Slashdot Mirror


'No, You Can't Ignore Email. It's Rude.' (nytimes.com)

Yes, we're all overwhelmed with email. One recent survey suggested that the average American's inbox has 199 unread messages. But volume isn't an excuse for not replying. Ignoring email is an act of incivility, reads an opinion piece. From the story: "I'm too busy to answer your email" really means "Your email is not a priority for me right now." That's a popular justification for neglecting your inbox: It's full of other people's priorities. But there's a growing body of evidence that if you care about being good at your job, your inbox should be a priority. When researchers compiled a huge database of the digital habits of teams at Microsoft, they found that the clearest warning sign of an ineffective manager was being slow to answer emails. Responding in a timely manner shows that you are conscientious -- organized, dependable and hardworking. And that matters. In a comprehensive analysis of people in hundreds of occupations, conscientiousness was the single best personality predictor of job performance. (It turns out that people who are rude online tend to be rude offline, too.)

I'm not saying you have to answer every email. Your brain is not just sitting there waiting to be picked. If senders aren't considerate enough to do their homework and ask a question you're qualified to answer, you don't owe them anything back. How do you know if an email you've received -- or even more important, one you're considering writing -- doesn't deserve a response? After all, sending an inappropriate email can be as rude as ignoring a polite one. [...] Whatever boundaries you choose, don't abandon your inbox altogether. Not answering emails today is like refusing to take phone calls in the 1990s or ignoring letters in the 1950s. Email is not household clutter and you're not Marie Kondo. Ping!

255 comments

  1. Article summary and title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One says it is rude to ignore email the other says well maybe ignore some.

    I am going to ignore emails that are irrelevant to my job or those from a person I do not know. I do not care if it is rude. My job is not answering emails it is something else.

    1. Re: Article summary and title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Iâ(TM)m still awaiting your reply to my last email about that sales proposal. If I donâ(TM)t hear back by the end of today, Iâ(TM)ll be forced to send another follow up.

    2. Re: Article summary and title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry man, I'm still working on that cover sheet for the TPS report. Will get back when it's done.

    3. Re: Article summary and title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You gotta get up pretty early in the morning to answer all your emails properly.

    4. Re: Article summary and title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah you suck at life and your job. It will catch up to you. A quick "this should go to x", or "sorry I'm not responsible for that" will go a long way.

    5. Re: Article summary and title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Fuck you. You wait if you want my reply. I can be as rude as I want because my employers and co workers isn't in it with me to be nice. We're in it for $$$. The moment I lose the capability to bring in the $$$ They won't bat an eyelid when getting rid of me. My clients are in it because I bring them $$$. They don't care if I'm rude and even if they do it's not enough for them to look pass the $$$.

      Actually that was just a dream I had yesterday.... too bad it didn't last.

    6. Re:Article summary and title by Immerman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed. My counterpoint to the article - don't send emails demanding other people's attention unless you have reason to believe that *they* would want to interact with you.

      It's far more rude to carelessly demand someone else's attention in the first place than it is to ignore such demands. Attention is a precious resource, paying attention to something disrupts what I'm doing, and sacrifices a slice of my life that I can never get back.

      If you do email me, be concise: tell me what you want, and why I should want to give it to you. And do so in as few words as possible because every word I read is costing me a moment of my life. Show that you respect my time and attention, or don't expect me to treat you with any greater respect.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    7. Re:Article summary and title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 Absolutely.

    8. Re:Article summary and title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can safely ignore the moron who wrote the article. He clearly doesn't understand that his feelings only apply to himself.

  2. 199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    199 unread emails? Not me.
    I must be doing something right, or are they doing something wrong?

    1. Re:199? by alzoron · · Score: 4, Funny

      I've got over 31,000 unread emails. I must have some kind of super power or something.

    2. Re:199? by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      Super unorganized?

      Why would you keep those all in your inbox? Do they have a reason to be there?

    3. Re:199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some people get a lot of spam, and may not want to take the time to personally curate each (junk) email.

      Related "Inbox Infinity" story here: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/19/01/15/0029223/slashdot-asks-how-do-you-manage-your-inbox

    4. Re:199? by Spamalope · · Score: 5, Interesting
      When I got to 10,000 emails a day I'd finally had it.

      Paying for email hosting + domain means unlimited aliases. A custom one for each vendor means I can turn them off when abused and I know who sold my contact info. So when Comcast sells my email address to T-Mobile I know they did it (and they lost a fiber connectivity contract - consequences...). When companies sign you up for marketing emails not matter how apparently placebo options are checked (most recently Overstock.com) I can delete that alias.

      I will not unsubscribe when I never subscribed. I will make a server side filter that forwards anything from them to one of their live person email addresses though. They can turn off the spam or not, I won't see it. Why would anyone feel obligated to respond?

    5. Re:199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely this. It's nice that the writer is a writer, and even then I bet they don't reply to BBB saying 'thanks for thinking of me'. I'm in a tech company where everyone emails, and they're all some level of important, and even if I had nothing else to do I would be able to spend all my work hours dealing with email and still have some left over.

    6. Re:199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Somebody sent them to me. Storage is cheap. Search is fast. I'm not going to waste time moving them into subfolders or deleting them.

    7. Re: 199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. People who answer emails have nothing better to be doing. If I send an email that has little value as compared to the time the person I am emailing, I consider them foolish to reslond.

      If I called someone about to run a race in the Olympics, I'd expect there to be a delay in response. If they won the race and I never got a response, I wouldn't be in any way hurt by it. In fact I'd be impressed.

      My time is valuable but to think other's time is less valuable than my own is stone cold narcissistic. The princess and princely overbearers can suck it up and grow the heck up.

    8. Re:199? by dissy · · Score: 1

      I've got over 31,000 unread emails.

      Why would you keep those all in your inbox? Do they have a reason to be there?

      Well, I used to filter away unread emails into a folder called 'unread emails', but then someone told me that is what the word 'inbox' means.

      Ever since then I leave my unread emails in my inbox, until after I read them and determine which folder would be appropriate for that email to go into :P

    9. Re:199? by gravewax · · Score: 2

      I have something like 40,000 as well (and yes I regularly clean up). they sorted into various categories and distribution lists (most through rules) which are there so I can use them as a searchable repository anytime I need. Emails sent directly to me are answered/read by priority of the current project and people I am working with, followed by my peers and or management followed by others when I have time, if you want to get immediate attention and you aren't at the top of my priority list then I expect you to make an effort to contact me directly rather than email. If I read every email addressed to me I would do nothing but read email every day.

    10. Re:199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't make sense to anyone i can think of. You sound like a user and not a manager.

    11. Re: 199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It not uncommon i actually tell people that there's a better way than sending emails back and forth. Get your lazy ass out of your chair and go have a conversation.
      I read all emails because i want the satisfaction of deleting it if its stupid. Then when i am asked if i read it i can say i deleted it because it was stupid.

      People who have communication skills send less emails. People who don't send more emails. That's my experience.

      True story. I used to get hundreds of emails and if i don't get the message within the first 10 seconds the trash gets it.

      They know my methods so i don't get as many as i used to.

    12. Re:199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Auto-refiling software actually exists, my actual favorite is afew, before IMAPFilter, thanks to a proper taxonomy and auto-refiling policies I can have also a proper automatic (and manual) garbage collection of my mails so not only I have only useful things but also I do not depend on any specific service, search is local (notmuch), MUA is local (notmuch-emacs), mails are copied and backed up locally (mbsync+afew), I can switch from any mail service to any other without issue thanks ALSO to a not so super-heavy maildir.

    13. Re: 199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > People who have communication skills send less emails.

      *fewer* emails.

    14. Re: 199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh o problem. I will just flag you as a slow email responder, instead of a quick one. Once a slow replier always a slow replier

    15. Re: 199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How much per year and from where?
      Runbox is about $20 a year with around 100 aliases and 10? Or so domains so at least 1000 aliases per account. Good enough to create spare ones at will.

    16. Re:199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just shy of 19K here. Most of them from some guy named gerrit. Problem is, I only have one configurable option for fewer emails and that's "none", which isn't a great choice. Why can't there be an option "only for comments from other users that I care about"?

    17. Re:199? by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      I find there is a simple way to deal with it. Look at the TO and CC lines. Relevance to my life is inversely proportional to the number of people receiving the e-mail.

      And if all you see is a to with their own e-mail, that means you've been BCC'd- and chances are the e-mail has zero relevance to anything at all.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    18. Re:199? by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Ha.

      I block all .xyz, .icu, .stream domain mail. All of it. there are no legitimate emails coming to me from those domains.

      And a lot of what I think of as 'legacy' domain blocks. .cn, which I whitelist case-by-case. .ru, .by, .rs, .ee, a bunch of others. I have no legitimate email form them for years.

      outlook.com mail has become even less trustworthy than yahoo.com mail, and gets scored up hard.

      And then my inbox is manageable. No more than about 100 per day.

      My work mail, however, is my primary means of communication with teams that need me, or that I need, and so I scan everything and respond. Less than 10% of my work mail is superfluous.

      The concept that some of your work email can be ignored is interesting to me. Yes, some of mine is ignored, duplicate notifications, unimportant announcements and invites, yes. But 'not important to me' doesn't exist in my work. Anything that I reject still has to be addressed, so it's either 'no, this cannot/will not be done because...', or 'send this -here-'.

      And I do, in effect, 'train' coworkers and other teams to send work where it should have gone.

      Oh, and my manager is very good at dealing with his flood of email. Server-side rules help this.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    19. Re: 199? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      You are missing a huge opportunity. Instead of deleting the alias set up an autoresponder to flood their digital pipes.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    20. Re: 199? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      It took me a minute to figure out that you meant the "To" and "CC", not "TO" and "CC" I was asking myself "What to hell is T O line?

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    21. Re: 199? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Then you should create a "Won't Read" folder. You threw the baby out with the bathwater.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    22. Re:199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've have nothing, other than the right to ignore any email you'd like to unless it involves responsibilities that come with your job and maybe family. Ms. Kondo is rapidly approaching her sell-by date and will get the kiss of Old News soon enough. This is what Slashdot has become. They should do a print edition which I'll find and browse in my dentist's office.

    23. Re: 199? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *fewer* time

    24. Re: 199? by dissy · · Score: 1

      Then you should create a "Won't Read" folder. You threw the baby out with the bathwater.

      That would be even more confusing. All of my unread emails get read.
      Not within sub-second times like the kids these days but certainly within the same day.

      "Won't read" implies I am not going to read them.
      It's the same problem as the person I replied to. It's pretty hard to filter something into a specific category before I read it and know what category I want it in.

      I see no problem with my system that you guys do.
      New emails come into the inbox. When I next check email I read them. I then reply and/or move them out of my Inbox.

      You kids these days labeling emails you read as "won't read" and knowing what the sender said before reading what they said. I swear.

    25. Re: 199? by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

      How much per year and from where?
      Runbox is about $20 a year with around 100 aliases and 10? Or so domains so at least 1000 aliases per account. Good enough to create spare ones at will.

      Use a catch all. It's easier than monitoring all those individual aliases.

    26. Re:199? by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      What you are describing is not what the article is describing. You don't seem to be saying that you keep all of these 40,000 emails in you INBOX, but in folders away from the inbox. That's not the same thing.

      To be clear, I keep every email I ever receive. They just get archived or moved to folders through rules. My inbox is only for things that still need my attention, and I keep it below 20 items most of the time.

    27. Re: 199? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      You kids these days labeling emails you read as "won't read" and knowing what the sender said before reading what they said. I swear.

      It only takes a couple of emails with a subject that contains the word "pilules" to know what the entire email is about. Ditto "Look, I know it's a fair ..." or "I can show you the video". "Can we meet this weekend" is a little harder, but when the sending domain is 12000 miles away I think it is safe to assume the answer is no and the question isn't honest to begin with.

      People who think that it is rude not to read every email they get, or can't figure out that some can be ignored based on the subject. I swear.

