I've always been fascinated by people who seem to have this problem. I've heard multiple individuals describe responding to emails as an infinite attention suck sort of like doomscrolling. For me, email is 99% updates/promotions, 0.99% real humans that I can hit with a one liner, and 0.01% humans that really require a thoughtful response. Something must happen to these email people where they grow prominent enough and advertise their address enough that they get inundated with genuine email that is all from thoughtful humans? Feels like a problem I would enjoy having, at least for a while.
I can give you an idea of why it's so terrible. I'm a professor that teaches multiple classes, I run our department's grad programs, I do various kinds of service activities within the university, I'm the editor of a journal, I collaborate on research with others, and I get media inquiries from time to time. That's the professional side. I have a family, a house, and just lots of other things that require email correspondence.
It's not that the volume of messages needing a reply is so large (though sometimes that's an issue too) but rather the time and energy required is so large. Most things don't allow for a quick one-liner off the top of your head and then going back to work. In some cases, you have to do research and make sure stuff is followed up.
My situation is by no means unique. Be thankful if you don't have to deal with it, because a lot of us do, and it's not by choice.
What you describe is a job that requires a lot of thoughtful, or at least meaningful, answers to a lot of people. If each answer leads to a context switch, this lands hard on any other work you do. On the comms side, this may well be a full time job; or more.
But the problem has nothing to do with email. The problem is with combining what sounds like a full time management job with a full time teaching job. In fact email makes it possible to batch those requests instead of always being interrupted at an external schedule.
And sorry -- I am not trying to tell you how to live your life, what comes next is just an engineering observation. But if one is overloaded the solution is almost always to ... reduce load. Transfer some duties and/or delegate more tasks and/or hire someone to help, etc. This is usually not easy, but IME most folks under overload who say they cannot reduce it either (1) did not try to reduce it in earnest or (2) are micromanagers who are willing to delegate only partway while maintaining the role in final decisions. My 2c.
You're not wrong, but university professors don't necessarily have the authority or budget to hire assistants. And much of the stuff they deal with absolutely requires their unique skills: delegation leads to errors and omissions with serious consequences.
My mom simply did not respond to emails from students. Or even her faculty. It worked fine for her, except many people considered it rude, but nothing bad happened otherwise. She had an office, an actual one, and whenever it was important enough, people went to the office.
Agree with you but would add that even on the professional managerial side it is indeed a luxury - yes for many people it would be possible, but there's also many people (in startups, or small businesses, or not small but struggling businesses) whose options are as limited as teachers.
Some of whom might have good options for changing jobs, or good hopes of things improving in the near future, but for many it would be the lesser evil compared to trying to find a different job with the same positives (whether salary or other motivation) but without those negatives.
I'm a retired software manager. Email was inherent to the job as the primary way to communicate with people in far-flung countries. I'm guessing I spent 20% of my time in my inbox. Unfortunately, it wasn't in consecutive, large blocks but minutes of time interspersed with meetings, reading, etc. I tried and failed to read email only in larger sessions (although I did sit next to a manager on a plane once who plowed through their email in a single 3-hour session).
When I retired, it took me several years to refine my email use. I finally figured out Google inbox with Primary, Update, etc. tabs were my friend. I had to give up the habit of treating each email with intent. Maybe 1% require a thoughtful response, 10% are worth reading and the rest can be ignored. That was not true for work email, though.
I’m a software manager at present - honestly I just ignore email. I do get some emails from customers, but they’re supposed to be communicating through proper channels so their customer success managers need to at minimum be on cc. So if anything is important people can Slack me (including to say “check your email for…”), and if there’s an action needed, I’ll click the little bookmark to add the message to the “Later” section till the issue has been addressed. I won’t in any way claim that I’m well organized, but I am proud that I don’t need to spend more than 20 minutes a week on email, because I hate email.
Do you have a school age child? My inbox is flooded with school updates, fund raisers, random questions, and is double when my two kids aren't at the same school.
It generally tends to happen if you either do enough stuff publicly, or own a business.
