Unfortunately, it’s extremely common for less senior people to interpret suggestions from more senior people as instructions to be followed even if they aren’t worded as such. Having a consistent, explicit, and unambiguous way of distinguishing between these scenarios that everybody on the team can follow easily is valuable. You can’t rely upon all developers to be good writers or even good readers, especially across language barriers.

This "good enough writing style" must also be able to cross cultural borders - I dare to say even journalists don't get it right most of the time:

* I've heard Kiwis say "F*ck you?" in lieu of "Seriously?"

* A Brit who says "That is an interesting solution!" usually does not feel intellectually stimulated by the solution but is conveying that it is utter garbage.

Thus, I very much like the proposed idea of well-defined labels.*

Anything that avoids ambiguity here is beneficial. Even if the comment itself is perfectly crafted, the potential for misunderstanding remains. This method outlines the expectations for responses much more than it conveys the tone of the message. This is critical information that is often overlooked in asynchronous communication.

The label takes a fraction of a second to type, and saves the reader(s) many seconds spent inferring what purpose the writer had.

The label makes it easy to find comments still in need of replies, and for automated security to prevent merging items with outstanding crucial comments.

The label opens the possibility of automated reporting and/or review of reviews.

Thank you for your comment. Your experience leads me to believe that the concept might be more useful for non-native speakers. The labels have helped us shorten lengthy PR discussions and focus on the factual aspects. For context: I work in a German company with an international team, and we use English as our business language

I tend to agree with that, however don't understand the language barrier. Labeling comments makes the intent unambiguous.

I also enjoy a tactical use of smileys and other emojis where applicable :)

I agree. For example just prepending "Question" to a sentence ending in a "?" did not convey anything more to me. Worse the Question that this OP posted in his example could have actually been constructed in a safer manner if safety was what this environment was most under threat. I did sense there was a need to robotify humans and sure enough the "Source" confirmed it (Google Software Engineering Practices)!