Ask HN: Is a system for single character responses to emails a bad idea? Lately, I’ve been using a single character to respond to a lot of emails. I get through emails much faster (especially on my mobile), and the sender gets useful info back quickly. For example, if I get an email asking for something and I won't get to it until the day after tomorrow, I’ll respond like this: ----- 2 The text above represents a response below. I apologise if this seems rude - I'm taking this approach to make sure I get back to everyone quickly (http://patbrown.org/pointmail.html). 1 - I’ll get back to you within 1 day. 2 - I’ll get back to you within 2 days. [Higher numbers mean the same as above…] t - thanks, I’ll look into it but I’m not sure how long it'll take. n - No / No thank you - I appreciate your message though. y - Yes / Yes please, that would be great. s - Sorry, I’ve read your email, but it’s highly unlikely that I’ll be able to fit this in. ----- The drawback of this approach is that it comes across as douchey to a high percentage of people. Is the approach irredeemably weird / off-putting? Any ideas on how to dial down the douche factor while maintaining the benefits? If it’s viable: - Would two character responses for finer grained meaning work better? For instance, “c1” could mean “It’ll be complete in 1 day” and “w1” would mean “Will get back to you on the below within one day”; and - What other codes / messages do you think would be important to include? |