It's always nice when people reach out but it can also kinda tend to pile up and become a source of feelings of guilt about stuff you didn't reply to (and all of the sudden it's 16 months later and replying this late feels awkward).
My problem isn't with email or Slack. It's with WhatsApp and Telegram. It's the official channel for many things now, except it's not one channel, it's 50 or so. Wedding invites, family dinner invites, everything goes into there. They look no different to the overembellished spam about how (insert race) puts AIDS blood in our butter.
REALLY IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENTS regarding my daughters' exams and schooling etc are in Telegram as well, sometimes WhatsApp. Some schools are well aware of the problem and have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars developing an app that isn't even an app, so now we have to head into yet another app-site to pick up the kids and get updates on schooling.
The good thing about Discord at least is I can be sure to ignore 100% of it and opt in any time I like.
The thing about emails is if I get too much spam from someone, I can unsubscribe. Same with social media. But I can't just block the gullible spammer uncle.
> Some schools are well aware of the problem and have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars developing an app that isn't even an app, so now we have to head into yet another app-site to pick up the kids and get updates on schooling.
Our local school seems to switch apps every year, steadily getting worse with each update until this year when they switched to something that's the least-bad of the lot.
Every time, I start thinking to myself: maybe I can just fucking write an app for them to use that wouldn't be a usability nightmare. But then I come to my senses, and realize that I absolutely don't want to maintain an app for a single customer, set up email, sms, etc., store data safely in compliance with the various regulations. So I just go back to grumbling.
For a moment I think, maybe I'm exaggerating. So I open up Telegram.
I wish HN allowed me to drop images, but basically, there's this "NEW SCHOOL TRANSITION" channel for my daughter who's switching schools.
95% of the channel is just user join spam. Yesterday someone dropped several PDFs. The title of these files is something like OZ36824106181121.pdf
Wtf is this file? I open it and it's a list of textbooks to buy. The school shop is open 29 Dec - 5 Jan, except in weekends. But some groups are to buy these books after 20 Jan. Am I in that group?
There is no CTA - do I need to buy this and when? We have a textbook borrowing scheme. Does the new school not do textbook borrowing?
This is not my only child. This is how DBTC gets me.
It greatly depends on your job, and it doesn’t have to be a glamorous job, just one where people request things of you or you of them. For example, a friend is a corporate buyer, somewhat low in his organization, and receives about 120 emails from humans each workday. (His strategy is to select all the emails he will handle that day, put them in a folder, and call himself done when that folder is empty. I.e., he almost never sends a same day response.)
> For me, email is 99% updates/promotions, 0.99% real humans
That sounds like personal email more than the work email discussed in the article. And if that's truly the split of your work email, seems like all you need is some server side inbox filters to manage that.
Work email will be very different from job to job as well. Many orgs have basically declared bankruptcy on email and moved peofessional communication to other channels.
For the last decade my work email has been basically notifications, with sometimes a single or two emails thoughtfully written by a human. And that's probably because anything people expect me to read will be either in Slack/whatever chat app, in a ticket/task, or straight in a calendar invite with an agenda to get up to speed.
Funny thing is emails are now either only relevant for a few miliseconds where I only need to know what triggered it, or ultra important "we'll delete your account in 5 days" type that I absolutely don't want to miss. In a year I haven't got anything in between.
I’m with you, I’ve had a range of professional jobs, but rarely much meaningful correspondence via email. There are definitely emails that might announce some deadline or deliverable, but the “email” part of the work might be adding a calendar reminder or something, not responding to it. If feels like (I’m sure people will disagree) email would be more of a time sink for people who have a secretarial or personal assistant role, where they are being asked to do lots of little things (get me time with your boss this week type stuff). For a developer, whether IC or manager, most coordination would take place through other channels, and not be a material part of the work.
For me, the entire inbox is this DBTC folder. I have notifications set up on my smartwatch and I triage each email in real-time as it comes in. If it's urgent, I act on it. If it is important or I want to follow up, then I add it to my (separate) to-do list, with a Google tasks voice command. And otherwise I just ignore the notification and the email sits there in the inbox until I feel like dealing with it. I use the unread status and pick things off in occasional focus sessions. Some things never get "read", and that's because they don't matter. Zero bandit stuff because I know exactly what's in my inbox at any given time, at least up to what my analog brain can hold. It fits right into the old "I heard a noise. What is it?" routine humans used when we were hunter-gatherers.
