3 ms·
His stance towards email reminds me of the book “Deep Work” that many HN threads talk about. I liked the idea of triaging your emails into 3 categories Emails
by reidjs 6y ago
His stance towards email reminds me of the book “Deep Work” that many HN threads talk about. I liked the idea of triaging your emails into 3 categories
Emails that will have a positive outcome regardless of when they are processed.
Emails that will have a negative outcome regardless of when they are processed.
Emails for which a timely response will make a difference.
- lmilcin 6y agoVery frequently you are not a person that people won't mind you don't respond to them. I need to read every non-spam email I receive and give a response if only to keep people in my network.
- sa46 6y agoYour first sentence is quite tricky to parse due to the triple negative. I parsed it as: Most people that email you will care if you ignore them.
- mulmen 6y agoIs that a... triple negative? I think you mean senders expect a response?
- forgotmypw17 6y agoDo you triage your spam? What is the false positive ratio, do you think?
- thaumasiotes 6y agoMy false positive ratio for "spam" marked automatically by gmail is around 50%. It's only that low because I started receiving occasional spam emails; it was more like 90%. (To be clear, I've interpreted your question as "of emails that got sent to the spam folder, how many of them had no business being in there?")
- baby 6y agoLet’s play a game, here’s how I would rephrase your first sentence: You are often not the kind of person who can afford ignoring emails.