    28. Re: 199? by dissy · · Score: 1

      It only takes a couple of emails with a subject that contains the word "pilules" to know what the entire email is about. Ditto "Look, I know it's a fair ..." or "I can show you the video". "Can we meet this weekend" is a little harder, but when the sending domain is 12000 miles away I think it is safe to assume the answer is no and the question isn't honest to begin with.

      Fair enough because I didn't state it, but I do exempt spam as being 'email' as well as being sent by a person.

      Thankfully spam filters are pretty decent these days so few like that ever end up in my inbox or anywhere I would see them.
      But on the occasion they do, I always flag spam as soon as I see it, both to do my part in helping train the filters, as well as have it deleted.
      I'm not even sure when I last had to look in my junk filters folder to fish a message out of it I was expecting. It's been a while!

      No in all of my posts in this thread I've only been referring to actual people senders.

      A subject of "hey" from a known contact would make a far better example.

    29. Re: 199? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      No in all of my posts in this thread I've only been referring to actual people senders.

      So for you, by definition, people cannot send spam?

      Most of the spam I get (at work) are people asking me to be an "invited speaker" at their "conference" in some wacky place. They're sent by people. I assume the conference is real, although I've never checked. It's just that they're "spam conferences" like the "spam journals" (which I am also asked to send articles to) that have popped up in the free-for-all of "open publishing".

      And the word here, today, is that I am rude for not replying to either one of these kinds of spam. Yeah. Sure. Sometimes I do -- pointing out that I travel first class on United and stay in at least 3 star hotels, with a $1000 per day honorarium, and when they forward my reservation info with a 50% down payment on the speaking fee I'll send them an abstract. Never got taken up on that. Go figure.

      Both of those kinds of spam have very recognizable subject headers and I can tell what the message contains without reading them, too.

    30. Re: 199? by dissy · · Score: 1

      So for you, by definition, people cannot send spam?

      More or less. I prefer to say spammers are not behaving as people, and career spammers are below even many species of mammals capable of rising above their selfish unsympathetic desires, but mostly so it doesn't sound as horrible of a thought as it really is.

      Ultimately I'm OK with that.

      Most of the spam I get (at work) are people asking me to be an "invited speaker" at their "conference" in some wacky place. They're sent by people. I assume the conference is real, although I've never checked. It's just that they're "spam conferences" like the "spam journals" (which I am also asked to send articles to) that have popped up in the free-for-all of "open publishing".

      Lucky you! On the being invited by a personalized email from a person anyway.
      I don't believe I've ever gotten anything more than a generic template email asking for money that was spewed out by a program.

      Or you're simply far better at whatever that topic is than I am at anything.

    31. Re: 199? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      More or less. I prefer to say spammers are not behaving as people

      Let's see: they're trying to use cheap methods of obtaining money from other people. That's not "behaving as people"?

      Lucky you! On the being invited by a personalized email from a person anyway.

      Yeah. Lucky me, to get spam that so easily passes through the filters.

  3. 199 unread messages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    An average of 199 unread messages and all of them unwanted newsletters and spam. I'd hardly call it uncivil to not spend my time on them. Rather, the act of spamming others with digital detritus seems to be the greater act of incivility.

    1. Re:199 unread messages by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      An average of 199 unread messages and all of them unwanted newsletters and spam.

      Get a better spam filter. I see a spam email less than once a week.

    2. Re:199 unread messages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spam is also from companies you have legitimate business with.

      Looking for a job? Linkedin spam comes with linkedin recruiters.

      Have some certifications and need to keep them current. Well you are going to get weekly and monthly spam along with important information.

  4. I'm ignoring this message by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most people still can't write a proper email to save their lives. Evidently you lot all read from bottom to top and like to use the network for your archive. Well, I don't. You want to reach me, you write a paper letter, because you're not doing all those stupid idiot unreadable crap things on paper. If netiquette is too hard for you, and evidence suggests that it is, stick to paper.

    1. Re:I'm ignoring this message by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most people still can't write a proper email to save their lives. Evidently you lot all read from bottom to top and like to use the network for your archive. Well, I don't. You want to reach me, you write a paper letter, because you're not doing all those stupid idiot unreadable crap things on paper. If netiquette is too hard for you, and evidence suggests that it is, stick to paper.

      The ability to consider the target audience, write coherently and get to whatever point you're making is not dependent on medium. These are skills, in and of themselves.

      If you think a different medium will suddenly correct the problem, you're either naive as hell or you're an old fart who's nostalgic for the old days. There is nothing special about paper.

      (sarcasm)If you don't believe me, print out your e-mails prior to reading them. Any difference? No? There you go.(/sarcasm) Yes I know that "Reply To" and indentation is relatively unique to e-mail. However, anyone with the above-mentioned skills can handle those.

    2. Re:I'm ignoring this message by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If anything I'm nostalgic for pre-september USENET, FidoNet Echomail, and QWK/BlueWave packets from BBSes. Not because of the technology, but because of the camaraderie. And the cost of sending by (non-free, even local) slow modem means people weighed their words and didn't send anything superfluous. Like previous messages in their entirety, with extra quoting added.

      My experience is that replies in paper generally don't take the form of a single line in crayon tacked on top of my entire message sent back to me. They'll just refer to my letter. Something that decent email clients do automatically, so why include the entire previous content? It makes no sense. In fact, sending letters back is seen as an insult. I likewise see top-posted crap as an insult. A double insult: Sent back the letter and couldn't be arsed to put any sort of effort in writing a reply.

      And there is a difference: There is a widespread etiquette to letters that you get taught in highschool. The same highschool whose teachers themselves can't write emails to save their lives either. Another difference is that it "feels different". People do sit down and take an effort more conciously than when writing emails. At the very least the act of printing the thing (if it's not hand- or typewritten) invites (proof)reading your letter once more than happens with email. Even the act of signing the thing by hand invites "but what am I putting my signature below, really?"

      So while printing before reading obviously makes no difference on the content (but probably does on the reading comprehension!), printing after writing but before sending certainly does make a difference. I did use to print long important messages and took a marker to them, typically while on the toilet, before another round of editing.

      So regardless of skill levels, people writing a paper letter tend to put more effort in it. Which doesn't change the generally poor skill levels, I'll give you that. But seeing the difference I still prefer paper. The perceived biggest cost of the stamp already means I'll get less attention-sucking idiocy in my paper inbox. The actual biggest cost is in writing the letter (unless your time is free). Reading is next. And yeah, the writer generally doesn't count reading cost, but if paper makes them consider cost at all, thus reducing my reading load, that's a win. So paper it is. Maybe I'll try email again once I get around to hosting it myself and rejecting poorly-formatted email at the gate.

      Thinking about it, this is the same sort of mechanism as why abandoning powerpoint is such a productivity boon. Making presentations takes a lot of time and adds a little colour to your dour talking, but both the making and most of the use in a talk are a distraction. And thus you lose sight of, and fail to put sufficient effort into, what's really important, ie. conveying the message. With pretty stuff that looks nice, true, but that isn't actually contributing to that goal sufficiently for the cost of making and using it.

      But it's so easy to do! In the same way, writing emails is too easy. This is a widespread problem.

    3. Re: I'm ignoring this message by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      You can thank Gates for that bullshit. Much like us in \ instead of / just to be different M$ defaulted to "Reply at the top" rather than the same way. The worst part is it can be impossible to get people to switch because "but da Microsofts dos it so it must be the right way!"

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  5. Email Practices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to be terrible with maintaining email because it seemed so overwhelming. My personal email account's inbox, which I've had for over a decade, has thousands of messages still that I've been steadily cleaning out (mostly due to the mailbox software, which is still several years old itself and rather limited).

    My workplace email has been great though. One of the best tips that I've learned was to archive everything that I've read and that I don't need to follow up with anymore. If someone needs a response now, I'll respond. If I need a follow-up later, I'll probably respond still to get the ball out of my court. Then, when no more action is needed, I archive it, regardless of what it is. That way, I can search for it later if needed. Anything else in my inbox is then treated as a fresh item.

    I basically live out of my inbox at work and have been able to get a leg up on my colleagues because of it.

    1. Re: Email Practices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is exactly how I deal with my inbox as well. It's not hard to keep up with a few hundred emails a day if you apply some filters and archive as soon as you no longer need to act. I of course delete many right away that are not directed to me. My inbox is near zero messages total read or unread by the end of the day.

    2. Re:Email Practices by jbengt · · Score: 1

      If someone needs a response now, I'll respond. If I need a follow-up later, I'll probably respond still to get the ball out of my court.

      There's nothing more annoying (in the e-mail world) than getting a non-response response to a reasonable question or request just to make it seem like the ball has changed courts. I consider that a big 'Fuck You'. Unfortunately it is getting all too common. Would it be that hard to just say "I'll need to follow up later.", and maybe even give a date when you might respond?

  6. What a load of garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. It depends on what your job is as to how important replying to emails are. Customer service jobs where you get emails from clients and a slow reply might mean losing business might be more important but it depends on the job (and probably the email).
    2. Slow replies to emails might be a sign that you're slack, they could also be a sign that you're busy working on other higher priorities or that your management give you too much work or an unfair workload.
    3. Scanning your emails a few times a day for anything high priority might be important but again it depends on your job.
    4. If something's urgent then I feel the responsibility is on the person who sent the email to follow you up with a phone-call or dropping around to see you.

    1. Re:What a load of garbage by Pentium100 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you want something from me, send me an email. I'll read it during work hours, maybe today, maybe tomorrow.
      If you need me to read it faster, send me an SMS. I'll read it in an hour if I am not sleeping.
      If you need something from me RIGHT NOW, call me. As a bonus, you will know immediately whether I can talk to you right now and whether I now know about your problem.

      Email conversation is slow, even if I reply you instantly, you will probably take some time to reply, which will stretch out our conversation (say, 5 emails each) to a whole day or maybe two days. So, if you are writing an email, then it is not that urgent to you.

    2. Re:What a load of garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well if you call me without asking and you're not a good friend, I'll block you because it's rude. If you text me I'll get back to you as soon as I read your message. If you send me an email, I'll probably read it right away but it'll take longer to reply because email clients have a "Save as draft" function. I'll reply when I have something meaningful to say and have made up my mind about how to say it. Bonus with email is probably that you get access to my long term memory, it's not fire and forget.

    3. Re: What a load of garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Midwest conventions...

      I won't hire you

      Mr Flyover

    4. Re:What a load of garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet nobody ever calls you because you sound like an asshole.

    5. Re: What a load of garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a generational thing. I was telling an elderly worker that I thought it was rude to call without asking via text or IM first, and they were telling me that they always call first. I had to remind myself that for the majority of their career, text and IM did not exist.

    6. Re:What a load of garbage by jbengt · · Score: 1

      e-mail (and good old letter writing) is not good for conversations at all. Neither are texts. But that does not necessarily mean you can put it off for days. The advantage of e-mail over a phone conversation, is that there's a trail left, and you can see it in your Inbox or Sent folder. I prefer phone conversations for better understanding of a situation, but I prefer e-mails for follow-up so I can flag them as a To-Do item.

    7. Re: What a load of garbage by jbengt · · Score: 1

      There's nothing rude about calling, especially for business-related conversations. It's a lot easier to understand each other when talking.

    8. Re:What a load of garbage by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      The point is that if you need something right now, call. We'll talk and maybe I'll ask you to write an email with the details, but normally the urgent matters (server is down etc) do not require that. And the conversation is faster when I do not have to type everything I want to say.

      If you write me an email without calling, then I'll assume that this is not very urgent. The reason is that I may not even be in the office right now (and if you call me with an urgent matter, I'll call a coworker and ask them to look into your problem or try to get beck to the office as fast as I can). I may have connected my monitor to another computer and cannot see the notification. And multiple other reasons.

      If whatever urgent matter you have requires a lot of details and so requires an email (with attachments etc), write the email and then call me right after you hit "send".

    9. Re:What a load of garbage by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      I prefer phone conversation over email. Since email is high latency, I have to think of everything I want to say and then write it, sometimes including some simple algorithms (check this, if it works, do this, if it doesn't then check that) which may be misunderstood etc.