Came here to say this. When I'm really pressed for time, I use the custom stars in Gmail to indicate the type of followup needed - reply, separate task, etc.
The author said they didn’t like Getting Things Done, then they almost literally reinvented Getting Things Done! Funny how sometimes an idea doesn’t click until you re-express it in your own words.
I follow the mantra "Inbox <20". Inbox 0 is not flexible enough and freestyle Inbox is not manageable in the long term.
Together with filters, freely reporting as spam/unsubscribing, my Inbox <20 becomes a sort of todo list which I can review and handle whenever needed (this include flight/hotel bookings, getting back to complex emails, etc.).
I have used something similar but for a slightly different problem. A long time ago (at the start of my career) I started using a folder called “Curious George” where I put all those really interesting emails with new ideas, trends, etc. The problem is not so much death by a thousand cuts but falling down a rabbit hole of some cool idea and losing an hour of focus. I collect all those dangerous emails and then go through them periodically. The difference is that none of these really require a direct response but some of them will result in me starting one of those annoying email chains that will steal others time - so it is much better to allocate time to read thoughtfully so I am only sending along the useful bits.
For those daily thieves of attention (described here) my approach is to use my inbox itself rather than a new folder. I leave them unread and archive the other garbage. Then I go through the unreads at a scheduled time. How well does this work for me? - not great. It works well enough but maybe I should try this idea instead. The biggest challenge with any of these methods is to develop the discipline to actually schedule and keep the time to review these things.
I've realised a few things dealing with time and attention, and devised a few strategies with varying degrees of success:
- Information consumes attention (as has been long observed).
- Corollary: excess information demands fast, cheap, regret-free rejection mechanisms. TFA describes several such approaches. The "DBTC" folder is one, but specifically refusing to use other, unmanageable, message queues (Twitter, FB, Slack, etc.) would be others. If a tool refuses to respect your boundaries, reject that tool.
- Time-blocking for low-urgency, but still significant tasks is useful. You're shifting from interrupt-driven mode to scheduled flow. This also means you can assess how your schedule relates to the incoming message flow, and whether or not that flow still exceeds your (now far more readily quantifiable) time devoted to it.
- There's still the question of how to prioritise items you're responding to. I'd suggest a rough triage method of:
1. Identifying high-priority senders (immediate family, work (management, colleagues, business relations), friends/social, and pretty much all else.
2. Randomly selecting from lower-priority queues is a way of fairly distributing your attention. If you can't do everything, sample a handful of items.
3. Quick "no"s (and learning how to phrase these delicately, if necessary) are useful. In some cases you might point the correspondent in a more useful direction. There's the physics professor's tactic of dealing with crackpot questions by directing them to one another, which preserves both attention and sanity....
My first exposure to the correspondence-limits problem came in one of the SF author Arthur C. Clarke's essay collections published in the 1970s or 1980s, in which he wrote of having had to resort to the tactic of responding to most of his own voluminous postal mail correspondence (and that international postal mail, for the most part, as he lived in Sri Lanka whilst most of his correspondents were elsewhere) with a pre-printed post-card with a set of checkboxes which answered most common inquiries. He'd already considered two further options: "Mr. Clarke regrets", and silence.
My inbox at work is an ever-growing TODO list, only it's one that is written by other people. And my "Sent" folder is a list of people I need to "chase" to make sure they did what I asked them to do. I feel like this can take up as much of your work day as you let it: Getting to 10% of the things other people want me to do and nagging people who are, themselves, doing 10% of the things others are asking them to do.
Email is an ignorable communication medium. It has lost relevance due to its ubiquity, which led to its overuse, which led to its redundancy.
There are a lot of stragglers that haven't realized it's redundancy yet, and madly spend a significant percentage of their time and effort organizing this pulsating mass of ever-changing chaos.
If you keep replying, they'll keep asking.
