
Email Introduction Etiquette - jaf12duke
http://blog.42floors.com/email-introduction-protocol/
======
tvladeck
If you're like me, and sometimes jump to the discussion before reading the
article, please go ahead and read the article. It's one of those rare ones
that is truly a summary of itself: super short, information dense, with every
part having meaning and nothing else.

This protocol is super simple, and allows for very efficient transfer of
information without putting people in uncomfortable situations.

~~~
jorde
Here's another take on the subject: double opt-in introduction by Fred Wilson:
[http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/11/the-double-optin-
introductio...](http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/11/the-double-optin-
introduction.html)

~~~
SonicSoul
so if one person opts in, and the other does not, do you just tell the first:
"sorry he wasn't interested in meeting you"?

~~~
nrs26
This has always been my issue with these e-mails.

Either way, it will be awkward, and checking in with someone to see if they
can be introduced just adds another e-mail to the chain.

Maybe I'm just overly choosy with who I introduce, but I have never had
someone not respond, or say "No, I don't want to be introduced to that
person." It just always seems to add an unnecessary step.

------
peterwwillis
> makes a specific ask

You mean ask a specific question? Or is this silicon valley jargon?

edit:

Through the power of The Googles I now realize he could have been using the
stock market form of 'ask'. It makes some sense since you're asking for an
investment. Not that I like it any better...

    
    
       The price a seller is willing to accept for a security, 
       also known as the offer price. Along with the price, the 
       ask quote will generally also stipulate the amount of the 
       security willing to be sold at that price.

[http://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/ask.asp](http://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/ask.asp)

~~~
gcv
It's nasty language change which has spread, kind of like "I spoke to she
about that problem" is spreading. Not specific to SV, but extremely common
here.

~~~
pbreit
"ask" as a noun is fine (even outside of finance). I've never seen or heard
"spoke to she" and Google doesn't seem to turn up anything.

~~~
gcv
I hear it occasionally. I hear its equally-appalling equivalent all the time:
"Please join Mary and I in welcoming John to our team."

Of course, prescriptive grammar is for the birds, anyway.

~~~
andrewaylett
That's surely just an over-reaction to people being told "and _I_ " in
response to a sentence like "Mary and me would like to welcome John to the
team". You can't win.

~~~
aptwebapps
As a kid, you get 'Me and Mary' as the subject corrected to 'Mary and I' for
reasons of both grammar and politeness. Some people don't understand or
remember the compound reason and just use 'and I' everywhere.

------
goblin89
Can anyone clarify—why BCC?

More precisely, what purpose does moving Mark to BCC, and then acknowledging
that and addressing him in the letter, serve? Why not just exclude him from
the conversation completely, or leave in CC if you're still addressing him?

~~~
dudus
Most people don't make a good use of BCC.

Another instance where it is useful is when asking a question at a mail list
but asking that anyone who answers only addresses the you not the whole email
list.

Just send the email with the list in BCC, and that's gonna be automatic.

~~~
yuvadam
That's a pretty rude and selfish way to approach a mailing list.

I wouldn't be surprised if such a question goes on to be ignored.

~~~
cbr
There are uses:

    
    
        From: me
        To: me
        Bcc: foo-enthusiasts
        Subject: [survey] what's your favorite version?
    
        What's your favorite version of foo?  Write me off-list
        and I'll post back to summarize.

~~~
teddyh
From RFC 1855, _Netiquette Guidelines_ , Section 3.1.2, _Mailing List
Guidelines_ :

> If you ask a question, be sure to post a summary. When doing so, truly
> summarize rather than send a cumulation of the messages you receive.

