41–50 of 66 posts
Why not use Yammer or similar? We are trying G+ for business apps. It's ok.
We've tried Yammer, and it's never really taken off. The nice thing about just copying an email to a list is the barrier to entry is so low -- the sender doesn't have to open a new tab, or create any additional content.
Part of the issue around transparency is that email inbox silos may be the wrong tool for a collaborative and productive tech company. In general, email is now being seen (as often remarked by ShowHN MVPs) as To Do lists, and in a tech shop, multiple people have an interest in that process. This results in unenforceable policies about To: vs Cc: and unwieldy threads you're never sure if you should delete the tail nes…
What's your affiliation with Request Tracker?
Over the years we have also tried ZenDesk, Tender Support, etc. They have their place. For example, I like Tender Support for adding help to a small end user facing SAS web site.
But RT can provide automatically structured metadata for extraordinary volumes of internal, client facing, and end user facing email.
If you email some company's support address, and get an email with something like "[company #12345] Your original subject" in the reply, and you can simply reply to that without quoting the original and without any "paste your reply between these lines" nonsense, there's a decent chance they're using RT.
I see Kayak, Yelp, and DynDNS on this list:
http://bestpractical.com/rt/who.html
Like those, Stripe likely has enough volume to warrant looking into it.
Why not use Yammer or similar? We are trying G+ for business apps. It's ok.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Random question relating to both e-mail and the law... So everyone puts these signatures/disclaimers on their e-mail now which say (paraphrasing): > This message is confidential. It may also be privileged or otherwise protected by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you have received it by mistake, please let us know by e-mail reply and delete it from your system; you may not copy this message or disclose…
I think people do these things mainly to deal with inadvertent disclosure (e.g., an incorrectly addressed email) or further downstream distribution of an email. The idea is to have some indicator that the original sender meant the communication to remain in confidence (which may be required to maintain, for example, attorney client privilege, or to preserve trade secret protection). When they are affixed automaticall…
My experience is people add these signatures because they see other people doing it and they assume it's a good practice or seemingly professional. It may be some inexperienced lawyers recommend it so they have something to say about email policy. It's not hurting anyone beyond eating up mail quotas, right?
I've known companies that had pretty good email policies....until they got sued and every email debate was turned into the evidence that they knew X or considered Y or thought about Z and were therefore guilty. :-(
I would imagine that this open email policy actually reduces the amount of lawsuit-relevant emails in one sense: If you want to talk about something sensitive or private you would probably pick up the phone or walk over to the person, knowing an email is shared with the entire company.
Full disclosure: I've worked on eDiscovery products and may be biased. This is a net good thing, I think, for a company to reduce its dependence on arbitrary communication that is written and backed up forever.
"We use Gmail for email and Google Groups for lists." "What we have today works pretty well for our current size—around 45 people." So if I can manage to get the Google authentication credentials for just one of Stripe's 45 employees, I can get access to the vast majority of Stripe's email? I hope they require two factor authentication.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Err, IANAL, but you may have committed a crime by tampering with evidence even though it was a civil case.
Definitely in California, if not most states: "Every person who, knowing that any book, paper, record, instrument in writing, or other matter or thing, is about to be produced in evidence upon any trial, inquiry, or investigation whatever, authorized by law, willfully destroys or conceals the same, with intent thereby to prevent it from being produced, is guilty of a misdemeanor." (Cal. Pen. Code. S. 135)
What if the paperwork in question isn't being used in an investigation, but rather as a way of proving residence in a particular area for the purpose of receiving services provided in that area?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's your affiliation with Request Tracker?
I believe I just shared that. Our company's used RT since 2003. Over the years we have also tried ZenDesk, Tender Support, etc. They have their place. For example, I like Tender Support for adding help to a small end user facing SAS web site. But RT can provide automatically structured metadata for extraordinary volumes of internal, client facing, and end user facing email. If you email some company's support address…
I'm curious about your thoughts on mailing lists vs. private newsgroups. I think of email and news as just two different ways of sharing MIME messages, with the difference that email is sent to specific people and newsgroups are stored on a server and can be archived and made (semi-)public. I realize that newsgroups have received much, much less attention than email recently, and it may just be that there isn't enoug…
"We use Gmail for email and Google Groups for lists." "What we have today works pretty well for our current size—around 45 people." So if I can manage to get the Google authentication credentials for just one of Stripe's 45 employees, I can get access to the vast majority of Stripe's email? I hope they require two factor authentication.
Yes, we do require two factor auth, and we're very stringent about laptop security generally. We're pretty cognizant that, even at a less open company, compromising any employee can generally be used to obtain a surprising amount of sensitive company information.