Cut it down to a quick squizz once a day and get in with the actual productive work.
(My experience written as universal. I'm aware there are some important emails - but I challenge that there aren't as many as you think there are)
Edited to add: you can only work on one thing at a time. It should always be the highest priority item. If something comes in via email, there's little to no likelihood that it should be jumping to the top of the pile (email is not a real-time communication platform, and people who think it is should be corrected). An email is like the first pangs of hunger: at least 24 hours from becoming important.
> I'm aware there are some important emails - but I challenge that there aren't as many as you think there are
The problem is not whether I think it's important. The problem is the customer thinking that's important. Or simply that I need to be aware of what they wrote. Or that I need to be aware of what another vendor wrote.
I'm not saying this is right, I'm saying it's where I'm currently sitting at.
That is idiotic advice. Email is absolutely not ignorable in any real business. We constantly receive important emails from customers / partners / vendors. If we ignored them then we would fail, and deservedly so. They have to be actioned quickly and with careful attention to detail.
I want to sign up for a service that charges people a penny to deliver an email to me -- otherwise the email is undeliverable. Even a minor cost to delivery will dramatically reduce spam.
> Many people have suggested strategies for dealing with this. One popular technique is Inbox Zero. The jokes about it suggests virtually nobody attains it, but I’m not even convinced it’s a virtue
I have inbox zero for personal and work emails. I can’t imagine living any other way.
Just use search. If search can't find it then the content wasn't descriptive enough and it is unimportant because the sender obviously didn't care enough to describe it properly.
Don't let lazy people make you more busy than you already are.
Sometimes the lazy people have money that you want, or are gatekeepers on getting money from others. So you have to accommodate their laziness if you want to eat.
I've always been fascinated by people who seem to have this problem. I've heard multiple individuals describe responding to emails as an infinite attention suck sort of like doomscrolling. For me, email is 99% updates/promotions, 0.99% real humans that I can hit with a one liner, and 0.01% humans that really require a thoughtful response. Something must happen to these email people where they grow prominent enough and advertise their address enough that they get inundated with genuine email that is all from thoughtful humans? Feels like a problem I would enjoy having, at least for a while.
I can give you an idea of why it's so terrible. I'm a professor that teaches multiple classes, I run our department's grad programs, I do various kinds of service activities within the university, I'm the editor of a journal, I collaborate on research with others, and I get media inquiries from time to time. That's the professional side. I have a family, a house, and just lots of other things that require email correspondence.
It's not that the volume of messages needing a reply is so large (though sometimes that's an issue too) but rather the time and energy required is so large. Most things don't allow for a quick one-liner off the top of your head and then going back to work. In some cases, you have to do research and make sure stuff is followed up.
My situation is by no means unique. Be thankful if you don't have to deal with it, because a lot of us do, and it's not by choice.
What you describe is a job that requires a lot of thoughtful, or at least meaningful, answers to a lot of people. If each answer leads to a context switch, this lands hard on any other work you do. On the comms side, this may well be a full time job; or more.
But the problem has nothing to do with email. The problem is with combining what sounds like a full time management job with a full time teaching job. In fact email makes it possible to batch those requests instead of always being interrupted at an external schedule.
And sorry -- I am not trying to tell you how to live your life, what comes next is just an engineering observation. But if one is overloaded the solution is almost always to ... reduce load. Transfer some duties and/or delegate more tasks and/or hire someone to help, etc. This is usually not easy, but IME most folks under overload who say they cannot reduce it either (1) did not try to reduce it in earnest or (2) are micromanagers who are willing to delegate only partway while maintaining the role in final decisions. My 2c.
You're not wrong, but university professors don't necessarily have the authority or budget to hire assistants. And much of the stuff they deal with absolutely requires their unique skills: delegation leads to errors and omissions with serious consequences.
My mom simply did not respond to emails from students. Or even her faculty. It worked fine for her, except many people considered it rude, but nothing bad happened otherwise. She had an office, an actual one, and whenever it was important enough, people went to the office.
You overestimate delegation opportunities for most teachers. With what money?