      On the other hand, when we are taking on the phone, I can ask you questions (does this work? ok, try it now) and finish the conversation taking up much less time and effort than with the emails.

      I sent an email. How long should I wait for the reply before switching to another task? I mean I hate frequent switching, but if the sender takes an hour to reply, I'd rather do something else during that time.

      There is another problem with email - it's kind of like UDP - I do not know if you read it. Let's say the server is down and it needs to be fixed ASAP. If I write you an email, I won't even know if you read it - maybe you are away from the PC. On the other hand if I call you and you do not answer, I know for sure that you did not pick up and may call someone else instead of waiting for you to get back to your PC and read the email.

    10. Re:What a load of garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >The advantage of e-mail over a phone conversation, is that there's a trail left,
      Every person who has ever told me this was intolerable and always a manager. There are plenty of much more secure ways to make a "record" or "audit trail" or whatever. I hate extracting engineering information from your horrid email chains full of PHBs. Oh and management's infatuation with outlook costs american business big money because they tend to lock the entire enterprise into m$. How many billions handed to ms just because some dude doesn't want to learn a new mail client.
      Email is good for managers. It makes their job easier at the detriment of everyone else. Email is slow paced
      I deliberately do not read email. If it's important you slack me or call me. Email is for meeting invites and it will be great when it even becomes outdated for that.

      You are the ones who need to change. I don't need to send you a fax either.

    11. Re: What a load of garbage by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

      That seems odd to me. If someone was upset because I didn't text or IM them before calling, I would imagine my reply would be "If that's the case, then why bother calling?". A phone call is not a meeting- if someone doesn't answer, you use other means to communicate.

      Your use of the term elderly implies you're annoying, however.

    12. Re:What a load of garbage by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

      I often, following a phone conversation, send an email with a short list stating what we discussed and ask the recipient " Verifying that I understood your correctly". This prevents misunderstanding of the conversation, and solidifies the tasks at hand. People can forget items referred to early in a conversation if something more relevant occurs later in the discussion.
      This doesn't prevent me from beginning to work the issues, but I have had instances in the past where the client follows up on the email stating there was a misunderstanding, and it prevents us from wasting time on non issues.

  7. Correction by jwhyche · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let me correct the thinking in the title here. "Yes I can. No it isn't." There we go.

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    1. Re:Correction by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      Well, that was convincing! Thank you for sharing!

      Actually, I find that ineffective managers do tend to be the ones who don't clean up their in boxes. This may be because they don't know what is important and what isn't.

    2. Re:Correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A key item in the little blurb that is easy to overlook: "ineffective manager". As a manager I do believe you better stay on top of your e-mails, it's your job. As to everyone else, the correction stands...

    3. Re:Correction by ChromeAeonuim · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If interacting with the people sending the emails is part of your job, than rude or not, you're not doing your job.

    4. Re:Correction by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the blurb talks about managers. But at some point somebody has to do stuff. If I make email my priority all the time, I just get more and more stuff to do and less and less time to do it. Rate-limiting my email is the only way to make progress on anything else.

    5. Re:Correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I interact with them when I give them performance feedback. 'You send too many unnecessary emails. Stop it.'

    6. Re:Correction by fred911 · · Score: 1

      Absolutely correct.
        But we do need a little clarity here, not responding doesn't mean the email was ignored. It means that the receiver didn't think it warranted a response (for whatever reason).

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    7. Re:Correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep - I have two choices:

      * Answer Email
      * Do Stuff

      See, this 'answer email all the time' approach makes sense for managers that have a third option:
      * Delegate

      I'm not able to delegate. Therfore I have to respond to to every email.

    8. Re:Correction by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Managing your e-mail - even large volumes of it - shouldn’t take much time:
      - first, turn off the “ding”. Set aside time to manage your email and deal with it at those times, not when the machine tells you there’s new mail. Twice a day, once every morning, or more often; whatever works for you. But don’t ever be reactive when it comes to email.
      - practise Inbox Zero or the 4Ds, or similar. These methods let you focus on sorting your email and prioritising it, getting rid of spam and stuff requiring no action right away. If necessary, send a brief reply. This should take only a few minutes.
      - in the previous step you have identified the few emails that require your attention. At this stage you are not really “dealing with email” anymore, what’s left here should be part of your work.
      So if you are dealing with email, it most certainly should be your priority... at certain short time slots during the day, and not at all outside those slots. So time-limiting rather than rate-limiting, by assigning the right priority you can handle large volumes in a surprisingly short amount of time. But if you are getting too many emails that are directly related to your assignment, you need to manage your co-workers in that regard.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    9. Re:Correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if you can only answer half of the days new email in the time you have allocated? What then?

    10. Re:Correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you get more emails/work daily than you can possibly handle in that day, like I do, then it's not a matter of "not doing your job" it's simply a matter of the workload being physically impossible to be completed. You might say that's a management problem, and you'd be right, but it hasn't been solved in the last 20 years, why start now.

    11. Re:Correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Managing your e-mail - even large volumes of it - shouldn’t take much time:

      What planet are you living on? Daily volume for my assortment of emails is approaching 200,000. Google filters that down to about 20,000. My
      local mail server filters it down to less than 500 a day, IF it takes 30 seconds to scan everyone .. that is 250 minutes or 4 hours and 10 minutes. Sorting and
      filing takes that 500 down to 100-150 that actually have to have a response which on average takes about 30 seconds if you can think/type at 60 words per minute.

      So at that rate I spend 50-75 minutes a day just answer email on a average day, on top of 4 conference calls or meetings. So that burns over 5 of my 8 hours of work time.

      Now if suddenly get buried because the volumes increase exponentially, to say 1,000,000 per day inbound and the process chain only manages to trim that down to 1000-1500 in my inbox... that means 1-2 days adjusting filters.

    12. Re:Correction by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      If you filter your emails down to the important stuff and you’re still left with too many to answer, you will have to talk to your co-workers because they might not be using the most effective way to communicate. (Tip: if you receive a reply to your reply to someone else’s reply, if the email chain turns into a lengthy back & forth or an n-way discussion, you need a face-to-face interaction or a meeting instead of using email). Or you need to talk to your boss as you may simply have too much on your plate. But think: if you simply start ignoring your emails, what will replace it? If nothing, then congratulations: chances are you have just made yourself irrelevant. Or perhaps you weren’t very good at filtering your mails.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    13. Re:Correction by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

      I live on a planet where thankfully I do not have to be aware of the amount of spam I am getting. Honestly, I have no idea. Not everything in my inbox is important, but everything - one or two spams that sneak past the filter aside - is legit.

      So you get 500 mails a day. That’s still an insane amount but hey, if you can clear that pile in 5 hours, that’s actually pretty good. What the hell is all that, though? If it’s all similar stuff like support requests, you might consider using a better tool to channel it all, like a ticketing system. In general that’s a question you should ask yourself if you are considering just ignoring your inbox (or not replying to everything): what will replace it?

      I’m always a bit surprised by people saying “I could be working instead of answering email”. What do you think answering email, i.e. communicating with your co-workers, is? If there is too much of it, especially before you’ve prioritised it, then you need to either manage your co-workers better, or talk to your boss as you may simply have too many responsibilities, or you live in a weird corporate culture with a lot of internal spam that can usually be handled with inbox rules quite well.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    14. Re:Correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm Six Sigma Email certified. Get on my level. Zero 4D? You are an amateur.

    15. Re:Correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's bitztream the rude autism-hating, custom EpiPen-hating, Musk-hating, Qualcomm-hating, Firefox tabs-hating, Slashdot editors-hating asshole!

    16. Re:Correction by Tristao · · Score: 1

      Same applies to every kind of unsolicited communication, e.g. SMS, postal, or even in-person. You can reply to whatever, but you can also ignore them. There are few exceptions, like (real life-threatening) emergencies, but those are not relevant to this discussion.

  8. US Business culture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a non Statian that's worked for a US company for a number of years, I can confirm that their office politics, views on what is and isn't polite, and general business culture is very different from the rest of the world.
    For anyone outside the US business scene, a US opinion, from a Statian, in a US paper, about US office ettiquete is irrelevant and mildly interesting at best.
    Remember, there, the appearance of doing work is more important than actually doing work (especially if your role is office based, and has you in a position with an ever growing inbox). American psycho was very nail on the head in that regard. I would not suggest anyone outside the US actually taking this on board.

    1. Re:US Business culture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would not suggest anyone outside the US actually taking this on board.

      And I thought I wouldn't agree with anything in your post.

    2. Re:US Business culture by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

      Wait, are you saying the appearance of doing work is more important than actually doing work in the US or in other countries?
      Also: You're basing your opinions on the movie American Psycho?

  9. Then Make Spammer Hunting Legal by dgatwood · · Score: 2

    If you want me to reliably respond to email, the first step is to pass a law declaring open season on spammers, with a bounty of $1,000 per head, and arm everybody in the world with shotguns. :-)

    I would be thrilled to have only 199 unread email messages. In fact, I have 3,592 unread email messages, despite numerous attempts to blacklist spammers, bulk delete spam, unsubscribe from various email lists that companies have put me on without my consent, etc. The volume of garbage is so extreme relative to the actual signal that I've just about given up on email entirely. I try to catch important emails from people I know, but I make no guarantees. The odds of an email never even being noticed until it is too late are probably at least 30% at this point.

    Heck, lately, the spam has been coming more and more from our own federal government, whose "We the People" website makes no attempts to validate email addresses whatsoever, resulting in some weeks getting dozens of "Thank You For Your Message" reports from an email alias that I have never used or given out publicly (same username, different well-known hostname). When even the federal IT department can't avoid being part of the problem, it's time to give up on the entire delivery system.

    The same is also true for the telephone. When I get calls, unless the number is one that I recognize, I do not answer. Ever. If anybody wants to reach me, they can either:

    • Call and leave a message; assuming you aren't one of those dirtbag scammers pretending to be from the IRS), I'll call you back. However, if you call and don't leave a voicemail message, there's a decent chance that I will block your number within minutes, so don't call unless you intend to leave a message.
    • Send me a text, if you have my cell phone number.
    • Contact me on Facebook.

    All other delivery methods are on a best-effort basis, and should be considered unreliable, at best.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    1. Re:Then Make Spammer Hunting Legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am 100% successful in demanding companies to follow CAN-SPAM law (one click unsubscribe).

      Of course I would only contact companies I have a business relationship with. But then they started adding mailing list emails on top of order notifications.

      This include letters (snail) to Google, YouTube, Pinterest, Digital Ocean and more.

    2. Re:Then Make Spammer Hunting Legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This article wasn't about spam, you dingus. You spent more time writing this stupid post of yours than you did actually reading the article.

    3. Re:Then Make Spammer Hunting Legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They invented a button for this. It's called "Mark as Read".

    4. Re:Then Make Spammer Hunting Legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You aren't very bright are you?

    5. Re:Then Make Spammer Hunting Legal by MeNeXT · · Score: 1

      I've been on the internet since the early 1990's. My email address is on a few websites. I pass out my business cards regularly. I never give this address for marketing/subscription purposes, I use an alias for that. I also had a Yahoo address set up for this purpose. I may receive 10 SPAMS a week.

      I've seen people give their email address to stores to get their receipt online and then complain that they can't handle the volume. It's yours to control. You can setup a Gmail or Yahoo account for the junk or better yet register a domain and create aliases that you can abandon when they get abused.

      My phone number, on the other hand, is starting to get multiple SPAM calls a day from robocallers as well as unsolicited texts advertising such and such. This is starting to affect my business because it's getting harder to ignore even when I block the numbers. It's even harder to trace.

      --
      DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
    6. Re:Then Make Spammer Hunting Legal by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      This article wasn't about spam, you dingus.

      Um.

      the average American's inbox has 199 unread messages

      Yes it was.

    7. Re:Then Make Spammer Hunting Legal by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      I think the root of the problem is that once your email address or phone number gets stolen from any store or website whose systems get compromised, it gets sold and resold to various scammer groups for nefarious purposes.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    8. Re:Then Make Spammer Hunting Legal by AleRunner · · Score: 1

      This article wasn't about spam, you dingus.

      someone attempts to put the effort in to write a specific useful post about a subject you don't understand and this is how you respond. Wonderful.

