Ask HN: Why Not Reply All?
3 points by canterburry 1 year ago | 5 comments- thayne 1 year agoDepending 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.
- uberman 1 year agoRead about email storms and you will understand why https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email_storm
- cratermoon 1 year agoDo you want to the default to be "reply all"? If so, why? How would it improve email for you?
- hsuhbdcstd 1 year agoBecause the world is cruel . I am a big fan of reply all. I would like this to be a default option
- talldayo 1 year agoIt 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.
- talldayo 1 year ago