has been thanked, politely.