      You spent more time writing this stupid post of yours than you did actually reading the article.

      And probably more time reading spam than reading useful emails. The article reads like a letter from the 1980s when spam didn't exist. Suggestions like "set up an autoresponder" are strictly for the ignorant who have never seriously used email. Expectation that people will effectively respond to all emails are for people who have never had their email address published. The article was 100% about spam, or more specifically, calling out people who have to deal with serious spam problems from a position of total ignorance. Due to spam, if you want your email to be read then you _have_ to verify separately that it's received. You do this via whatever other channel the recipient has agreed with you, for example an instant messenger. Every sending of an email is a serious event and should be done only with due care and consideration for the recipient. The person writing this article is a boor in a china shop.

  10. Comes with the gig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I think learning to efficiently deal with an increasing influx of communication is just part of going down the leadership road. The more responsibility you have, the more people are going to reach out to you, and the more shit you get CCed on because someone is hoping you'll jump in and fight their battle or just wants to cover their ass.

    Like the summary says, you really shouldn't just abandon your inbox and hope it all sorts itself out. People will label you as "doesn't check his email" and just track you down in person when they really have to, but will also start going around you .. and being seen as an obstacle isn't exactly great for long term career success.

    Eventually good managers figure out a way to deal with it.

    1. Re:Comes with the gig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a bit of a social contract here. A lot of this comes from bad email habits.

      Ideally, an email should be short, roughly 5 sentences for most things. It should have a title that clearly reflects the contents and the urgency. The email body should contain some sort of actionable information and a clear statement about what you're looking for.

      If you're doing that, then you should be able to expect that people will actually do something with the email most of the time. The exceptions are either rude people or those that aren't managing their workload effectively.

    2. Re:Comes with the gig by jrumney · · Score: 1
      Automated filtering is the key.

      Half a dozen messages a day are where I need to spend my time, and there aren't enough minutes in the day to be replying, or even reading the 99%.

    3. Re:Comes with the gig by vakuona · · Score: 1

      The problem with email is that there are various kinds of emails.

      Sometimes, email is directed specifically to you and you alone. This you must deal with.

      Sometimes you are cc'd - these ones, you may or may not need to do anything with.

      Then there are the mailing list emails!

      Maybe we need something other than email. What we need is a system where you assign someone work to do, set a deadline and have it added automatically to said person's to do list. In effect, something like a bug tracking system. There should also be a clear way to determine if this task is to be prioritised over others.

      These tasks should be re-assignable, so you can pass it on to someone else. This will also encourage to writer of the email replacement to include as much information as is necessary to enable any reasonably competent and end experienced person to pick up the work.

    4. Re: Comes with the gig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds an awful lot like micromanagement. I do not want that employee working for me.

    5. Re:Comes with the gig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eventually good managers figure out a way to deal with it.

      Yeah, they learn to ignore a good amount of it, obviously. I have not known any real exceptions.

  11. Computer-mediated communication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The whole business of developing etiquette from scratch in the age of electronic communications is interesting as hell. It used to be that people thought of email as a typical letter, delivered nearly as slowly as actual physical mail. Now it is merely the world's slowest form of instant message.

    1. Re:Computer-mediated communication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      world's slowest form of instant message

      Yeah, it needs the special monster cable that the other IMs use. Or is it slower because it allows for more content (aka thought) than the other IMs?

    2. Re:Computer-mediated communication by asylumx · · Score: 1

      This is a perfect description of the problem, people think of email like they think of IM. I get way too many emails that could easily and effectively be replaced with a quick IM. I'm not sure if I really want that many IMs, but if it's important then of course I'd prefer the more disruptive communication method.

  12. Organization by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One skill needed for effective management is good organization.

    An overflowing inbox is a sign of difficulty with this skill.

    How hard is it to "archive"? You don't have to have a fancy folder structure. Most email applications today have an "archive" feature.

    If you can't deal with it now, send a quick note saying you can't, and move on. Then archive the email.

    1. Re:Organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depending upon the amount of email you receive, you can archive by year, month or possibly week. You read it and if you can't immediately act on the email, you enter it into project management software and archive the message. If you can immediately act, you do so and then archive the message.

      The inbox is just an inbox, emails shouldn't generally be hanging out there very long. They should hang out there long enough to decide whether to act and then whether it's an immediate action or a future action.

      And religiously unsubscribe from anything that you're not interested in and can unsubscribe from.

    2. Re:Organization by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I don't understand people who can't respond to email. What kind of emails are they getting that are so hard?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Organization by mamba-mamba · · Score: 1

      With webmail, I don't see the point in archiving anything. Just let it scroll on down. Leave everything in the inbox. All folder schemas just make it harder to find the email you are looking for later anyway because you have to try to remember which folder or tag you used.

      --
      By including this sig, the copyright holders of this work or collection unreservedly place it in the public domain.
    4. Re:Organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally I manage around 100/200 messages per work day thanks to a proper setup (notmuch{,-emacs}, mbsync, afew, a proper taxonomy, a proper mail services with unlimited aliases and a STANDARD IMAP setup) I NEVER archive mails, I garbage collect them with as much automation as possible so my maildir grow at an acceptable (very low) rate and I do not waste nor storage nor bandwidth for garbage contents...

      I agree that most people do not actually know how to deal with mails but much part of the problems is that nearly anyone push crappy mail solution (like webmails, any kind of them) and do not encourage development of proper MUAs, my personal setup is effective but simply too complicated for most users and nothing technically block the development of my very same setup with a single tools far quicker to setup and keep up. It's only a matter of commercial choices and commercial power.

    5. Re:Organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This and what another AC posted is bullshit (but feel free to live however you want to live, that's why software customization is awesome). An inbox isn't like a real mailbox, it has infinite space. Search works just as well from the inbox, an archive, or anything else. All the filters (date range, subject contains, addresses, has attachments, etc...) work no matter the email location as well.

      If anything a 'full' inbox is a sign of better management than an empty one. If I don't need to read an email, I don't touch it at all as doing so would be a waste of time. Daily build report passed? All I need to see is the subject line (you do write useful subjects don't you?*), no need to even click/select it. Create a filter to move those into a folder? Hell no, as then I'd have to watch that folder to see when it gets new emails which adds a new task/habit I'd have to do and provides the chance of forgetting and missing something. Skip the passed emails and only receive failure ones? That doesn't work as I want to know the machine hasn't crashed or something else went wrong which could have prevented the failed email. Have a email you want to get back to without it getting lost in your every growing inbox? Covert it into a calendar event, add it as a task, write it down, move it into your special folder, etc...

      Though eventually you may need to delete some emails. When everything is in one place, it's easy to sort by sender, subject, etc... then simply delete 500 messages with one selection. The less actions you perform on your incoming mail, the more efficient you are with it. A highly organized email account is from someone who either has too much time on their hand or can't handle complex environments.

      I have about 40,000 'unread' emails in my personal inbox. That's 40000 times I avoided waiting for the email to load then pressing 'a'. In case you're wondering, a lot of those emails are online order progress emails, blood donation reminders, and tings like that. Stuff I want to see when it comes in but it isn't important enough to touch nor do I want them hidden in another folder I'd have to check.

      *Not enough room in the subject line? Skip the useless intro lines so the email preview will show the important details instead of a pointless "Hi". I'm a software developer, my goal is to be efficient as possible. If you take it personally that someone doesn't acknowledge your existence in the world when specifically trying to contact you, talk to a therapist and get a dog. And stop asking me a question when you only wanted to say hi.

      Don't take my insulting/aggressive tone personally. I'm just annoyed by people telling me I'm doing it wrong when they don't care to think why someone might doing it that way. Society sucks.

    6. Re:Organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An overflowing inbox is also an indication of an excessive amount of spam - corporate and otherwise.

      I sometimes like to search my inbox for discussions that took place years ago to refresh my memory as to why we did things a certain way.

    7. Re:Organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I get CCed on dozens of emails daily. Am I expected to reply to those?

    8. Re: Organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      âoeMark as Readâ. Anything else is a waste of time, but leaving them Unread is worse - how do you differentiate between new and old at that point?

    9. Re:Organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can you tell which emails are ones that need your attention, then, if you're not organizing them at all?

    10. Re:Organization by mamba-mamba · · Score: 1

      The ones that need attention get replied to on first reading. Or if I can't reply immediately, then I mark them as unread after reading. If they are marked as unread, then I will scan through them later. Occasionally I add a follow-up reminder to an email if it is very important but can't be dealt with for some time.

      --
      By including this sig, the copyright holders of this work or collection unreservedly place it in the public domain.
    11. Re:Organization by AleRunner · · Score: 1

      I don't understand people who can't respond to email. What kind of emails are they getting that are so hard?

      • emails that might or might not be phishing and require actual investigation to vaildate if they are real
      • emails containing complex attatchments that may or may not be viruses which require scanning before opening
      • emails that come among hundreds of emails with somewhat similar content where all the other emails are spam
      • many other simlar categories which take minutes to hours to analyse

      just because your life is easy doesn't mean everyone else has an easy life.

    12. Re:Organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you misunderstand: it's not that I can't; unless there's something in it for me, I won't. You don't get an automatic claim on my time because you took .075 seconds to put a message in my inbox. Email has become a shit channel of communication with a signal to noise ratio so low that it's nearly useless. If you have no social capital with me you are not getting a response. period.

    13. Re:Organization by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      Oh, how about "These numbers don't look right. Can you tell me where all my sales are?"

      Or the long chain of 50 replies about some problem with a note that says "Hey can you please look into this?"

      My response to both: "Let's talk." Many times, that's the end of it.

    14. Re:Organization by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      I don't use a fancy folder schema. Just "Inbox" and "Archived." In other words, "To do" and "Done."

    15. Re:Organization by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      That's an extremely reasonable response.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    16. Re: Organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sort by date. Remember when you last checked your email or the last emails you've skimmed.

    17. Re:Organization by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      I don't use a fancy folder schema. Just "Inbox" and "Archived." In other words, "To do" and "Done."

      Really? Earlier you said:

      If you can't deal with it now, send a quick note saying you can't, and move on. Then archive the email.

      So, you're saying that when you tell someone that you can't deal with their issue now you send a reply and then consider handling their issue "done".

      The problem with archiving email that you haven't actually done anything (real) about is that it becomes READ and removed from your normal scan. That's what happens when I read an email that I need to do something about but cannot do it NOW and I leave it in the INBOX. Sheesh, I'm not going to back through my archived (or filed) email looking for read email that I've not dealt with when I don't do that for my INBOX email.

      What works for me MUCH better is to keep anything I still need to do something about as UNREAD in my INBOX. My email client has a pseudo-folder called "unread". All the unread, unhandled email shows up there, even if it was from a month ago. (I currently have unread, undone things from last July. Very low priority until it becomes important, but I can't just wave it off as "done" and forget about it.)

      But if calling everything you've answered but not actually acted on "Done" by archiving it works for you, more power to you. You probably spend a lot more time scanning your archived email looking for things you forgot to do than I do, but it's your time to spend. Or maybe you just rely on people to remind you on a regular basis about things you said you'd do later but haven't?

  13. "we're all overwhelmed with email"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Yes, we're all overwhelmed with email." ... what? I literally cannot remember the last time a human being actually sent me an e-mail. (I'm obviously not counting SPAM and companies that respond to tickets.)

  14. e-mail got you down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Sorry, Bob. You work 10 metres down the hall. Don't send me an "important" e-mail that needs an immediate response. Walk down the hall and tell me. I view your e-mail as A) an attempt to avoid me, B) making work an isolated place, and most important C) an attempt at sabotaging my job performance by hoping won't check e-mail quick enough to get it.

    Also, Susan, I don't need your two e-mails a day about mundane office details. I don't care if somebody didn't replace the sugar in the sugar cup at the coffee machine. Or somebody left the little window in the hallway cracked open.