[http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.html#page-10](http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.html#page-10)

------
joelandren
This is spot on, but this is still a PITA for everyone involved. There should
still be a better way.

~~~
livingtech
Yes, I fully expected this to be an article about how to "fix" this problem
situation. I have to say that I have been in a few of the positions in this
sort of chain, and now if I'm the inviter, I always just CC both. Not
forwarding on the entire chain feels dishonest. (Obviously the invitee doesn't
need to read the whole thread, but it's there for posterity, and to give
context.) If the "busy person" is so rude that they wouldn't want the
introduction in the first place, then they can be that rude themselves, and
not leave it to the middle person, IMO. If they're not rude but not
interested, then they can take the 2 minutes it takes to compose a "bowing
out" email. Sheesh.

~~~
wpietri
As a frequent introducer, I would never forward the whole chain.

Consider the case of a friend looking for a job. If they come to me asking for
an introduction, they may be open with me about things they wouldn't tell a
stranger in the first minute of contact. E.g., concerns about the target
company, fears they might not measure up, things going on in their life. It's
hard for me to know what they don't want shared, I want to minimize the risk a
violation of trust, and I don't want to guess at what the recipient might have
an issue with. So I'll always write my own intro or ask for something I can
forward.

Also, if someone dumps some unwelcome request from a pal in my lap, I'd be
irritated that I had to do the work of bowing out. It's their friend, not
mine, so it shouldn't be my problem. For that reason, I always ask permission
to do an intro unless I have strong reason to believe the intro would be
welcome. (E.g., if somebody told me they're looking for developers, I'll do
intros without confirming an interest in each specific person.)

~~~
danielweber
I once worked at a place where the board members were having a discussion
_about_ the CEO, and then of the board members decided to just cc: said CEO
into the conversation at random, because "well we are talking about him and he
deserves to know."

That board was not well-functioning.

------
mathattack
As someone who does a lot of introducing, if someone already owes me a favor,
sometimes I try to cut the middle step of, "Would you talk to X?" and just cc:
them both, but I realize it's a bit presumptuous.

As the OP rightfully suggests, it's the little things in etiquette that are
important.

~~~
aroch
I do this as well, though it seems in my field this is fine and acceptable
behavoir (Unless you're from a competing research group...)

------
bentcorner
I find the social dynamics of To/CC/BCC really interesting. You only see it in
Emails and it doesn't exist in any other communication medium. Most social
communication platforms I can think of the top of my head only really support
the "To" part of email.

~~~
digikata
BCC is pretty close to the social dynamics of in-person conversations that
sound like: "Don't tell <person> I told you but FYI ...".

~~~
klochner
It's not typically used that way -- bcc is used to prevent disclosing all
recipient emails, and it also prevents spamming all recipients on replies:

    
    
        to:  sender_address@domain.com
        bcc: recipient1@, recipient2@, . . . 
    

Ever been part of a giant cc list that everyone replies to and hammers your
inbox? bcc would have avoided that.

------
jqgatsby
I've often been tripped up by the semantics of the word "meet" in email
introductions, as in "Nice to meet you". Everyone seems to want to reserve the
word "meet" for actual in-person meeting, and I've seen such constructs as:
"Pleased to 'meet' you" "Pleased to e-meet you" "Pleased to virtually meet
you", etc

I'd love to hear how the language-sensitive hacker news crowd deals with this
issue, and also what tortured constructions you've seen recently. Currently
I'm using "pleased to make your acquaintance" or "thanks Jim for the intro",
but neither of those is completely satisfactory.

~~~
gk1
I say "nice to meet you" or "nice to be introduced to you." If I'm feeling
particularly edgy then I say "nice to be intro'd to you."

------
lumens
It's nice to have a reference like this, but as the comments on this thread
display, everyone has their own preferred variant(s).

It's silly to think that there is a "one size fits all" email intro framework.
Different contexts require different amounts of background information and
introducer participation.

Really, the greater theme at play is the need for people to think more about
how their actions (here, nearly effortless electronic ones) effect others.
Sending email intros without understanding the benefits and detriments to both
sides is impolite at best and downright rude at worst.

The Golden Rule applies, even to email.

------
JaakkoP
Great, actionable advice! I've been using Gagan Biyani's "forwardable email"
as a guideline, which is very similar. [https://www.udemy.com/raising-capital-
for-startups/](https://www.udemy.com/raising-capital-for-startups/)

It seems that the likelihood of the email being read increases the shorter
email is. At the same time, I have found the shorter the email, the harder it
is to write.

------
rcavezza
Related: One of my favorite articles on how to send an email introduction:
[http://jfleeg.tumblr.com/post/21231029406/the-art-of-
making-...](http://jfleeg.tumblr.com/post/21231029406/the-art-of-making-an-
email-intro-photo-above)

------
chinpokomon
This is generally the protocol I use. I like to use BCC during the handoff if
the referral is coming to me. I'm surprised at how often I get pulled into
conversations that I don't need to be a part of, because someone doesn't BCC
me in return.

------
stevewillows
Anytime I have worked for a larger organization, I wished they would have a
quick session on best practices / etiquette with communication.

------
Myrmornis
The "fresh email" from Mark fails to satisfy the author's own prescription: it
does not "make a specific ask".

------
kanamekun
This proposed workflow reads like a product spec for a great web app...
hopefully someone builds a website which does this exactly!

