SurvivingEmail
Seven Reasons Why I Didn’t Respond to Your Email
By jennifer j. rose
To: <undisclosed recipients>
From: Lawyer
Re: Something really important
Dear Friends,
Attached is a Really Important Proposal. Please
read it over, and let me know your thoughts.
The sender was perplexed that the response rate to his
email was absolutely zero. What went wrong? Concealing
the names of the recipients is fine (and in fact, recommended)
for sending out jokes and announcements, but it’s
definitely not the way to elicit thoughtful responses.
The number of recipients could be counted on one hand,
but the recipients had no way of knowing whether they
were one of five or one of a hundred. The sender didn’t
even show the recipients the courtesy of addressing each
by name. Why would anyone feel motivated to respond to
an email like this? The sender didn’t want the
recipients to know who else would be receiving the message.
How difficult would it have been for him to send separate
messages to each individual, instead of a single mass-mailing
to <undisclosed recipients>?
TO: jennifer, Bob, Ted, Carol, Alice, and 25 other
named recipients
FROM: Lawyer
Re: A question
You’re asking 30 people for an answer? What are
you doing, taking a vote? If you’re asking 29 other
people for an answer, what’s the rush for me to
respond? Why should I respond at all? Let the other 29
recipients respond.
TO: Jeff, Yolanda
FROM: Lawyer
RE: Scheduling
CC: jennifer
Once again, the sender couldn’t understand why
jennifer hadn’t replied. Was the message trapped
in her spam filter or lost in space? Was she intentionally
ignoring the sender? Was she just having another hissy
fit?
None of the above! She received the email, all right,
but why should she waste her time responding to email
that was not even addressed to her? If the sender wanted
her reply, then he should’ve directed the email
to her along with the other named recipients, instead
of just copying her in.
TO: jennifer
FROM: Lawyer@aol.com
RE: Blah Blah Blah
Please respond to me at Lawyer@SomeOtherAddress.com,
because I never check my AOL address.
You didn’t have the courtesy to send this email
from the very address to which you’d like me to
direct my response? Are you some incapable of sending
the email from that very address instead of the one you
never check? Why should I do your work for you? Are you
lazy or just plain stupid?
TO: jennifer
FROM: Lawyer
RE: Fwd: Nothing in Particular
You’ve forwarded a joke to me. You’ve thanked
me for a response. You’re telling me that the sun
is shining, and the birds are singing. There is absolutely
nothing in your message that demands a response, so why
should I send one? Do you really need the reassuring
touch from me that your joke was funny, that I’m
thanking you for thanking me, or that I really care about
your weather report?
TO: jennifer
FROM: Lawyer
RE: Why Haven’t You Responded?
Let’s see. Sure, 36 hours have now elapsed since
you sent me that email on Saturday night. Sure, it deserved
a response, but there was absolutely nothing that compelled
a response within minutes of the time you hit “send.” You
wouldn’t expect me to answer the phone at 9 p.m.
on Saturday night, nor would you dream of getting a response
to an old-fashioned snail mail letter within minutes
of the time you placed it in the hands of the U.S. Postal
Service, so why should email be any different?
TO: Lawyer
FROM: jennifer
RE: My Response to Your E-mail
*** ATTENTION***
Your email is being returned to you because there was
a problem with its delivery. Your mailbox is full.
You’re asking me to play the challenge-response
game for the privilege of responding to email that
you sent to me? Your spam blocker is rejecting me.
jennifer j. rose receives her email at jjrose@jjrose.com in Morelia, Michoacán, Mexico.
© Copyright 2009, American
Bar Association.
