Re:Ask HN: Why Not Reply All?
by thayne on Monday July 01, 2024 @09:31PM
(#40852728)
Depending on your email client, and possibly said client's configuration, it might be.
That said, accidentally replying all with sensitive or embarrassing information is probably worse than accidentally sending a reply to one person instead of everyone, so it is a safer default, even if reply all is more common.
Re:Ask HN: Why Not Reply All?
by talldayo on Monday July 01, 2024 @09:42PM
(#40852780)
It feels like a common trope among businesses of a certain size, when someone asks "Why does nobody read the emails?" without looking at the inbox from an engineer's perspective.
My job is not to read emails. I don't open a Gmail window with 200 unread CC'd responses and think that it's my duty to untangle that. I work on what I'm paid to do and wait until I'm told otherwise by my manager. The reason every single email client doesn't default to reply-all is because engineers are conspiring together underground to stop the unjust suffering and PIPs caused by missing the needle in the email haystack. Company-wide emails are the single point-of-failure that necessitate alternative communication platforms like Slack.
That said, accidentally replying all with sensitive or embarrassing information is probably worse than accidentally sending a reply to one person instead of everyone, so it is a safer default, even if reply all is more common.
My job is not to read emails. I don't open a Gmail window with 200 unread CC'd responses and think that it's my duty to untangle that. I work on what I'm paid to do and wait until I'm told otherwise by my manager. The reason every single email client doesn't default to reply-all is because engineers are conspiring together underground to stop the unjust suffering and PIPs caused by missing the needle in the email haystack. Company-wide emails are the single point-of-failure that necessitate alternative communication platforms like Slack.