    1. Re:e-mail got you down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Bob needs a trace of office work requests, proof that he's doing his work.

      You trying to avoid this traceability indicates you're either a slacker or a liar.

    2. Re:e-mail got you down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Making work an isolated place sounds great.. it's the babblers needy socialization that gets in the way.

    3. Re:e-mail got you down? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Just delete the sugar email, that’s one second of your time. As for Bob, make it clear to him that you do not check your inbox continuously, as you shouldn’t. Phones or direct contact is how you deal with urgent stuff. If an urgent item is handled too late because it was sent by email, that’s on Bob, not on you. (And if your manager sees it differently, I’d recommend finding a different job).

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  15. I'm not ruled by my Inbox by magzteel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I read/reply to email if and when I want to. Same goes for text messages and voice mails.

    It's my device and my time and I will use them as I please.

    1. Re:I'm not ruled by my Inbox by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Funny

      How rude!

    2. Re:I'm not ruled by my Inbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I read/reply to email if and when I want to. Same goes for text messages and voice mails.

      It's my device and my time and I will use them as I please.

      Amen!

      You're not ruled by your front door either!
      Or your work, friends, family... you don't owe anyone anything!

    3. Re:I'm not ruled by my Inbox by antdude · · Score: 1

      Even for work? :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    4. Re:I'm not ruled by my Inbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially for work!!!

      I can't send you an e-mail about how screwed up your code is because I'm too busy fixing it .. learn to read the changelog you insensitive clod!

  16. Hidden agendas and co-workers by bobstreo · · Score: 1

    Make sure you have return receipt turned off on your email client. That way they'll never know if you read it.

    I once had a cow orker who loved to bcc every manager they could, to prove how valuable they were to the company.

    If I received one of these emails, I would compose 5-10 page replies including every detail regarding the email.

    Sometimes I would include documentation from a vendor showing how wrong the original sender was in their assumptions and requirements.

    Managers were quick to tell the original cow orkers that they be removed from the bcc chain because all that technical talk just made them itchy.

    Personal email? I'll read it if it's from a friend or family member, or someone trying to send me money as part of a class action lawsuit, otherwise I'll usually scan the subject and delete it. I've realized most email "vendors" don't know how to actually block spam in a useful way.

    1. Re:Hidden agendas and co-workers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would store them up in a folder and then once every few months, right click and mark the entire folder read just to spam the hell out of them with read receipts. Fortunately, Outlook has a 'read receipt' column that can be added just for that reason.

    2. Re:Hidden agendas and co-workers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      what's a bcc chain? that makes no sense at all.
      maybe you mean cc? otherwise anyone bcc'd on the original email doesn't get a cc to any replies. Nobody knows they got the message. It's BCC'd -- blind carbon copy.

    3. Re:Hidden agendas and co-workers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You clearly don't know what the B in Bcc is, despite your apparent familiarity with BOFH terminology. This observation makes my head hurt.

    4. Re:Hidden agendas and co-workers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Way ahead of you. Not only have I already done that, but I've also set up an inbox filters to move emails from co-workers who repeatedly use the term "cow orker" directly to the trash folder.

      *glares at Bob*

    5. Re:Hidden agendas and co-workers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Managers were quick to tell the original cow orkers that they be removed from the bcc chain

      There cannot be a "Bcc chain" - individual recipients cannot see the Bcc recipients (by definition) so a "Reply All" only addresses the sender and any Ccs. The orginal Bcc recipients see the original message and nothing else.

    6. Re:Hidden agendas and co-workers by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

      Maybe he meant blind CC, in the sense that "he's blindly CCing everyone"? ;)

  17. A Considered Response by MrKaos · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't think a timely response is as important as one you have considered. Once it is out there, its gone and you can't take it back.

    With email there is some time to respond, not immediately unless it really has to be that way.

    When people see thought in the response it's a good sign you've considered what they had to say.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    1. Re:A Considered Response by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I don't think a timely response is as important as one you have considered.

      It's far more important than one which arrives too late. Seriously some people need to learn to send a quick reply even if it's "Give me a week to get back to you" and then use the flag for follow-up feature in Outlook.

      I've lost count of the number of times certain people have replied to me long after the window for their opinion to matter had closed. The sad part there is they've flushed themselves down this toilet of inefficiency.

      Your email was late and as a result you completely wasted your time writing it, and as a result someone else's email is now late.

    2. Re:A Considered Response by Monster_user · · Score: 1

      It is one thing for an email to have arrived past a deadline, and to have been wasted. It is another for it to cause somebody else's email to be late. Pick one or the other, not both.

      Some things are important to get right, and the deadline shouldn't be fixed. Late and past due deadlines are a thing for a reason. A game released without a rendering engine, or a player character model, might not be a wise move. Borrowing credit for a product, when you haven't even come up with an idea for the product might also be an unwise move. Setting a hard deadline for the funding of the business which expires regardless of whether the prerequisites are completed is a bit extreme, and complaining about delaying a milestone because a prerequisite milestone is incomplete as being "inefficient" is kind of nonsensical.

      Either the author of the reply's time was wasted since the deadline had passed, or the email was late and the deadline had to be extended (and probably shouldn't have been so short to begin with, imho).

    3. Re:A Considered Response by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      It is another for it to cause somebody else's email to be late. Pick one or the other, not both.

      How do you pick? If you're not on top enough to read your emails chances are you're not on top enough to understand which are important. Not everything has a fixed deadline at the time of writing the original email, but eventually all unread emails fall into irrelevance.

  18. Flick a match by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I could flick a match into my email box and let it burn perpetually I would

  19. Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless there is a pre-existing arrangement, I am under no obligation to respond to someone's email.

  20. Keep expectations low. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keep expectations low. The general rule is that I never answer emails unless an action item for me was explicitly called out and the email has me in the 'To'. If it is important, then folks should reach out on Slack etc. If I am copied in an email, you cannot be sure that I will ever read it.

  21. You don't answer for the other person's benefit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...you answer for your own.

    Spam and trolling aside (obviously ignore that), some people seem to think that it's OK to be rude to others because others are rude / ignorant / annoying / whatever to you, but that's missing the point. You don't respond to these people for *their* gratification: you respond to them (politely and reasonably quickly) because there is a good chance that it will benefit *you* in the medium/long term.

    Simple example: getting a promotion isn't just a function of how well you do your assigned job, it's also a function how people perceive you as a person, and if it comes down to choosing between "the helpful guy" and "the snarky prick who ignores people's emails" who both do an OK job then obviously you're better off being the former.

  22. Yikes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What an incredibly cunty article.

  23. are we now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    all overwhelmed by email? come on. i'm a brain cancer survivor and struggle with various repercussions from such, thusly have been overwhelmed by a great many things in life, but my email? come on, a little attention and a little automation equal 35 read messages in my inbox which reside there (rather than archive) as they are important enough to want quick access.

  24. Ignoring email is rude? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I’ve got one particular coworker who often emails me a question multiple times over the course of a few months - even though I have almost always already answered the question in a response to her first email. She loses track, and rather than checking whether I’ve already answered... asks the same question again.

    Wasting my time with pointless emails like that is far ruder than me not responding with a third or fourth or fifth email containing information I’ve already sent more than once.

    And yes, when I answer a repeat I do append the first message and point out that I did answer weeks ago... it doesn’t deter her. She is seriously vapid. Many of us wonder how she has held onto her job (and no, none of the things which probably have popped into your head there can explain this one).

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Ignoring email is rude? by fred911 · · Score: 1

      "(and no, none of the things which probably have popped into your head there can explain this one)."

        Leverage/dirt or she's built an isolated fiefdom that would be harder for a replacement (or management) to figure out, then it is to tolerate her ineffectiveness.

        Quite possibly a slow poisoning might expedite a solution.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    2. Re:Ignoring email is rude? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "I already answered this question. Please check your inbox." Is a valid answer, you know.

    3. Re:Ignoring email is rude? by swillden · · Score: 1

      "I already answered this question. Please check your inbox." Is a valid answer, you know.

      Further, I think it's the right answer. If this were an occasional event then it's reasonable to just answer again, or even to do the work of finding the previous email and forwarding it again. If this happens frequently, though, I'd create a canned response that says "I already answered this question. Please check your inbox." and send it. Make her do the work of searching her mail to find the previous answer, rather than doing it for her. Eventually she may realize that it's less effort to do that before emailing, rather than after.

      You do need to be sure that you actually have answered the question before, though.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    4. Re:Ignoring email is rude? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Many of us wonder how she has held onto her job (and no, none of the things which probably have popped into your head there can explain this one).

      If it's not nepotistic or sexual then it's probably blackmail-related. People who have things on people get to keep their jobs.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Ignoring email is rude? by nickersonm · · Score: 1
      This is the professional solution.

      Ignoring email is rude and unprofessional; if a coworker is being rude and unprofessional, it is very reasonable to point it out. It doesn't excuse being rude in return.

    6. Re:Ignoring email is rude? by LostOne · · Score: 1

      Even better is when they quote the entire email chain that has all five previous answers to the question when they ask it for a sixth time. At that point, even if it's a "valued customer", I reply back with "You quoted the answer five times in your query. Please read your your email." Sometimes I'll be more diplomatic, but there really isn't a diplomatic way to say "stop wasting my time and just read the answer already". Depending on the specific circumstances, it will be accompanied by a "this falls outside of standard support and, thus, future queries for the same information will be billed at a our consulting rate at a minimum time increment of 1 hour." Most of the time, it does cause the repetetive questions to stop. Much of the time, I get back some comment or other along the lines of "it's easier to just ask you" as if I'm their PA or something and when I do, they definitely get back a fee schedule. Occasionally, it triggers a shitstorm with managers involved, but it usually calms down when I turn the tables on the managers. "What's your email? I'll copy you on *every* query and reply from now on and you can see for your self."

      --

      If it works in theory, try something else in practice.
  25. No Unread E-Mail Here by mschwanke97402 · · Score: 3

    You don’t have a right to my time or attention unless we have an established social or business relationship. I have a pretty good multi-layer spam filtering system. That takes care of 90% of the incoming mail. It takes a few moments to highlight and permanently delete most of the rest a few times a day. That leaves a handful for me to actually read and sometimes reply. Damn, perhaps I am organized.

    1. Re:No Unread E-Mail Here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's all applaud ourselves for feeding and dressing ourselves too, this is important.

    2. Re:No Unread E-Mail Here by mschwanke97402 · · Score: 1

      Let's all applaud ourselves for feeding and dressing ourselves too, this is important.

      Let me also applaud myself for generally refraining from speaking rudely to strangers from an anonymous account.

    3. Re:No Unread E-Mail Here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You cannot applaud yourself for not being an arrogent, pretentious douchenozzle, though. Go back and read what you type. Learn why someone would rudely comment about it. Finally, go fuck yourself while you think about it and you will find Nirvana.

  26. Common Courtesy by ememisya · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As far as I know 48 hours is the default time period to allow for an email recipient to respond.

    1. Re:Common Courtesy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, and that's why your boss always emails you at 5pm on Friday.

      *Boss taps forehead* "You may not be not on the clock on the weekend, but your ass is still mine."

    2. Re:Common Courtesy by mjwx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As far as I know 48 hours is the default time period to allow for an email recipient to respond.

      Will my inbox self destruct if I don't?

      Honestly never heard that one and it doesn't ring true either.

      The problem is that most people don't understand email. It's not a synchronous form of communication like a telephone, IM or face to face conversation. Email was designed to be asynchronous. This means you do not require an immediate response, if any response at all. People assuming their email requires a response, let alone an immediate response is wrong. If you're emailing me, you're giving me information that doesn't require an immediate response or maybe, just giving me information that doesn't require one.

      Common courtesy is not emailing me about things I have no involvement in. The thing about common courtesy is that it isn't common.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    3. Re:Common Courtesy by Cid+Highwind · · Score: 1

      As far as I know 48 hours is the default time period to allow for an email recipient to respond.

      Will my inbox self destruct if I don't?

      Nope, but if you don't register an opinion within ~48 hrs, you will forfeit your right to complain about decisions made in that thread.

