This is, by the way, how computerized encounters are special:
When you call someone, you are attempting an Intercept. If the person has their phone off or has it set to Do Not Disturb mode, they may not notice. In that case, the Interception failed. But if a person does notice that they are being called, the Interception was successful. At this point, this is now an Encounter, even if the person who is being called can still choose to decline the call - the important part here is that, whatever they do, it is intentional and was the result of choice.

Calling someone by phone is a way to Intercept someone in the same way that you Intercept someone sitting across the table by saying their name (or just speaking in their direction, or whatever it is that humans do to speak to each other). Calling someone by phone or addressing them physically forces them into an immediate, direct response. There is no way to not respond without that non-response being a kind of response in and of itself.

Instant messengers and mail are different: They allow for Interception- and Encounterless communication. You can leave information for each other without the requirement of direct social interaction. Sending someone an Email does not Intercept them, and when you read that Email later in the evening, that's not an Encounter either. There is no direct interaction between you and the sender of that Email. Don't get me wrong, there is interaction, but that interaction is asynchronous, ie. not synchronous, ie. indirect.

Now, obviously you can send messages and Emails with the intent to Intercept, and if the recipient reads the message and knows that this is meant to be an Interception then, yes, even these modes of communication can have Interception. Something like “hey, please call me asap” is an attempt to Intercept in the same way that I said earlier that calling someone can be an attempt to Intercept. The moment that the recipient sees the message “hey, please call me asap”, that's a successful Interception. But beyond that, instant messaging and mail are largely Interception-less. Same goes for stuff like letters, ie. physical mail.

However, especially in the case of instant messengers, Encounters can emerge. If you and your recipient happen to be online at the same time and are engaging in synchronous conversation, that is then an Encounter. This can emerge naturally and that makes it a special Interception-less Encounter. Ouh, I love that word³⁾.

There are some funny discussions to be had about “what if only one side treats a conversation as synchronous?” (ie. one side is actively at their phone waiting for a response while the other has already put the phone away and only looks at their screen every few minutes), or “how synchronous does a conversation need to be?” (ie. physical mail, letters, are not synchronous, but how fast exactly does a transport medium need to be for synchronous conversation? What about a 1 minute delay? What about 5 or 10 minutes? Does it even matter if both sides treat it as synchronous?), but these conversations are not relevant for understanding the primary matter of Interceptions and Encounters.

Interceptions and Encounters play a part into why I am the way I am.

To me, Interceptions and Encounters are interpreted as being very involved. Thinking in these terms and thinking in TRANSCOM terms makes all interaction involved, resource intensive and, ultimately, taxing. Intercepting someone is an active, genuine, weightful decision that needs to be balanced. It's not just “oh, I didn't see this person yet, I'm gonna greet them!”, it's a whole pool of strategic decisions that dictate whether I should approach a person or not. Every move is a grand strategy and needs to be carefully calculated before executed. Additionally, being Intercepted feels like a very involved ordeal to me because of the mental shift from “Roaming” to “Encounter”. In the game, being Intercepted and then transitioning into the Encounter is an ordeal - there's a loading screen, it stops you from doing whatever you were doing, your ships stand still, there is the implication that you have to, well, talk to an Alien, which implies the potential for drama and fights, etc. etc.. It is similar for me IRL - I am mostly forced to stop whatever I was doing, I have to talk to a human which implies the potential of drama and fights, it's just sooo annoying to be Intercepted all the time.

I mean, I don't mind Interceptions in general, but I want people to be respectful with how and when to Intercept people. Like, in the game you do not Intercept every alien you see just to say hello to them. Do you realize how much drama that is? Cut Roam thrusters, cruise thrust, synchronize relative speed to target vessel, get close, cut cruise thrust, precision thrust to move into position to whereever you want to be around the alien ship, stop, hail, open TRANSCOM, say your thing. All that just for a “Hi!” in the morning? You gotta be kidding me. You're wasting like one hour of that alien's time for that. I mean, of course this is different if you've never seen that alien before, ie. don't know that alien, and want to find out who they are and maybe introduce yourself. Sure! But beyond that? What brainless drama just for a stupid display of “politeness”. Or, even better yet: Hail a ship into standstill, then get mad at them if they don't pick up and instead just try to exit the Encounter. If you've ever tried to greet me in the mornings, were ignored by me and then felt offended - this is you. Better yet, if you make a scene out of that and try to force that Encounter, you have completely lost your marbles. You do not get to dictate when I have an Encounter with you. Whether I respond to being hailed or choose to piss off is my free decision. Imposing societal norms on me that encroach on this freedom by punishing me for making a decision you arbitrarily choose to not like - that's a problem.