3 ms·

> "Write a long email that took time to reason and write, precise and complete text." Respectful hard disagree. Emails should be limited to five sentences. "I

> "Write a long email that took time to reason and write, precise and complete text." Respectful hard disagree. Emails should be limited to five sentences. "I didn't have time to make a shorter reply" as an apology / disclaimer for rare exceptions. In virtually every case, anything longer belongs somewhere better than email (Slack, wiki / knowledgebase, docs site) or merits a realtime conversation. My PoV is shaped by over 20 years in the industry working at startups, SMBs and huge enterprises.

conductr 2mo ago
Hard disagree back. Email has multiple contexts when I would say that short form is ideal and should be the default but at times a thoroughly long form email is needed. Or, honestly, you just need to create a document at this point. It could be a slide deck or word/markdown/excel/etc (depends on context) and this should be in the email. But email is key. My experience is that people search subject lines, conversations, dates, and generally traverse historical conversations much better in email than in chat or a fully external application. They won’t search Slack, or try but can’t find the conversation. They won’t remember it’s on a wiki, you’ll constantly be redirecting them to the url. If the file is attached to an email, sometimes they’ll resurface it from a year+ ago. I find that’s way more common than someone referring to a chat from even a month ago. Chats are semi ephemeral. I’ve used both Teams and Slack and feel neither has really changed the game in terms of how the entire user base of an org use the system, enabling the historical reference points and moving it out of a ephemeral state, so email remains a stalwart for archival purposes and helps provide maximum context after the fact (people tend to elaborate on their choices more when writing an email).
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- prepend 2mo ago
  I’ve found that a two-prong approach works best. Detail in the email, expect people to read it or fail. And include a reference to a wiki or some more detailed version that can be collaborated on and extended. So the email isn’t the primary source, the wiki is (really some markdown in git). But the email is the thing that people organize and find over time.
  - conductr 2mo ago
    This probably differs a bit by your exact profession and circumstances. I could see devs and technical people (most of HN readers) to prefer and have success with this when operating with like minded peers. It doesn’t scale much outside that. If you work with people outside of tech/dev minded people, those who are not used to RTFM type info seeking, it’s going to be an uphill battle.
    - prepend 2mo ago
      I think you may be right. Fortunately, I work with like 10k collaborators who are all science/tech oriented and it works quite well. I wouldn’t want to work in an org where people can’t read email and want to talk to everyone instead.
      - conductr 2mo ago
        I'm envious, although I think my experience is the rule and your's more of an exception. It might be more common on HN given the demo, but IRL, people mostly want to talk. Or even if they read email, they can't be bothered to search for things themselves. Makes me think of another long standing habit I have, I just ignore people. If they ask me something that has been answered and I know it's in an email somewhere, I ignore the question. If it's something they really need, they will go find it. Obviously this is very YMMV and I was able to start doing this after I reached a higher position/role, I've been a CFO for some time now and I still have certain people and audiences I will promptly answer any question even if I know it's been answered/documented.
john_strinlai 2mo ago
>anything longer belongs somewhere better than email (Slack, wiki / knowledgebase, docs site) wiki/kb or docs site, sure, depending what the topic is. but... slack? for your long-form communications? please email me your long stuff, don't slack it to me. email is perfectly fine for longer text when longer text is required. (opinion also shaped over a long time in various roles at companies of various size)
- prepend 2mo ago
  Oddly, I find the search in Slack, Teams, and Discord to be so horrible I don’t create any “knowledge there.” It’s like trying to write a paper on the telephone. Anyone putting long form stuff into an IM system is taking the way of pain.
  - chrisweekly 2mo ago
    (Replying to parent and GP) I wasn't suggesting an IM system should be the source of truth for long-form documentation. But searching Slack works better than searching email you weren't cc'd on. Virtually anything is better than email for many essential aspects of collaboration. Want to add someone to the mailing list and loop them in? How many prior emails will you forward to them? Someone replies to one of several points in an email, someone else wants to address a different point, and there are a mix of habits and patterns for whether / how much / where to quote or include the previous messages in a response.... vs adding someone to a channel where they can review the conversation history, and some combination of threads and links to additional channels or external resources can adequately support whatever direction(s) the conversation takes. In any case, it's the wrong tool for the job in so many ways, so much of the time. Hence my recommendation to keep emails to 5 sentences, and to prefer communication tools that properly support multiuser collaboration.
    - john_strinlai 2mo ago
      we have polar opposite opinions on email and slack/teams/discord! im not sure i am even understanding the issues you brought up about email correctly. may i ask what age bracket or generation you are? only if you're comfortable sharing, of course. im in my 60s. and im curious if our difference of opinion here is a product of what technologies were/are available during the start & prime of our careers. i very well might be in stubborn old man mode subconciously.
BeetleB 2mo ago
So far, searching email has been more effective than searching anything else (Wiki, Slack, etc).
- chrisweekly 2mo ago
  How do you search emails you weren't cc'd on?
  - BeetleB 2mo ago
    If it has to be information stored in depth, then sure a KB/wiki is better. IME, the majority of long emails should not be persisted in such places, because they contain a fair amount of errors. One could say that any long email thread should be eventually synthesized in the KB/wiki after the conversation has wound down. And Slack/Teams? No way. If I need to write something long in response to a Slack IM, and email is verboten, then I'll insist on setting up a meeting.
    - chrisweekly 2mo ago
      I think we're on roughly the same page. Long emails are problematic. Realtime meetings or (possibly but not necessarily near-realtime) chats in a dedicated channel can and do solve email's problems.

