zlacker

> ...read your first bullet point, ignore the rest, and drop all the nuance?

Oh hell yes, this is definitely a thing with lots of people. It's one of those WTF realizations that everyone who works in a corporate environment gets slapped in the face with really hard.

There are certain people for which you MUST give 1, maybe 2 sentences at a maximum, address them by name, AND, make sure that they're the only person in the "to:" field. Anything different and you risk ghosting or first-thing-only response.

If there's other folks in the cc who I know may actually read for context, I will add a '"*** details ***"' separator after a few blank lines and then write up normal paragraphs. I know the "details" stuff will get ignored by the target, but that's OK. It's just there for reference and for others who may chime in.

>>crispy+(OP)
Also I auto-filter bcc'ed e-mails and if your e-mail has a tracking pixel in it (e.g. from Superhuman or some such), it will get deprioritized because I don't believe in privacy invasion attempts. (Also, your tracking pixel will be blocked so it won't work anyway.)

>>crispy+(OP)
Perhaps those people have just read too many emails in the past that ended up being a waste of their time? Over time they learned to glance at things and predict what the rest of the email is going to say.

Think about those download websites where you have to find the download link in the middle of all the ads that are masquerading as download buttons. There's a lot of information on those pages, but people become really adept at spotting the real download button. The rest of the information gets ignored.

I think this is why some people insist on verbal communication when you're trying to teach them something. If they get a text guide then they will gloss over things and skip steps leading to failure. With verbal communication you're effectively there to keep them at least mildly focused so that they don't gloss over things.

>>Aerroo+Iq
> If they get a text guide then they will gloss over things and skip steps leading to failure.

I find this to be very true when learning new programming techniques. Most learning resources start from a significantly more basic starting point than most learners are at, so I'm liable to skip until I start seeing things I don't already know how to guess. The problem is that there are often important subtleties buried amidst the obvious knowledge.

>>Aerroo+Iq
> Perhaps those people have just read too many emails in the past that ended up being a waste of their time?

I am sure that's often the case but I still find it rude and dismissive.

In the end it doesn't really matter for me as long as I can get my point/request across in a sentence or two (and cover my ass with an "optional" details section).

You're absolutely right that voice or face-to-face is essential for certain communication.