Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Email Introduction Etiquette

blog.42floors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 120 posts

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#21

Post by wpietri »

livingtech wrote: post #5
joelandren wrote: post #2

This is spot on, but this is still a PITA for everyone involved. There should still be a better way.

Yes, I fully expected this to be an article about how to "fix" this problem situation. I have to say that I have been in a few of the positions in this sort of chain, and now if I'm the inviter, I always just CC both. Not forwarding on the entire chain feels dishonest. (Obviously the invitee doesn't need to read the whole thread, but it's there for posterity, and to give context.) If the "busy person" is so rude that…

As a frequent introducer, I would never forward the whole chain.

Consider the case of a friend looking for a job. If they come to me asking for an introduction, they may be open with me about things they wouldn't tell a stranger in the first minute of contact. E.g., concerns about the target company, fears they might not measure up, things going on in their life. It's hard for me to know what they don't want shared, I want to minimize the risk a violation of trust, and I don't want to guess at what the recipient might have an issue with. So I'll always write my own intro or ask for something I can forward.

Also, if someone dumps some unwelcome request from a pal in my lap, I'd be irritated that I had to do the work of bowing out. It's their friend, not mine, so it shouldn't be my problem. For that reason, I always ask permission to do an intro unless I have strong reason to believe the intro would be welcome. (E.g., if somebody told me they're looking for developers, I'll do intros without confirming an interest in each specific person.)

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#22

Post by bentcorner »

I find the social dynamics of To/CC/BCC really interesting. You only see it in Emails and it doesn't exist in any other communication medium. Most social communication platforms I can think of the top of my head only really support the "To" part of email.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#23

Post by dhimes »

peterwwillis wrote: post #20
wpietri wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is jargon. It's the thing one is going to ask for. The meaning is slightly more specific than a generic word like "request" or "desire". It implies something specific, focused, and prepared.

If that's the case, the word 'specific' in the sentence is what makes it specific, not the phrasing. You already know they want you to provide a request for something, but you don't know it's something specific until they specify specifically. 'give a specific ask' and 'ask a specific question' are therefore equivalent, with the exception that the former looks like it was written by a 5th grader.

with the exception that the former looks like it was written by a 5th grader

Jesus I laughed hard at this. Thank you.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#24

Post by potatolicious »

peterwwillis wrote: post #20
wpietri wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is jargon. It's the thing one is going to ask for. The meaning is slightly more specific than a generic word like "request" or "desire". It implies something specific, focused, and prepared.

If that's the case, the word 'specific' in the sentence is what makes it specific, not the phrasing. You already know they want you to provide a request for something, but you don't know it's something specific until they specify specifically. 'give a specific ask' and 'ask a specific question' are therefore equivalent, with the exception that the former looks like it was written by a 5th grader.

They're not the same thing. An "ask" is the item being requested, it is not the question.

"Can I have a cookie?" is a question, the cookie is the ask. An ask is implicitly tangible or substantial.

"What's the weather today?" is a question, it doesn't really have an ask, since the item being demanded is trivial. It exists in business jargon specifically to separate minor requests "can you send me that file?" from substantial exchanges "can we update this report to include the last two quarters?"

An "ask" is more "demand" than "question", without the negative connotations of demanding things from people.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#26

Post by wpietri »

omarkatzen wrote: post #7

This is why it's unreasonable to have any faith in the contemporary Silicon Valley. Cold-calling used to work out there, because it was full of people who just wanted to do a good job and help each other succeed. Now, you need an introduction because it's full of emasculated social climbers who need some way of determining whether a person is of sufficient social status to merit 30 seconds of consideration. Because o…

Oh, please. This intro etiquette isn't about status; it's about respect for people's time.

People still generally want to help people succeed. But people are also busy. I do intros like this pretty much any time I talk to two people who are likely to benefit by talking. I'd guess I average 2 a week.

I've been in San Francisco 14 years, and I think this place is even easier to navigate now than when I got here. Few cold call anymore, but that's more because we've got better things than phones. Meetups, conferences, mailing lists, on-line groups, and Twitter all allow people to connect in ways much better than strangers using a loud mechanical bell to interrupt somebody in the middle of whatever they were actually trying to do.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#27

Post by wpietri »

peterwwillis wrote: post #20
wpietri wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is jargon. It's the thing one is going to ask for. The meaning is slightly more specific than a generic word like "request" or "desire". It implies something specific, focused, and prepared.

If that's the case, the word 'specific' in the sentence is what makes it specific, not the phrasing. You already know they want you to provide a request for something, but you don't know it's something specific until they specify specifically. 'give a specific ask' and 'ask a specific question' are therefore equivalent, with the exception that the former looks like it was written by a 5th grader.

I'm not claiming it isn't horrific; I wouldn't say it myself. But "ask" is a pretty clear term of art.

Also, I'm not sure Hacker News denizens can really complain too much about other people's jargon. Among many others, we inflicted "blog" and "tweet" on the world.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#28

Post by antoko »

peterwwillis wrote: post #12

> makes a specific ask You mean ask a specific question? Or is this silicon valley jargon? edit: Through the power of The Googles I now realize he could have been using the stock market form of 'ask'. It makes some sense since you're asking for an investment. Not that I like it any better... The price a seller is willing to accept for a security, also known as the offer price. Along with the price, the ask quote will…

I've also heard it used in sports and such

Team A are X points down and given the injury to STAR_PLAYER for them to come back now is a big ask

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#29

Post by jorde »

tvladeck wrote: post #11

If you're like me, and sometimes jump to the discussion before reading the article, please go ahead and read the article. It's one of those rare ones that is truly a summary of itself: super short, information dense, with every part having meaning and nothing else. This protocol is super simple, and allows for very efficient transfer of information without putting people in uncomfortable situations.

Here's another take on the subject: double opt-in introduction by Fred Wilson: http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/11/the-double-optin-introductio...

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#30

Post by Groxx »

bentcorner wrote: post #22

I find the social dynamics of To/CC/BCC really interesting. You only see it in Emails and it doesn't exist in any other communication medium. Most social communication platforms I can think of the top of my head only really support the "To" part of email.

fwiw it exists in MMS too, though I'm not claiming that's a good thing.
Post reply on HN