      --
      0 1 - just my two bits
    4. Re:Common Courtesy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was told it's 24 hours... that's how i handle it. If I don't get a "I'll get back to you later" or a vacation responder within the first 24 hours, you're at least in my "in the future i'll respond to your emails whenever it pleases me"-list

  27. "I'm not saying you have to answer every email..." by sheramil · · Score: 5, Funny

    "... you just have to answer mine. "

  28. Quick question by TimMD909 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Would it be rude to simply assume the author's article is BS, and simply not read it? Asking for a troll.

    1. Re:Quick question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the author should not be ignored. It's not rude it's stupid. That writer was clearly paid by some lobby group who's interest it is to ensure a gradual shift towards eventually-mandatory message responses for their workforces, allowing after-hours work with no pay and vastly increased tracking of employees at all times.

      The writer should not be ignored, because they instead should be made an example of before others begin to follow suit.
      There is nothing benign about their article. Find out who paid for this, and kill them.

  29. Oh yes, I can by gweihir · · Score: 1

    And I can even add you to my spam-filter if you are wasting my time.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  30. Perportionate response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My response will be directly portioned to how much you pay me, if at all, or if you are a friend/relative. All others are welcome to consider rude, I don't care.

  31. "concientiosness" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is bullshit. All it means is that you do things like a machine, not that you do the right things.

    And not answering emails is a way to tell people to stop sending you emails because they are "conscientious" and just do things that are a waste of time.

    But conscientious people get promoted and make everyone's life miserable.

    Said the maverick neurotic.

  32. Wrong. Your mails are rude. by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    Full quotes. Chronological mess. 98% noise, repetition and footers with bullshit disclaimers. Basically unreadable. If you're not a paying customer, those go straight to the waste-bin. If you are a paying customer I'll reply tersely in the hopes that you will learn how email is written. It's not my fault that Mickeysuck fubared email with default fullquotes and people who were to dumb and/or lazy to change their settings in Outlook back in 1998 when this degrading of email etiquette started.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:Wrong. Your mails are rude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's one of those self-righteous narcissist idiots going on a rant again. "You don't give me you immediate attention, whaa!

      Written media, with the possible exception of IM, means it can wait. WRT email, there isn't even a guarantee that it has arrived in the first place, and it's considered rude not to instantly replying? WTF. The author needs to get back to earth and get over himself. He doesn't own my time, nor does he get to set my priorities.

    2. Re:Wrong. Your mails are rude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're not a paying customer, those go straight to the waste-bin.

      E-Mail messages from paying customers (which includes new contacts including a charge-code in the subject) get priority treatment. Others not so much.

  33. It's an indicator for life skills by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're overwhelmed with the messages that people send you (or that you don't manage to unsubscribe from/filter out), that says something about your life skills. Cluttered inbox, cluttered garage, cluttered mind. And then every so often you call Marie Kondo and throw everything, including necessary things, away because you're too overwhelmed anymore to make distinctions. When you realize that you miss some things, that triggers the next shopping spree. Der ganze alte Schrott muss raus, und neuer Schrott muss rein.
    I avoid dealing with that kind of people, because they're probably too busy dealing with their heaps of unsorted ham+spam to be dependable.

  34. for managers by Goldsmith · · Score: 1

    The key part of this study is that managers need to be responsive to emails. This makes sense in an organization that uses email to manage people. If your job is something else... then you should be spending only a small amount of time and attention on email.

    1. Re:for managers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Managers would have absolutely nought to do were it not for e-mail. It is not as if they do anything at all useful, so if they cannot deal with e-mail efficiently (which is the only reason they exist at all) then what is their point?

  35. Can't relate by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

    Both my private addresses as well es my work email are at 0 unread.
    I reply to every direct question from a real person I have some kind of contact with or who have valid reason to contact me.

    I receive little to no spam. I make sure to unsubscribe the moment I get mail from any mailinglist and my anti-spam measures seem to be strong. Between blacklists and spamgourmet.com I seem to be pretty good at not getting much in the first place.

    I will admit though that I'm neither in a management positiin nor do I have a budget people could try to talk me into sending their way.

  36. Should I say "hello" to everyone I see? by petes_PoV · · Score: 1
    The rules of civility depend on circumstances.

    It would be rude to ignore emails from someone I have a close connection with - I would not want them ignoring my emails. Quid pro quo.. It is not rude to ignore emails that come from (for example) a mailing list or a cc: ALL.

    In the workplace I have clearly defined reporting lines: up and down. Those individuals have my attention. For the rest, I don't work for them. Their issues are not my concern.

    As for phone calls, the same applies. In the late 80's I was one of the few techies in what was the national branch of a computer manufacturer. Most of the other people in the office were S&M - sales and marketing. When I started, if they wished to ask a question they would have to call (although individuals were frequently away from their desks or out of the office), or walk a floor or two to our office to find someone to talk to face-to-face. In 1989 we were all given mobile phones. After that we were bombarded with calls, directly from sales people, no matter where they or we were. The working day went from being (largely) productive to a constant stream of trivial interruptions from people who found it was easier to make a call, than to find the answer for themselves.
    The same applies to email and smartphones. Easier modes of communication "dumb down" many people and dump pressure on others.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
  37. Not paying attention to (some) email is prudent by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's prudent exactly because "I don't have time to read your email." translates to "Your email isn't a priority for me at this time.". Technically I do read all my email, at least as far as the sender and subject, but the first thing I'm looking for when I skim it is "Is this email relevant to something that's one of my priorities right now, and if so which one?". If it is, that email has the priority of whatever it's related to and I'll get to replying to it when my priorities permit. Which means if it's a low priority item I won't be working on for some time, don't expect a quick reply. If it's a high priority for you but not for me, either you or your manager need to stop bothering me and go talk to my manager about getting relative priorities adjusted (in fact this should've happened when the priority for the item was set, that this is coming up indicates a severe lack of communication on the part of one or more of the managers involved). I'll be happy to help bring it to my manager's attention, provide estimates on how quickly things can be done and what the effects of shuffling priorities will be, but don't expect me to go upending my priorities without my manager knowing about it and approving it. Note: bug reports already have a (really high) permanent place on my priority list and get a same-day or faster response (if nothing else, indicating how long I think it'll take to nail the cause down and get a handle on a fix). Regular updates on progress and ETA from me are required and I rarely miss sending them out so be really sure you've checked your folders and there really isn't a relevant update before bugging me about progress.

    Personal email I handle on the same basis, and I feel absolutely no obligation to respond to email merely because you sent it to me. If I don't respond it's usually because either I don't know you and your email had nothing in it to interest me, or I know you and don't want to talk to you about whatever your email was about (or possibly at all, depending). The exceptions involve things like my being in the ICU in a coma, and if you're close enough friends to expect a response from me you're already on the list of people who'll get notified about things like that in some way.

    Yes, I'm an old codger who refuses to be nickel-and-dimed to death by people wanting "just a few minutes of my time". Time is ultimately the only currency we have, and I'm as careful with it as I am with the dollars in my bank accounts. My friends understand this and we've worked out a mutually-acceptable balance. Failing to understand it, in turn, is one of the fastest known ways to get put into my twit filter.

  38. This is gonna be a huge shock by bferrell · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    To mIllenials...

    And they're gonna twitter at us about it.

    Keep in mind, this is the crowd that more of less invented ghosting.

    1. Re:This is gonna be a huge shock by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      Nawh, it's been around forever. They *did* however polish it to a bright star of social interactions.

  39. How about 20k unread emails? by mamba-mamba · · Score: 1

    My work inbox has 1700 unread emails. Personal email 20k. Most of them are not personal communications directed specifically at me, though. They are sales come-ons or ship notifications or email group digests, etc.

    I wonder just how far from the norm I am? Do other people actually try to organize their emails or just leave them all in the inbox to scroll down like a social media feed?

    --
    By including this sig, the copyright holders of this work or collection unreservedly place it in the public domain.
    1. Re:How about 20k unread emails? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All e-mail messages are sorted into appropriate folders, so only things requiring "unsolicited attention" or responses are left in the inbox. When the message is read and dealt with it is filed away somewhere else -- things that will be dealt with "later" are re-marked as unread and left alone. Only so many things can be displayed on the screen without scrolling, and I never scroll in my inbox. If your message was so unimportant that it managed to scroll off the screen without me having dealt with it, it indicates that it has not been able to rise to the state where it is both "seen" and "worthy" at the same time. Get used to it.

  40. WE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN YOU ARE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is what is being said.
    When someone accuses you of turning off or leaving your phone at home, it's because your time is not important compared to theirs.
    When work does so, it's because working for no pay outside of your actual hours is profitable and totally not slavery so you're a bad person if you don't

    When every single email sent to you is expected to be answered no matter what, it is because your attention belongs to others, not yourself, no matter how inane their need for it may be.
    If someone is going to accuse you of being rude for *sleeping* seven hours a day when even though you need much more than that they wanted to wake you up midway through: they are trying to slowly and painfully cause an early death by preventing my ability to rest and/or relax. A slow torturous death is still murder and their justification is "because I am more important than you are".
    The least they can do is do it to your face, because such a threat to your or your family's life deserves an appropriately violent response.

  41. 'Incivility', indeed! by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    If, in 2019, not answering someone's email is considered 'incivility', then on what level do we consider spam to be?

    1. Re:'Incivility', indeed! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Crime against humanity

  42. If your job involves answering e-mails... by ET3D · · Score: 1

    Of course a manager would have to answer e-mails, that's part of their job. You'd expect a programmer to program, which would include things like writing code and debugging, and a manager to manage, which would include things like answering e-mails, talking to people and making decisions.

    So if answering e-mails is part of your job and you're not doing it well, you're obviously not doing your job well. That doesn't mean that anyone not answering e-mail isn't good at their job. There are certainly a huge number of occupations where answering e-mails is not something you'd want a person to do.

    1. Re:If your job involves answering e-mails... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most programmers do, in fact, need to deal with people too. This often takes the form of communicating over email.

  43. Email is for unimportant stuff... by David_Hart · · Score: 1

    My personal email gets unread for weeks at a time, I usually check it once a month to make sure that my bills get paid. Friends, Family, SO all use text, IM, Facebook,or plain old fashioned phone calls. If it's important, someone will call me about it. If I am am applying for a job or working with my Real Estate agent, then I check it more often. But otherwise, it's one of the last things on my list...

    As for Work, Email is a lifeblood of our company. I work at a large company and everything, and I mean everything, is done through email. So, you can imagine that I don't want to even look at email when I am at home unless I have to.

  44. Email's purpose has changed by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    My inbox contains a bunch of chat notifications, some general information from HR, some reports from the automated build system, and absolutely nothing that demands a response.

    If people do expect a response, then email is not the best medium any more.

  45. Where have all your letters gone? by kaur · · Score: 1

    Where have all your letters gone?
    Off to Facebook, everyone...
    (to the tune of "Where Have All the Flowers Gone")

    Communications have split into three:
    - friends & family - on facebook, snapchat or whatever
    - promotions and ads - in email
    - official stuff - invoices, bills, formal notices etc - in email

    There is nothing in my personal inbox any more that requires immediate answer. Google helpfully sorts the ads to a special folder to be ignored. I can then read & respond to official mail once a week or as I see fit.

    Not answering my friends would be rude. This does not happen on email though.

  46. I strongly disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FTA: "But there's a growing body of evidence that if you care about being good at your job, your inbox should be a priority."

    What does being "good" at your job mean? Being productive, or alternatively playing the politics that wins you promotions? As a software engineer, reading and replying to every email means that I would not be able to do all the technical tasks needed to actually ship products.

    Many years ago, I worked for a very large computer company. Management would get on my case about not running the company's instant messaging app. I told them that since I was one of the few people working in my area who knew a lot, I would be bombarded all day long by everyone who did not know how to do their jobs with questions. That would 1. make my productivity decline, and 2. never teach them how to figure out the solutions on their own.

