

Don't Suck At Email - andrewhyde
http://markosullivan.ca/dont-suck-at-email/

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

~~~
artaak
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.

~~~
derefr
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).

------
dkokelley
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.

------
Deestan
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
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.

~~~
Deestan
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.

------
j_baker
Another thing: don't cc everyone that _could possibly_ want to know about your
email's existence. That annoys me to no end.

~~~
nagrom
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!

~~~
tome
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.

~~~
tokenadult
The clients have degraded because many list managers are inconsistent with how
headers on list messages are set.

<http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html>

There isn't any way, for a given client, to ensure consistent behavior when
replying to all lists, and for the lists there isn't any reasonable
expectation that all users will have the same client behavior. Things are a
mess all around now.

~~~
tome
Mutt lets you define mailing lists, so if you press list reply (Ctrl-l by
default) it will know whether to reply to the address the message was sent to.

------
johndoe77
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
I guess the days are gone when top posting is considered bad.