As for reducing: research, grad programs, journals, media inquiries - these are not optional for profs
You are accustomed to professional managerial class luxuries that are unavailable to most hard working folks
Agree with you but would add that even on the professional managerial side it is indeed a luxury - yes for many people it would be possible, but there's also many people (in startups, or small businesses, or not small but struggling businesses) whose options are as limited as teachers.
Some of whom might have good options for changing jobs, or good hopes of things improving in the near future, but for many it would be the lesser evil compared to trying to find a different job with the same positives (whether salary or other motivation) but without those negatives.
I'm a retired software manager. Email was inherent to the job as the primary way to communicate with people in far-flung countries. I'm guessing I spent 20% of my time in my inbox. Unfortunately, it wasn't in consecutive, large blocks but minutes of time interspersed with meetings, reading, etc. I tried and failed to read email only in larger sessions (although I did sit next to a manager on a plane once who plowed through their email in a single 3-hour session).
When I retired, it took me several years to refine my email use. I finally figured out Google inbox with Primary, Update, etc. tabs were my friend. I had to give up the habit of treating each email with intent. Maybe 1% require a thoughtful response, 10% are worth reading and the rest can be ignored. That was not true for work email, though.
I’m a software manager at present - honestly I just ignore email. I do get some emails from customers, but they’re supposed to be communicating through proper channels so their customer success managers need to at minimum be on cc. So if anything is important people can Slack me (including to say “check your email for…”), and if there’s an action needed, I’ll click the little bookmark to add the message to the “Later” section till the issue has been addressed. I won’t in any way claim that I’m well organized, but I am proud that I don’t need to spend more than 20 minutes a week on email, because I hate email.
Do you have a school age child? My inbox is flooded with school updates, fund raisers, random questions, and is double when my two kids aren't at the same school.
It generally tends to happen if you either do enough stuff publicly, or own a business.
It's always nice when people reach out but it can also kinda tend to pile up and become a source of feelings of guilt about stuff you didn't reply to (and all of the sudden it's 16 months later and replying this late feels awkward).
My problem isn't with email or Slack. It's with WhatsApp and Telegram. It's the official channel for many things now, except it's not one channel, it's 50 or so. Wedding invites, family dinner invites, everything goes into there. They look no different to the overembellished spam about how (insert race) puts AIDS blood in our butter.
REALLY IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENTS regarding my daughters' exams and schooling etc are in Telegram as well, sometimes WhatsApp. Some schools are well aware of the problem and have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars developing an app that isn't even an app, so now we have to head into yet another app-site to pick up the kids and get updates on schooling.
The good thing about Discord at least is I can be sure to ignore 100% of it and opt in any time I like.
The thing about emails is if I get too much spam from someone, I can unsubscribe. Same with social media. But I can't just block the gullible spammer uncle.
> Some schools are well aware of the problem and have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars developing an app that isn't even an app, so now we have to head into yet another app-site to pick up the kids and get updates on schooling.
Our local school seems to switch apps every year, steadily getting worse with each update until this year when they switched to something that's the least-bad of the lot.
Every time, I start thinking to myself: maybe I can just fucking write an app for them to use that wouldn't be a usability nightmare. But then I come to my senses, and realize that I absolutely don't want to maintain an app for a single customer, set up email, sms, etc., store data safely in compliance with the various regulations. So I just go back to grumbling.
For a moment I think, maybe I'm exaggerating. So I open up Telegram.
I wish HN allowed me to drop images, but basically, there's this "NEW SCHOOL TRANSITION" channel for my daughter who's switching schools.
95% of the channel is just user join spam. Yesterday someone dropped several PDFs. The title of these files is something like OZ36824106181121.pdf
Wtf is this file? I open it and it's a list of textbooks to buy. The school shop is open 29 Dec - 5 Jan, except in weekends. But some groups are to buy these books after 20 Jan. Am I in that group?
There is no CTA - do I need to buy this and when? We have a textbook borrowing scheme. Does the new school not do textbook borrowing?
This is not my only child. This is how DBTC gets me.