    Unfortunately, the management at that now-failing company was so bad in my area that eventually I quit after I worked there 15 years. I am very proud of the work I did there. But I didn't play the political games to get ahead. When I quit, I thought to myself, "this is a much bigger loss for them than it is for me." Things have gone much better for me since then. I didn't have another job lined up when I quit. And I don't regret that decision to quit at all.

  47. DR-DOS days by pigsycyberbully · · Score: 0

    I get domain spam bots e-mails asking me to move my domain name to their server, but that is to ( postmaster ) so they are easily rejected. My working e-mail is kept private and only exchange with work colleagues or personal friends and that amazingly somehow gets jobsearch work agency e-mails, from fake job organisations in the U.S. spamming the U.K..

    Because of the DR-DOS days and small hard drives I read all the e-mails and reply to them as soon as I have read them and I can usually do them all in one day even if there are 900 in the inbox. They used to call it "house cleaning" in DOS days it was something people done religiously, and it is a habit you never forget.

    Reading that back sounds like I have got old without knowing it. I have not but it sounds like it.. Oh dear, oh dear.

    08..56 AM.

  48. Volume x Quality = Constant ?? by andrewbaldwin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I remember this conversation with an older worker and it struck me as sensible at the time and very wise now.

    Without going full "four yorkshiremen *" on it...

    Some years ago people sent typewritten memos; you could get 4, maybe 5 carbon copies if you were lucky - any more and a second copy needed to be typed. Result: you thought long and hard about what was said, kept it brief , and considered exactly to whom you would send the message - every addressee counted.

    Then came the photocopier - you could easily send memos to 20, 30 people (more involved negotiation with the custodians of the copier and/or negotiations with the stationery dept.) - people were less rigorous about addressees and the volume of less relevant and less valuable info increased.

    Then came email - the cost of sending to hundreds of people was minimal; it was quick and easy. Whilst increased communication helps the 'signal to noise' ratio took a nosedive and we got increasing volumes of decreasing quality messages.

    Moving on from that conversation, we have social media where absolute crap is broadcast to the whole world and kept for eternity - but the majority of it is inane, inaccurate, disingenuous and unhelpful.

    Seems like we have an analogue to the gas law:

    Volume x Quality = Constant

    ----

    * Monty Python -- a classic sketch

    1. Re:Volume x Quality = Constant ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just to be pedantic, the 4 Yorkshiremen sketch was originally from the "At Last the 1948 Show" (featuring John Cleese and Graham Chapman, but none of the other Monty Python troupe).

    2. Re:Volume x Quality = Constant ?? by andrewbaldwin · · Score: 1

      You are absolutely correct and I made a mistake - in mitigation, they did perform it at their Drury Lane show.

    3. Re:Volume x Quality = Constant ?? by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Agreed, but you skipped faxes, which were when the race to the wait-to-the-last-minute, don't-plan-ahead, you-gotta-answer now mentality really got going.

    4. Re:Volume x Quality = Constant ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing is, the article isn't talking about spam. You're fine ignoring those. Also scammers, phishers and other assorted scum - basically, anyone that both you and your employer don't mind if they think you rude, then by all means be as rude as you like to them. Nor is it about automated shit, like newsletters and reports that you actually want that get auto-mailed to you on some kind of regular basis.

      TFA is, very specifically, talking about email that is composed and addressed to you personally. I think you do owe some kind of responsibility to the senders of those emails. Personally I make sure to read them as soon as possible (within about 3 hours of receipt, unless I'm on leave), and reply on the same basis (within about 1 day, again unless on leave).

  49. Almillat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All the contents you mentioned in post is too good and can be very useful. I will keep it in mind,
    Thanks for sharing the information keep updating, looking forward for more posts.Thanks

    http://www.almillat.com

  50. Just checked: 18000 unread emails by maroberts · · Score: 1

    Which must make me incredibly rude.

    I remain permanently subscribed to a lot of Job boards so I ignore those and related direct emails. I also ignore the Amazon/ CostCo and other emails from online stores.

    Paradoxically I do read a lot of the spam, because I never cease to be amazed over the number of hot women I've never heard of wanting my body.

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

  51. Amen by CptJeanLuc · · Score: 1

    That non-significant share of colleagues who ignore your emails, possibly pretending they never saw it, are truly annoying. And I am not talking about spam here, but polite non-sociopath emails that are somehow important, in which there are specific questions or calls for action stated to the recipient - some times requiring nothing more than a quick response. Emails that if left unanswered means the project I am in charge of starts grinding to a halt.

    Eventually after pulling every possible trick in the book to solve it yourself, you have to escalate and have your boss call that other person's boss, with a lot of negativity following - and the end result (because you were right that person should have responded) (s)he gets the order to help out, which they then do in the most passive aggressive unhelpful manner they can think of. And all the way you are thinking ... why was all this bullthis necessary.

    At some point after learning I could never expect any response from some particular ill-mannered person, I would start walking over to their desk immediately after sending that email (unfortunately only works on-site), and if they were not there I would put a post-it note in the middle of their computer screen asking them to please look at some email I just sent. Which improved responses, but you would be surprised how many people just ignore the post-it note - and also how many people will look you in the eyes and say they are going to do something for you, and then proceed by doing exactly zero.

    If you need to get in touch with someone remotely then post-it notes obviously do not work, but if you have some colleague there who you are on friendly terms with, if the request is important you could send them an email asking to go have a chat with that person, saying that "hey, so and so sent you an email and asked me to tell you it's really important".

    Always respond to emails. Often you can apply 80/20 rule, in which a quick reply is all the recipient needs. Or if the request should not be answered as stated, just quickly respond why - in 70% of cases the request goes away. Even stating "this is not a priority because X, do Y instead" will make most the non-priority stuff just evaporate. Or some times, "I will have to get back to you in about X time" is appropriate, but then you also have to follow up.

  52. symmetry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is not responding rude and sending email not rude?

  53. Says you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And still I couldn't care less. If that makes me rude... Have a biscuit and move along

  54. It's rude to send them by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    99 out of 100 mails I get are pointless. And I'm not even counting spam. It's FYI, it's "just in case you might be interested" CC, and let's not start about all the "funny" ones.

    Email as a means of communication is dead for me. You want to communicate with me, you use Skype (professionally) or Discord or Telegram (if private). EMail is something you send to me for archive functionality.

    Ignore at your own risk, i.e. at the risk of your request being ignored.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:It's rude to send them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your name betrays you, Opportunist

  55. What does "slow" mean ? by unami · · Score: 1

    In the naughts it was considered (at least where I live, Central Europe), that it's rude if it takes you longer than 24h to answer. I usually still go by this, but make exceptions for people who are either exceptionally fast or slow.

  56. Old people... by fbobraga · · Score: 1

    Today, everyone with an Android phone has an email account and doesn't even understand it: for my parents and grandparents, for example, a mail received is just a phone notification that they don't understand, and thus, ignore... I check and clean my mother inbox regularly, but this kind of thing is far for common...

    1. Re:Old people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Today, everyone with an Android phone has an email account and doesn't even understand it: for my parents and grandparents, for example, a mail received is just a phone notification that they don't understand, and thus, ignore... I check and clean my mother inbox regularly, but this kind of thing is far for common...

      Why don't you just turn off syncing of email to the phone entirely and save the data .

      Hell, I don't even carry data on my cellphone, which is way my smart phone bill is $16/month

  57. Rude sender by HalAtWork · · Score: 2

    An email is often a request that is all too easily fired off. Typing and sending an email is incredibly fast but the action required on the other end is considerable. And often the email is sent off without due diligence on the end of the sender, which is incredibly rude, not valuing the receiver's time. Often the sender will not even check their own email for the answer which has been sent time and again, but sender can't remember in short term memory so they fire off another email about "how do I do this again? What's the phone number again? Where can I find this again?"

    There are many resources available but sender just thinks it's easier to send an email. It's like googling the human world to them. We've sometimes been so fed up we've even made detailed documents with the steps you need to follow and all of the possible contingencies but you can't find that either or be bothered to read can you?

    So naturally the recipient would rather ignore the many requests and wait to be contacted through another medium, whether it be a voice call or in person, to follow through, as a form of vetting.

    Fuck off with your shaming.

    1. Re:Rude sender by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why doesn't the recipient tell the sender that they already have the answer in their inbox when they get asked the same thing multiple times? And why doesn't the recipient respond with "I'm working on it and will update you shortly" when they get an intensive request? Maybe the recipient in your example needs to get a sense of responsibility.

    2. Re:Rude sender by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, but that requires time on the part of the recipient where the sender should have taken due diligence. Didn't read the parent post did you? Oh I see what you did there...

    3. Re:Rude sender by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a known situation. We had some people who were known for the "off the cuff" e-mail messages. The general rules was that one had to receive three (3) separate e-mail messages requesting the same thing over a period of at least a week, without an intervening message asking something different, before a response was warranted...

  58. Managers... by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

    When researchers compiled a huge database of the digital habits of teams at Microsoft, they found that the clearest warning sign of an ineffective manager was being slow to answer emails.

    A manager manages. They are the interface between the working team and the rest of the world, they have to process email, it's their job. The manager is here so that the other members of the team don't have to respond to outside communication and focus on their own job instead.

  59. E-mail types by MitchDev · · Score: 1

    When 99 out of 100 e-mails is spam trying to sell me something I will gladly ignore and delete those emails. Not all email requires or deserves a response.

  60. Invalid argument by jouassou · · Score: 1

    Responding in a timely manner shows that you are conscientious -- organized, dependable and hardworking. And that matters. In a comprehensive analysis of people in hundreds of occupations, conscientiousness was the single best personality predictor of job performance. (It turns out that people who are rude online tend to be rude offline, too.)

    Conscientiousness is one of the Big Five, which together with your IQ, can predict work performance quite well. Being conscientious, among other things, implies that you naturally try to respond in a timely manner. But that doesn't mean that forcing yourself to answer emails more rapidly makes you more conscientious, nor that answering emails more rapidly will affect overall work performance. In other words: forcing non-conscientious people to reply quickly may just end up decorrelating reply time from conscientiousness, instead of boosting their overall work performance.

    TLDR: Correlations in human behavior tend to change if you try to force new behavioral patterns on them.

    1. Re:Invalid argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a complete load of shit.

      Not answering email has nothing to do with NOT being hardworking.

      I don't answer email BECAUSE I am doing the work of 8 people and am working my ass off. That's literally the exact reason, I'm too fucking busy with too many hundreds of micro-tasks being juggled - because I literally have to do them alone - to spend even 10 minutes reading email, unless I get here half an hour early and even then, if I do get here 30 minutes early, I have tasks to do.

  61. This nice Nigerian keeps emailing by xenog · · Score: 1

    He keeps offering me twenty million, and I answer that I'm not interested. I already have enough money. He is now emailing me more. I keep ignoring him. I feel bad now.

  62. E-mail is NOT anything else than a postcard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...it is just like anything that gets into your physical mailbox, You decide what you put in the trash, what you want to read and what you want to respond to. If people think it is rude they are too sensitive.

  63. random thoughts by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

    Helpful tip for many: if you use Outlook at work, you can set up the junk mail filters to quarantine messages that aren't from you own domain or your contact list. Goodbye tons of marketing emails.

    That aside, I have found that colleagues who do not answer relevant work related emails within a day or generally not worth working with. It is just basic time management. I recommend "Time Management for System Administrators" all the time

    I understand the catch-22, but I recently decided I will avoid buying things directly from vendors and instead try to get them on Amazon. If I go vendor direct, I invariably get signed up for their chirp of the day email crap no matter how hard I look for opt-out tricks.

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    1. Re:random thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My manager used to simply delete anything sent to him by lesser staff and only reported to the higher ups. Another manager deleted anything longer than 60 words. Another manager only replied if there was a billable cost centre to backcharge under our time management system.

      A bright manager gave everyone access to his inbox, and demanded we reply to what emails we could. We learnt a lot (security area). This manager had nothing to hide. As everything was marked urgent, only things marked time sensitive got real priority.

      Finally there are only so many hours in a day, where pay and promotions were frozen. There were no freebies or Indian hours. So automatic replies with the calender linked were sent,with a direction that sending to the group mailbox may be faster.

