I don't read your email threads

> Save a vibe today and send an IM instead of an email thread.

I would rather the email honestly. IMs usually have the expectation that I'm going to respond to you "soon", which is an interruption/distraction. And they don't contain enough information so I have to start going back and forth with the other person.

At least with email, most people recognize that you will respond in your own timing in the next 24-48 hours. With IM I've found that expectation out the window.

Save the distraction. Send an email.

Personally I prefer to be sent a full email thread over a message in chat, because

a) I can ignore it until I have time to look at it

b) You can see who else has already been involved in the conversation - seeing a fellow team member being involved can help avoid falling for situations where someone is trying to work around one of your colleagues who's already told them they can't have what they're asking for.

c) The chat message is from an individual, so you only get their interpretation of what's happening - if there's an email thread then there's going to be multiple people involved, each with their own perspective.

I'm sure this is a problem in large corporations, but on some days I'd give an arm and leg to receive an actual email instead of the random slack messages with zero context and a builtin social pressure for low latency responses.

I wish people would make shared white papers for discussions. People basically collaborate on the collected notes and decisions; with modern tools you can have history and attribution easily.

Some threads become difficult to unravel.

Is this intentional ragebait? Calling IMs "actual communication" is .... odd. Email all but guarantees more thoughtful replies than IM.

I'll agree that the example of simply tagging someone in a long quoted thread is not the way to go. The sender should have included a summary and an explanation of why the new recipient is suddenly added.

The same can be said about Slack threads.

If you’re including someone new into an already running conversation, take the time to write a summary for them and why you’re now involving them in the conversation, and what you expect from them. No, don’t use AI to do it, that’s more offensive than “see below”.

Work is messy. If work was properly organized according to first principles and catering to each extremist taste of the individuals in the group who are looking to minimize theirs efforts, then you will take 10x the time to develop the product and you will loose your market to your messy but working together competition.

I honestly love reading them. The fact that I got tagged means something went awry and it's fun seeing HOW that happened. Who misunderstood what or who is missing what context.

Then I can make bunch of people's work life easier by clarifying the state for everyone

I figured out where the chaotic picture on that post originated - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POT3plx0vBs

A email thread, to me, is much preferable to any IM, unless participants knows to send those IMs in a thread as well.

All the context are in there in the rawest of forms, you a run through them with your eyeballs or have your tools do the summarisation there and then. Most of the IMs I received didn't even quote the original message they were responding to, and I end up spending time jumping up and down the channel or group to get the whole context. Not to mention folks sending me link to a slack, which, depending on the mood of the almighty slack god, can or cannot be opened in the app / current slack session.

But you do you. :)

i agree but nobody gives a shit about this unless you have the authority to impose this in your own company

> IM (Teams, Slack, etc.): Actual communication

lol good luck doing Slack Thread archeology instead then.

(I'm not experienced with Teams but since its Microsoft, it's likely worse.)