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

41–50 of 120 posts

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#41

Post by danielweber »

wpietri wrote: post #21
livingtech wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 once worked at a place where the board members were having a discussion about the CEO, and then of the board members decided to just cc: said CEO into the conversation at random, because "well we are talking about him and he deserves to know."

That board was not well-functioning.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#42

Post by dictum »

javindo wrote: post #13
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…

Doesn't necessarily have to be jargon, it's a fairly common phrasing "would you ask that of him?" / "the client had an ask which we fulfilled". I suppose it can sound a bit biz-buzz but nothing specific to SV.

"Would you ask that of him?" fits the normal usage of ask as a verb, though. In "the client had an ask which we fulfilled" (where ask means "request", I presume) "ask" was nounified.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#43

Post by jqgatsby »

I've often been tripped up by the semantics of the word "meet" in email introductions, as in "Nice to meet you". Everyone seems to want to reserve the word "meet" for actual in-person meeting, and I've seen such constructs as: "Pleased to 'meet' you" "Pleased to e-meet you" "Pleased to virtually meet you", etc

I'd love to hear how the language-sensitive hacker news crowd deals with this issue, and also what tortured constructions you've seen recently. Currently I'm using "pleased to make your acquaintance" or "thanks Jim for the intro", but neither of those is completely satisfactory.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#44

Post by kyleashipley »

joelandren wrote: post #2

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

I don't have a ton of love for LinkedIn, but this is a problem they've taken on and solved to some degree. If I have a second-degree LinkedIn connection, I can request an intro through an intermediary, who has the chance to reject it, pass it along, and so on.

I'm not sure how much the investment community uses LinkedIn, but it seems like the closest thing to a solution right now.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#45

Post by gcv »

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…

It's nasty language change which has spread, kind of like "I spoke to she about that problem" is spreading. Not specific to SV, but extremely common here.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#47

Post by swalkergibson »

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…

I tend to agree with you here. In the scenario proposed by the article, the busy person is still essentially doing the same amount of work. Having to consider the intro, reading up on the subject and the requester, etc, etc. If the answer is a flat no, then so be it, but let them hear it directly from the person. I find it hard to believe that somebody could be so busy that taking a few minutes to respond to such a request would actually be a problem. If it is so onerous, perhaps setting aside a few hours out of one day per week to handle these requests would be prudent? That way, you can minimize the impact it would have on your day-to-day life.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#48

Post by peterwwillis »

potatolicious wrote: post #24
peterwwillis wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 subs…

Alright, so 'ask' here is just synonym for 'request', then.

Looked it up... most dictionaries don't have a noun form of 'ask', though macmillan has a separate page just for it. (It's also a Scandinavian myth about the first man made from an ash tree, but that's probably not the intended use from the OP)

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#49

Post by [deleted] »

gcv wrote: post #45
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…

It's nasty language change which has spread, kind of like "I spoke to she about that problem" is spreading. Not specific to SV, but extremely common here.

[deleted]

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#50

Post by evacuationdrill »

gcv wrote: post #45
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…

It's nasty language change which has spread, kind of like "I spoke to she about that problem" is spreading. Not specific to SV, but extremely common here.

Why would you say "she"? Is "her" somehow offensive now? Or have they forgotten objects of prepositions are, well, objects?
Post reply on HN