3 ms·
I don't see the difference in your #1 between email and group chat in spreading awareness other than 1. ease of absorption (email is easier) and 2. ability to r
by fingerprinter 11y ago
I don't see the difference in your #1 between email and group chat in spreading awareness other than 1. ease of absorption (email is easier) and 2. ability to respond (again, email is easier). Imagine trying to read backscroll of a chat conversation and then trying to "redo" this in chat vs the same in email. The chances (not saying it doesn't happen, but the likelihood) is higher that you can have an effective email exchange. If you aren't right there for the chat, it's over. Some people love this, some people hate it. It's certainly not efficient for group settings. And dear god, please don't make and announce decisions this way.
It's about shelf life. Both group chats and emails have a shelf life. Emails have a longer shelf life (probably up to 48 hours in responding and staying relevant in many cases) whereas group chat's have shelf lives measured in minutes. Chat is great for quick one off's, maybe even a few key people on hand, but not for extended groups. In fact, it's rather terrible.
Nothing beats meetings with all the right folks, though. Meetings are much better than both group chat or email for spreading awareness. Actually, now that I write this, this might be a use of chat; a virtual meeting via chat. Though, I argue the utility is in having all the parties present and not the protocol.
- pavel_lishin 11y agoI disagree with you on both points; I think that it's easier to communicate by blurting out questions into a chatroom, and it's easier to respond in the same.