It greatly depends on your job, and it doesn’t have to be a glamorous job, just one where people request things of you or you of them. For example, a friend is a corporate buyer, somewhat low in his organization, and receives about 120 emails from humans each workday. (His strategy is to select all the emails he will handle that day, put them in a folder, and call himself done when that folder is empty. I.e., he almost never sends a same day response.)
> For me, email is 99% updates/promotions, 0.99% real humans
That sounds like personal email more than the work email discussed in the article. And if that's truly the split of your work email, seems like all you need is some server side inbox filters to manage that.
Work email will be very different from job to job as well. Many orgs have basically declared bankruptcy on email and moved peofessional communication to other channels.
For the last decade my work email has been basically notifications, with sometimes a single or two emails thoughtfully written by a human. And that's probably because anything people expect me to read will be either in Slack/whatever chat app, in a ticket/task, or straight in a calendar invite with an agenda to get up to speed.
Funny thing is emails are now either only relevant for a few miliseconds where I only need to know what triggered it, or ultra important "we'll delete your account in 5 days" type that I absolutely don't want to miss. In a year I haven't got anything in between.
I wonder why spam in personal email is acceptable but spam in work email is not. Why can’t we do both?
Substitute Slack for Email?
I’m with you, I’ve had a range of professional jobs, but rarely much meaningful correspondence via email. There are definitely emails that might announce some deadline or deliverable, but the “email” part of the work might be adding a calendar reminder or something, not responding to it. If feels like (I’m sure people will disagree) email would be more of a time sink for people who have a secretarial or personal assistant role, where they are being asked to do lots of little things (get me time with your boss this week type stuff). For a developer, whether IC or manager, most coordination would take place through other channels, and not be a material part of the work.
You nailed it:
< FOR ME >
my personal email is like yours. my work email is like the post.
For me, the entire inbox is this DBTC folder. I have notifications set up on my smartwatch and I triage each email in real-time as it comes in. If it's urgent, I act on it. If it is important or I want to follow up, then I add it to my (separate) to-do list, with a Google tasks voice command. And otherwise I just ignore the notification and the email sits there in the inbox until I feel like dealing with it. I use the unread status and pick things off in occasional focus sessions. Some things never get "read", and that's because they don't matter. Zero bandit stuff because I know exactly what's in my inbox at any given time, at least up to what my analog brain can hold. It fits right into the old "I heard a noise. What is it?" routine humans used when we were hunter-gatherers.
Came here to say this. When I'm really pressed for time, I use the custom stars in Gmail to indicate the type of followup needed - reply, separate task, etc.
The author said they didn’t like Getting Things Done, then they almost literally reinvented Getting Things Done! Funny how sometimes an idea doesn’t click until you re-express it in your own words.
I follow the mantra "Inbox <20". Inbox 0 is not flexible enough and freestyle Inbox is not manageable in the long term.
Together with filters, freely reporting as spam/unsubscribing, my Inbox <20 becomes a sort of todo list which I can review and handle whenever needed (this include flight/hotel bookings, getting back to complex emails, etc.).
I have used something similar but for a slightly different problem. A long time ago (at the start of my career) I started using a folder called “Curious George” where I put all those really interesting emails with new ideas, trends, etc. The problem is not so much death by a thousand cuts but falling down a rabbit hole of some cool idea and losing an hour of focus. I collect all those dangerous emails and then go through them periodically. The difference is that none of these really require a direct response but some of them will result in me starting one of those annoying email chains that will steal others time - so it is much better to allocate time to read thoughtfully so I am only sending along the useful bits.
For those daily thieves of attention (described here) my approach is to use my inbox itself rather than a new folder. I leave them unread and archive the other garbage. Then I go through the unreads at a scheduled time. How well does this work for me? - not great. It works well enough but maybe I should try this idea instead. The biggest challenge with any of these methods is to develop the discipline to actually schedule and keep the time to review these things.
I've realised a few things dealing with time and attention, and devised a few strategies with varying degrees of success:
- Information consumes attention (as has been long observed).