conductr 2mo ago

Hard disagree back. Email has multiple contexts when I would say that short form is ideal and should be the default but at times a thoroughly long form email is needed. Or, honestly, you just need to create a document at this point. It could be a slide deck or word/markdown/excel/etc (depends on context) and this should be in the email. But email is key. My experience is that people search subject lines, conversations, dates, and generally traverse historical conversations much better in email than in chat or a fully external application. They won’t search Slack, or try but can’t find the conversation. They won’t remember it’s on a wiki, you’ll constantly be redirecting them to the url. If the file is attached to an email, sometimes they’ll resurface it from a year+ ago. I find that’s way more common than someone referring to a chat from even a month ago. Chats are semi ephemeral. I’ve used both Teams and Slack and feel neither has really changed the game in terms of how the entire user base of an org use the system, enabling the historical reference points and moving it out of a ephemeral state, so email remains a stalwart for archival purposes and helps provide maximum context after the fact (people tend to elaborate on their choices more when writing an email).

deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
prepend 2mo ago
I’ve found that a two-prong approach works best. Detail in the email, expect people to read it or fail. And include a reference to a wiki or some more detailed version that can be collaborated on and extended. So the email isn’t the primary source, the wiki is (really some markdown in git). But the email is the thing that people organize and find over time.
- conductr 2mo ago
  This probably differs a bit by your exact profession and circumstances. I could see devs and technical people (most of HN readers) to prefer and have success with this when operating with like minded peers. It doesn’t scale much outside that. If you work with people outside of tech/dev minded people, those who are not used to RTFM type info seeking, it’s going to be an uphill battle.
  - prepend 2mo ago
    I think you may be right. Fortunately, I work with like 10k collaborators who are all science/tech oriented and it works quite well. I wouldn’t want to work in an org where people can’t read email and want to talk to everyone instead.
    - conductr 2mo ago
      I'm envious, although I think my experience is the rule and your's more of an exception. It might be more common on HN given the demo, but IRL, people mostly want to talk. Or even if they read email, they can't be bothered to search for things themselves. Makes me think of another long standing habit I have, I just ignore people. If they ask me something that has been answered and I know it's in an email somewhere, I ignore the question. If it's something they really need, they will go find it. Obviously this is very YMMV and I was able to start doing this after I reached a higher position/role, I've been a CFO for some time now and I still have certain people and audiences I will promptly answer any question even if I know it's been answered/documented.

john_strinlai 2mo ago

>anything longer belongs somewhere better than email (Slack, wiki / knowledgebase, docs site) wiki/kb or docs site, sure, depending what the topic is. but... slack? for your long-form communications? please email me your long stuff, don't slack it to me. email is perfectly fine for longer text when longer text is required. (opinion also shaped over a long time in various roles at companies of various size)

prepend 2mo ago
Oddly, I find the search in Slack, Teams, and Discord to be so horrible I don’t create any “knowledge there.” It’s like trying to write a paper on the telephone. Anyone putting long form stuff into an IM system is taking the way of pain.
- chrisweekly 2mo ago
  (Replying to parent and GP) I wasn't suggesting an IM system should be the source of truth for long-form documentation. But searching Slack works better than searching email you weren't cc'd on. Virtually anything is better than email for many essential aspects of collaboration. Want to add someone to the mailing list and loop them in? How many prior emails will you forward to them? Someone replies to one of several points in an email, someone else wants to address a different point, and there are a mix of habits and patterns for whether / how much / where to quote or include the previous messages in a response.... vs adding someone to a channel where they can review the conversation history, and some combination of threads and links to additional channels or external resources can adequately support whatever direction(s) the conversation takes. In any case, it's the wrong tool for the job in so many ways, so much of the time. Hence my recommendation to keep emails to 5 sentences, and to prefer communication tools that properly support multiuser collaboration.
  - john_strinlai 2mo ago
    we have polar opposite opinions on email and slack/teams/discord! im not sure i am even understanding the issues you brought up about email correctly. may i ask what age bracket or generation you are? only if you're comfortable sharing, of course. im in my 60s. and im curious if our difference of opinion here is a product of what technologies were/are available during the start & prime of our careers. i very well might be in stubborn old man mode subconciously.

BeetleB 2mo ago

So far, searching email has been more effective than searching anything else (Wiki, Slack, etc).

chrisweekly 2mo ago
How do you search emails you weren't cc'd on?
- BeetleB 2mo ago
  If it has to be information stored in depth, then sure a KB/wiki is better. IME, the majority of long emails should not be persisted in such places, because they contain a fair amount of errors. One could say that any long email thread should be eventually synthesized in the KB/wiki after the conversation has wound down. And Slack/Teams? No way. If I need to write something long in response to a Slack IM, and email is verboten, then I'll insist on setting up a meeting.
  - chrisweekly 2mo ago
    I think we're on roughly the same page. Long emails are problematic. Realtime meetings or (possibly but not necessarily near-realtime) chats in a dedicated channel can and do solve email's problems.