~~~
bluetidepro
Do you think we really need a web app that does something this simple that can
be accomplished via any existing email app/product? And I'm not trying to be a
dick by saying that, I'm actually curious. I feel like I see sites that would
do something like this (do something general, something that could easily be
done with an existing app/product) a bunch of times each week that seem neat
for a min, but then I completely forget about them. It always ends up being
that the existing app/product you use a 100x a day is just easier to
use/remember.

------
auggierose
Wow, this is anal.

You can learn a lot about people by observing their etiquette.

(I am pretty sure what the first comment to this comment will be)

------
pagade
Nice. Also learned how and when to really use BCC.

------
briankim
Thanks, the BCC bit was interesting.

------
tfigueroa
A fine article, but - maybe this makes me a jerk - a bit obvious.

~~~
dsjoerg
You'd think that, but the things that are obvious to you are not obvious to
everyone <\--- which itself is a thing I used to think would be obvious to
everyone.

------
omarkatzen
This is why it's unreasonable to have any faith in the contemporary Silicon
Valley. Cold-calling used to work out there, because it was full of people who
just wanted to do a good job and help each other succeed. Now, you need an
introduction because it's full of emasculated social climbers who need some
way of determining whether a person is of sufficient social status to merit 30
seconds of consideration. Because of that, the positive-feedback loops that
occur when hard-working people want each other to succeed have completely
stopped in the Valley.

~~~
wpietri
Oh, please. This intro etiquette isn't about status; it's about respect for
people's time.

People still generally want to help people succeed. But people are also
_busy_. I do intros like this pretty much any time I talk to two people who
are likely to benefit by talking. I'd guess I average 2 a week.

I've been in San Francisco 14 years, and I think this place is even easier to
navigate now than when I got here. Few cold call anymore, but that's more
because we've got better things than phones. Meetups, conferences, mailing
lists, on-line groups, and Twitter all allow people to connect in ways much
better than strangers using a loud mechanical bell to interrupt somebody in
the middle of whatever they were actually trying to do.

~~~
omarkatzen
_People still generally want to help people succeed._

Doubt it. Rents and house prices are at a record high due to horrible NIMBY
regulations and no one's doing a damn thing about it. Startup equity slices
are tiny, and the old Silicon Valley guarantee (that working for a startup
meant the founders would take a personal interest in setting you up to be a
founder in your next gig) is long gone. VCs are funding lots of well-connected
rich idiots, but if you don't come from the "right" social milieu, it's nearly
impossible to get.

What used to be a quirky and different society is now a shitty knock-off of
Manhattan that copies its worst parts but none of its good ones.

 _Few cold call anymore, but that 's more because we've got better things than
phones._

s/call/email/g. You know what I mean. Obviously _calling_ someone you don't
know is considered pretty rude these days.

~~~
wpietri
Evidence? I don't see any of that as worse than 15 years ago except the rents.
And that I'd blame on demand spikes more than nimbyism.