- Corollary: excess information demands fast, cheap, regret-free rejection mechanisms. TFA describes several such approaches. The "DBTC" folder is one, but specifically refusing to use other, unmanageable, message queues (Twitter, FB, Slack, etc.) would be others. If a tool refuses to respect your boundaries, reject that tool.
- Time-blocking for low-urgency, but still significant tasks is useful. You're shifting from interrupt-driven mode to scheduled flow. This also means you can assess how your schedule relates to the incoming message flow, and whether or not that flow still exceeds your (now far more readily quantifiable) time devoted to it.
- There's still the question of how to prioritise items you're responding to. I'd suggest a rough triage method of:
1. Identifying high-priority senders (immediate family, work (management, colleagues, business relations), friends/social, and pretty much all else.
2. Randomly selecting from lower-priority queues is a way of fairly distributing your attention. If you can't do everything, sample a handful of items.
3. Quick "no"s (and learning how to phrase these delicately, if necessary) are useful. In some cases you might point the correspondent in a more useful direction. There's the physics professor's tactic of dealing with crackpot questions by directing them to one another, which preserves both attention and sanity....
My first exposure to the correspondence-limits problem came in one of the SF author Arthur C. Clarke's essay collections published in the 1970s or 1980s, in which he wrote of having had to resort to the tactic of responding to most of his own voluminous postal mail correspondence (and that international postal mail, for the most part, as he lived in Sri Lanka whilst most of his correspondents were elsewhere) with a pre-printed post-card with a set of checkboxes which answered most common inquiries. He'd already considered two further options: "Mr. Clarke regrets", and silence.
The future was not evenly distributed.
My inbox at work is an ever-growing TODO list, only it's one that is written by other people. And my "Sent" folder is a list of people I need to "chase" to make sure they did what I asked them to do. I feel like this can take up as much of your work day as you let it: Getting to 10% of the things other people want me to do and nagging people who are, themselves, doing 10% of the things others are asking them to do.
See Cory Doctorow's "suspense file" (adapted from GTD's tickler file) for addressing follow-ups:
<https://pluralistic.net/2024/10/26/one-weird-trick/#todo>
Email is an ignorable communication medium. It has lost relevance due to its ubiquity, which led to its overuse, which led to its redundancy.
There are a lot of stragglers that haven't realized it's redundancy yet, and madly spend a significant percentage of their time and effort organizing this pulsating mass of ever-changing chaos.
If you keep replying, they'll keep asking.
Cut it down to a quick squizz once a day and get in with the actual productive work.
(My experience written as universal. I'm aware there are some important emails - but I challenge that there aren't as many as you think there are)
Edited to add: you can only work on one thing at a time. It should always be the highest priority item. If something comes in via email, there's little to no likelihood that it should be jumping to the top of the pile (email is not a real-time communication platform, and people who think it is should be corrected). An email is like the first pangs of hunger: at least 24 hours from becoming important.
> I'm aware there are some important emails - but I challenge that there aren't as many as you think there are
The problem is not whether I think it's important. The problem is the customer thinking that's important. Or simply that I need to be aware of what they wrote. Or that I need to be aware of what another vendor wrote.
I'm not saying this is right, I'm saying it's where I'm currently sitting at.
That is idiotic advice. Email is absolutely not ignorable in any real business. We constantly receive important emails from customers / partners / vendors. If we ignored them then we would fail, and deservedly so. They have to be actioned quickly and with careful attention to detail.
I want to sign up for a service that charges people a penny to deliver an email to me -- otherwise the email is undeliverable. Even a minor cost to delivery will dramatically reduce spam.
Micropayments are the next big thing after fusion power...
> Many people have suggested strategies for dealing with this. One popular technique is Inbox Zero. The jokes about it suggests virtually nobody attains it, but I’m not even convinced it’s a virtue
I have inbox zero for personal and work emails. I can’t imagine living any other way.
I propose Inbox Infinite.
Just use search. If search can't find it then the content wasn't descriptive enough and it is unimportant because the sender obviously didn't care enough to describe it properly.
Don't let lazy people make you more busy than you already are.
Sometimes the lazy people have money that you want, or are gatekeepers on getting money from others. So you have to accommodate their laziness if you want to eat.