Re: Mail, not to be confused with spam...
On 30/11/2011 15:30, SM wrote:
At 06:30 30-11-2011, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
There are already 500+ comments on yesterday's post on Slashdot on
"Europe's Largest IT Company To Ban Internal Email" .
Is it because of spam that people stops using email?
According to the news article, "only 10 per cent of the 200 electronic
messages his employees receive per day on average turn out to be
useful". There wasn't any mention of "internal email" or "spam".
It depends what they mean by 'useful'
I get lots of emails from ZDNet, Computing.co.uk etc which are, 90% of
the time, useless, but I subscribed to them, and occasionally there's
something useful. It takes me 2 seconds to scan them and delete if
they're not. I could easily unsubscribe if I wanted.
In a lot of businesses, no one understands the 'reply' button (just
'reply all'), and they can never remember people's email addresses, so
just email to everyone (just in case) - this works to best effect in
companies of 1000+ employees - and they'll always forward messages about
how you shouldn't open emails with 'hello' in the subject or your PC
will explode, so it's not surprising that 90% of it is rubbish. Of
course, people then reply (to all) saying please stop sending them
emails, which starts a storm of everyone else doing it (replying to
all), then people reply (to all) complaining that they are still getting
emails, etc, etc.
Giving the IT guy(s) authority to patrol the corridors with baseball
bats is as good a disincentive as banning internal mail IMHO :)
Especially in an IT company... Unwarranted use of 'reply all' in an IT
company should be a sackable offence.