Don't Suck At Email

http://markosullivan.ca/dont-suck-at-email/

by andrewhyde • 17 years ago

43 24 17 years ago

lazyant• 17 years ago

Instead of using 'unread' another option is to archive all messages and leave only in the inbox the pending ones.

ahlatimer• 17 years ago

I do the same thing. It makes it easy to see, at a glance, what emails still need a response or some action on my part since I sort by date, not status.

artaak• 17 years ago

It seems that there is more work associated with your option. If A = all emails, P = number of pending and A>>P, then

his method: click "unread" P times

yours: click "archive" A-P times

A-P >> P

His method is less work.

bretpiatt• 17 years ago

I also use the unread status for stuff I could go back and respond to, I then archive stuff older than 90 days in my inbox. Having 3 months of email I can search on my BlackBerry is handy when I'm away from a computer.

derefr• 17 years ago

Assuming maximal interface fluency with GMail, you actually perform [on the order of] the same number of input actions for both. Remember, in order to take care of the messages, there has to be a point at which you initially read them. You can then combine the read + file steps into a single triage step.

In triage method A (his method), you first page through all your unread mail (1 click/keystroke to open the first, then A - 1 clicks/keystrokes to advance to the next conversation without returning to the inbox, and 1 final click/keystroke to go back to the inbox.) Then, once you've seen them, you select the mail you want (P clicks requiring dexterity, or A+P keystrokes; it's a compromise) and mark them as read (1 keystroke.) M_a = O(A + P) = O(A). (Because, as you said, A >> P.)

In triage method B (the "naive" method), you page through all your unread mail, and at each step, you either advance to the next conversation, or archive the current conversation and advance to the next conversation. (1 click/keystroke either way.) M_b = O(A).

byrneseyeview3• 17 years ago

Or stop using your inbox as a todo list. You wouldn't give people the ability to insert Viagra jokes into your normal todo list; why would you let them send whatever they wanted to a todo list for your most pressing issues?

roundsquare3• 17 years ago

So, instead, you put "reply to mail xyz" on your todo list for every email you want to respond to but can't respond to right away?

Seems like to many steps to me.

roundsquare3• 17 years ago

Yeah, I love this method, but if your in a high email environment it requires you to be ruthlessly efficient.

Instead, I flag emails I want to respond to/come back to soon. Also, any emails either a) directly to me (i.e. not to a mailing list I'm on) or b) from my manager(s) gets automatically flagged. Once a day I go through and clean up all my flagged emails.

j_baker• 17 years ago

Another thing: don't cc everyone that could possibly want to know about your email's existence. That annoys me to no end.

Imprecate• 17 years ago

In a work setting I think it's fine as long as there's some level of interest. Obviously it's a balancing act, but I like to keep my direct manager and peers working on the same component informed about test plans, etc.

One other issue with CCing everyone is that you always end up with someone throwing their two cents in about minor issues when they aren't even invested in the project.

byrneseyeview3• 17 years ago

That's why you can have more than one email in the 'To' field:

To: You want to read this.

CC: You may want to refer to this.

dkarl• 17 years ago

Good luck with that. People at my company regularly send out meeting invites to 3-4x as many people as are actually desired at the meeting. As with email ccs, It's a CYA thing, to prevent other people from claiming ignorance when the shit hits the fan later.

nagrom• 17 years ago

The email thing that infuriates me is when people send something to a mailing list that I am on, that they think that I should read and copy the mail to me as well. At work, we have people sending the same mail to three mailing lists and then I receive a fourth copy too. Aarrggh!

For a tool that has been around for the last 30-odd years, I am amazed that people are as bad at email as they are. And I'm not talking here about secretaries, or non-technical staff. I'm talking about scientists in a research institute!

tome2• 17 years ago

I blame the mail clients. Most don't have a "reply to list" feature, so respondents end up "group reply"ing in order to make sure the mailing list features in the list of To: addresses.

It's lazy, and I hate it, but it gets the job done for them.

dkokelley• 17 years ago

Rule #8: Don't CC people who don't know each other. Use BCC for that. Nothing bothers me more with email than seeing my email listed next to hundreds others belonging to people I don't know. It's a personal privacy thing. I don't know these people. I don't want them to have my email address.

Deestan2• 17 years ago

A minor addition to #2, in which he says that you should only have one question:

If you communicate with someone who only bothers to skim your email (tech support and sales people rarely impress here), or with people with limited reading comprehension for any other reason:

State that one question three times throughout the email, each formulated in a different way but with the exact same meaning.

sokoloff• 17 years ago

His point #2 is only have 3 sentences in TOTAL, and make the last one the one question you have for them.

Your comment is by no means a minor addition to #2, but more of a refutation.

Deestan2• 17 years ago

I do not refute it. In the general case, you really should stick to three sentence total and possibly one question at the end.

I provided a special (but annoyingly common) case where it is useful to diverge from the rule. The case is where there is a low probability that the reader will understand any given sentence.

Given that the reader has an estimated 60% chance to understand any given sentence, if you repeat the content in three different sentences, you get a 94% chance that at least one of them will be understood.

As an actual example, I give a shortened transcript from a recent discussion with PayPal support. My first 3 emails were all variations of:

    I keep getting "The card cannot be used, try again 
    later" when trying to pay.  This has been going on 
    for months.  What should I do?

2-3 sentences and one question; they were completely unable to understand any of it (likely because the support people are paid by the number of tickets they reply to and just skim any incoming case). I estimated their reading comprehension hit rate to about 30%, which means I had to fire at least 7 explanations at them to get a >90% chance of success. This is my 4th email to them, which was rewarded with an actual helpful answer:

    Hi.  Thank you for the answer, but since you also 
    recommend "just try again at a later time" it seems 
    you are missing a vital point I'm trying to make:
    
    I have been "trying again" for months.

    I have been trying again weeks later several times.
    This has been going on for months.

    As you recommended, I tried repeating the process at
    a later date, but this did not help.

    [skip 5 more reformulations]    
    
    Please let me know typically how long this "security-
    related" issue takes to pass through PayPal's bowels.
    How much "later time" do I have to wait to try again?
    
    [signature]

When trimming the fat, this email is identical to the first one which has 3 sentences, the last one of which is a question.

johndoe77• 17 years ago

If you have taken the time to send an email, give the recipient time to read it. Do not send the email and immediately walk over or send and IM asking the same question.

Pistos2• 17 years ago

I guess the days are gone when top posting is considered bad.

Don't Suck At Email

Related Stories