4 ms·

I think _delirium's point may be that writing longer emails with higher information density may preclude the need for you to receive 100s of work emails per day

• _delirium 16y ago
  That's part of my goal at least. I use emails for things closer to design proposals, roadmaps, whitepaper outlines, etc., which need rationales, examples, etc. Ideally, an email should be something I'd like to archive and refer to in the future, at least until it's been superseded by something more authoritative (like an actual whitepaper). I think of them a little more like technical blog posts directed at specific readers; and it's hard to write a 5-sentence blog post that's worth reading. If it's just a quick ephemeral note or question, I'll use IM or my group's IRC channel. An exception is emailing people I don't regularly work with, e.g. a professor at a university who I've never met. Those I do try to keep short and to the point, to maximize the likelihood I'll get a reply.
  • derefr 16y ago
    I think the reason that this sub-thread always comes up in these discussions, is that for some people, "emailing people I don't regularly work with" is the only thing they use email for.
  • pasbesoin 16y ago
    I like the idea. In practice, I encounter the contradiction of people who complain that I "write too much" but then make mistakes -- ad nauseum -- because they don't read what I actually wrote. There are second, and third, paragraphs for a reason. Take two minutes to read them, so that I don't end up telling you [rhetorical] the same thing five times. It's a pleasure to encounter the person who doesn't respond for a day or three, but then actually addresses the points in my email. The end result tends to be a much more efficient and thorough process.