  64. Salesweasels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The vast majority of my unanswered emails come as cold call emails from sales people. They find my profile on LinkedIn see where I'm currently working, guess at the email address since most are First.Last@company.com then send me unsolicited sales pitches. As I continue to delete them and ignore them, I then start getting LinkedIn connection requests from the same people which end up in my home address.

    So yes I'll continue to ignore them and delete them and no it is not rude. Sending me unsolicited emails because you have a sales quota to meet is what is rude.

  65. Article ending by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least at the end of the article they acknowledge their opinion is contradicts reality, as it is signed: "The opposite view on email."

  66. If you contradict yourself, I don't need to listen by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

    "I'm too busy to answer your email" really means "Your email is not a priority for me right now."

    It isn't. And?

    Whatever boundaries you choose, don't abandon your inbox altogether.

    So, if I don't think it's worth answering - I've read it and decided it's not a priority for me right now. Haven't abandoned my inbox. Shut the fuck up.

  67. Walk through a city center and count the talkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Take a walk through a modern American city center and count, how many people tried talking to you for whatever reason.

    If you don't respond to every peddler, panhandler, merchant, petitioner, campaigner, tourist etc. you are arrogant and rude. Right? Now if you were an attractive person, increase that number by three to four. Not responding = rude. Yeah, right?

    And if you are tasked with responding to email, you are rude if you don't respond to every email within 48 hours, even if you're just one person and there's a thousand emails coming in per day. Right? You signed up for that job, so volume is irrelevant and overwhelming numbers are your fault, right?

  68. Your email is not a priority for me right now. by tomhath · · Score: 1

    Nor will it be important tomorrow or the day after. Deal with it.

    1. Re: Your email is not a priority for me right now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree!
      Most emails have a very definite priority Right Now!
      They have a very LOW priority... but they do have a priority.

      However, we do agree however that the priority of email is not likely to change in the foreseeable future....

       

  69. Re:If you contradict yourself, I don't need to lis by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

    And yes, just reading the subject line many times constitutes reading enough of the email to ignore responding.

  70. If your job is to be rude: FUCK YOU. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If your job is to be rude: FUCK YOU.

  71. Answering all emails by byteherder · · Score: 1

    If I answered every email, I would not get any other work done. Most people cc the whole team for every email, creating huge email chains.

    If you are answering all your emails then you are not doing any real work, AKA you are a manager.
    This is the digital age's equivalent to a paper pusher.

  72. no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My outlook inbox at work right now is over 1000 unread.

    Email is bullshit. Of all the tools we have at our disposal it is literally the most useless and that's when it's used appropriately.

    As administrators we get automated emails from dozens of different systems that we cannot turn off from our side, too, so I have literally hundreds and thousands of unread robo-emails that I keep around in case someone 11 months down the road wants to pull some BS and tries to say I made a mistake, etc, records keeping reasons.

    I have better things to do than read my email every morning, sorry, that's the situation the company has created.

    And god forbid you get caught in a reply-all chain, THE WORST.

  73. email replies. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I respond to every email that deserves a reply at work. I delete far more emails than I reply to. Between junk mail, "marketing emails" and just copy the world just in case emails. Most mail doesnt deserve a reply

  74. Attention is Saturated by ripvlan · · Score: 2

    To the person who sends me 5 emails before I arrive in the office each morning, along with immediately followup "did you get this?" --- yes I'm ignoring you. I have other things to do. You send too much email and you're pushy.

    Many times I don't respond to an email because I'm stuck. I don't have an answer to the question asked and my only response would be "I don't know what next steps are." And many times the problem takes care of itself before I respond or the issue is no longer an issue (only the important stuff gets done).

    I used to work at a very large organization and the volume of email is incredible. People cc you just because. I would receive tons of email that was directed at no-one - directed at "the void." I didn't reply because there were 66 people on the To line - who owns it ? Not me. Thanks for the Notice.

    But email to me I generally reply right away. Unless I knew to strategically delay my response because I was given other priorities. And I had a lot going on - so I only read email once every hour or so. It was like a FB/Twitter feed. There's always an update - so I batch processed email. Sorry that I couldn't Like your individual post. I have to prioritize thinking about your problem against my other tasks. Has anything changed in 50 years?!

    And sometimes your problem just isn't important enough. suck it.

    1. Re:Attention is Saturated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's the problem with that approach, though.

      If YOU can't answer the sender's question, maybe SOMEONE ELSE can. Sender has no way of knowing that you can't answer the question, and there may be consequences to asking someone else.

  75. You can email me all you want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Im under no obligation to respond nor care whether or not you think Im rude.

  76. I ignore SMS/Texts. Have them blocked. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't answer the phone from unknown callers. Leave a message.

    I don't see SMS/texts. You are free to try, but they are blocked on my plans. If you hit my google-voice number, I won't see it for months or longer, if ever.

    If you want to communicate with me, there are 2 ways.
    * email
    * email to setup a time/place/conference call to meet

    SMS is a black hole. Useless. No way to stop spammers.

    With email, I have excellent controls. The server-side spam filters are working pretty well - 200 emails a day, 5 matter. Back when I had a 9-5 job, I'd see 300 emails daily with about 20 that I needed to handle. The rest were FYI, which needed to be read and understood.

    I don't use social networks.
    I don't use slack/reddit/twitter or any of those.
    I am on IRC, sometimes. ZNC makes it appear that I'm always there. I'll skim the last few pages of messages, sometimes.

    These days I self-host most services, including email. RSS is still amazing.

  77. Approx 391,000 unread emails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have approximately 391,000 unread emails, and that only keeps growing. That is from a 15 year period, and many are nagios, fail2ban, system auto apt upgrades, and other notifications, but quite a few are real people who have gotten lost in the mix.

  78. Re:Organization -- server queue theory by HGG · · Score: 1

    "An overflowing inbox is a sign of difficulty with this skill." Maybe in your world, but not for many people.

    In many (most?) cases this is about good old server-queue theory, with you (the reader of email) being the server. When the workforce is cut over and over, the remaining staff get what used to be many people's workloads. Eventually they can't keep up.

    In my case: Before I retired I was working with several (more than 5) wholly distinct intra-coprorate communities -- each with its own email chains and questions and initiatives. I was generally a key participant in each community, meaning my input was required. It took 2-3 hrs/day to work through them on a good day.

    But if I was out on vacation or sick or traveling or at training or at a conference, then the email stacked up. When I got back, the backlog was in hundreds or thousands. The normal daily load did not stop to wait for me to catch up. I might throw in a couple more hours for a few days to catch up, but I also needed think time to plan the next project, attend meetings, deal with personnel issues, etc.

    So despite best intentions, you fall behind. You can't even scan it to find what is critical. Certainly not enough time to send apology notes. Eventually you give up on that entire tranche -- just delete the hundreds or thousands of lost causes and start fresh. Why delete? In my context if anyone needed my input from that tranche, they would resend it and call or stop by my office to make sure I got to it.

  79. Wrong about rude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (It turns out that people who are rude online tend to be rude offline, too.)

    Bullshit. Most people that are rude online turn into very meek and submissive people when confronted offline. The fact that they cannot see the people they are communicating with makes them spew bile all around them, but when you look them in their eyes, their tune changes drastically.

    People who are rude offline has no reason to change online, they are assholes in either medium.

  80. Fuck Yeah, America!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because if theres ONE thing Americans are know for its their politeness.

    Eat a cock Ms. Manners!

  81. Stupidly flaunt a public persona by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stupidly put your contact information on a public site.
    Sign up for marketing newsletters
    Sign up for many unneeded phone apps with your email address
    Let people connect your email address with your social media profile
    Let Oracle Data Cloud connect your real life name, address, etc with facebook and email address.
    Hint, there's an opt out......https://marketingplatform.google.com/about/data-studio/

    Use all those targeted big data coupons like the creepy one from Target predicting a girl's pregnacy https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-target-figured-out-a-teen-girl-was-pregnant-before-her-father-did/#1b302b8d6668

    Cut the cord one app at a time.

  82. Email rules for the sensible person by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

    1) Always send your PGP Key early on in the email thread.
    2) Always use someone's PGP Key to encrypt an email message.
    3) Always digitally sign your emails.
    4) Return emails within 3 hours.
    5) When requested to setup secure mail for an employee or client, do it!
    6) Never use Outlook, it's a pile of crap.
    7) Always recommend Open Source tools.
    8) Always recommend a secure email provider.
    9) Never leave emails in your inbox that can be sorted, labelled and filed.
    10) Be rude when it's called for, never protect feelings over common sense.

    Following these rules, will leave you successful.

  83. Don't let Email run your life by ghoul · · Score: 1

    I regularly switch off my email when I have to concentrate. Every few hours I will open my inbox - reply to what can be replied in less than 2 minutes, what I just need to be informed of I glance over and move to saved folder if I will need the information later, and anything which actually needs me to gather information and compose a longer email or hold a meeting etc i flag and move to a to do folder. Everyday I have a block of time to go over my todo folder and get as much done or scheduled as possible.
    For short things which are urgent like whats the password to this server I ask people to ping me on IM. Of course I also switch off IM when I am trying to do deep thinking.
    For real emergencies people can always call but again I tell them the phone is for emergencies. If they call me too many times for not real emergencies I start responding to their calls with the autotext - In a meeting will call you back.
    There are of course exceptions- family calling I will pick. Or if I am waiting for someone to call back with certain information that I am waiting for I will pick.
    But you have to protect your time. if your focus is on being responsive then it wont be on being productive. Sure there are jobs where it is more important to be responsive than productive - those are mostly jobs where your role is a coordinator - but if your role needs deep thinking being responsive should not be your priority.
    With this system End of most days I have 0 unread emails though I may have many todos. Of course this is for genuine work mails. Spam gets filtered away and I dont even look at it before it gets deleted.

    --
    **Life is too short to be serious**
  84. I Once (in the '90s) Read (on Slashdot IIRC) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that 99.95% of all email was spam, and if you left out Torrents this was a majority of Internet traffic.
    I've never seen this. I immediately demanded to know what was happening to my 1/20th of a percent REAL MAIL.

    I've NEVER seen email that wasn't spam. Friend(s) want to communicate over FacingBook Messingmess, they won't go near email, that's for spam!

    When I hadda "professional" job (again, in the '90s), I sometimes used to get "real" email. Very seldom did any of it require actual action. When the CEO broadcast to the entire outfit his Friday-afternoon missives which took 45 minutes to read and were written in execuspeak (which I don't understand) I quickly learned to ignore those too.

  85. Re:Organization -- server queue theory by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    This reminds me of a story of the postal service in Spain. A number of years ago, they got so far behind delivering mail, that they just dumped truckloads of it into the trash and started over. That might have worked for the postal service, but not for the people who were expecting mail.

    Yeah, sometimes companies cut too many people. There are cases of dysfunction so bad that even a good manager can't keep up. At that point, it's time to move on.

  86. Duh by zmooc · · Score: 1

    Of course it is rude. So is sending me an email.

    --
    0x or or snor perron?!
  87. How's life in the hypocrite lane?

  88. Agreed by jf_moreira · · Score: 1

    My Inbox is ALWAYS at zero unread messages. Even a few days after when I return from vacation. I really don't know what is the big deal, you have to find slices of time and prioritize what needs response to what doesn't (example: automatic alert messages does not, since I work managing IT Infrastructure services). My priority is always my Inbox, or Skype pop-ups. Common, people, learn to manage your time. Resume is available under request. :)

  89. Here's your solution: by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 1

    Solution: Whitelist.

    Don't allow email to come in without registering with you first.

    Problem solved.

    --

    Lodragan Draoidh
    The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
  90. Maybe it's your passive aggression? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you slap a post-it note on the middle of my screen, you can rely on me smearing boogers across your screen, mouse and keyboard, and actively deleting your email.

  91. Rude is subjective. by laxr5rs · · Score: 1

    I'm Release Engineer. I get all my "to dos" through Slack in our company and almost never through email. If you want to get in contact with me, then you go though the channels I frequent. If you think I'm rude because you don't understand how I work? Well, maybe you should talk to me.