The addition that I think would make it scalable and worthwhile is to establish an interoperability standard via mail headers. Broadcast you're using this system with X-UsesMailTickets so that compatible clients can pre-fill their emails with "X-MailTicketType: Yes/No", etc.
A ‘frighteningly ambitious’ way to improve email
11–20 of 88 posts
Re: A ‘frighteningly ambitious’ way to improve email
#12The first thing I thought of when I read this title was Paul Graham's essay about startup ideas. I'm glad the title succeeded in that sense, as it's relevant to this article.
More to the point, I like this idea. I like that it focuses on the perspective of those who send you emails. I feel that many people trying to solve this idea would look to changing how inboxes handle messages or look to changing the user interface of email systems.
But instead, this solution actually helps reduce email by responding to senders. That's a unique approach. Very out of the box.
But it's true that it's "frighteningly ambitious" to try and tackle this problem on the sender's side. I could see this failing if the majority of senders are the type to simply send off an email and not check for a while, which would ignore the automated message query. However, if a majority of users do pay attention to it, they can edit their email options and hopefully make life easier for the receiver.
Excellent idea. I hope it develops into a full startup.
Re: A ‘frighteningly ambitious’ way to improve email
#13The addition that I think would make it scalable and worthwhile is to establish an interoperability standard via mail headers. Broadcast you're using this system with X-UsesMailTickets so that compatible clients can pre-fill their emails with "X-MailTicketType: Yes/No", etc.
In addition to the header, the content can be in a mime/alternative so compliant readers can display it.
Re: A ‘frighteningly ambitious’ way to improve email
#14This is an interesting way to coax contextual metadata from senders. However, for certain senders I will always respond promptly and thoughtfully, regardless of message formatting. Senders such as friends, family, clients, etc. Which makes the auto-reply a bit tricky:
Thank you "motherpowers" for sending the email titled "Happy Birthday" to "leepowers". For a faster response time please re-formulate your birthday greeting as a series of yes/no questions and re-send.
So being able to whitelist senders would be a requirement.
My dream is that in a few months I will open my Inbox Pro app in the morning and answer 20 Yes/No questions using just my left thumb...
I'm not sure what this would accomplish. Reading and comprehending email is not difficult. The difficult part is thinking through an inquiry and responding intelligently. "Can we move up the launch date a week?" This is a yes/no question that anyone can understand. But actually exploring an answer to this question can require considerable mental effort. There's very little utility in having this message display in a slightly different format with a checkbox.
Re: A ‘frighteningly ambitious’ way to improve email
#15There used to be a mail provider (EarthLink?) that automatically responded with a message saying I had to click on a link to get my email past their spam filters. I found that infuriating. I can imagine getting one of these automatic responses might cause similar negative reactions - that the person using Inbox Pro is a little bit of a primadonna. Having said that, I still signed up for the beta. Because I'm a primad…
This system by itself can be frustrating... as the problem is that they tend to challenge-response everyone.
I would love to see a system that does automatic spam classification (like gmail), but if you get auto-classified as spam, then you get the challenge-response, as a last ditch effort to get through the spam filter.
Re: A ‘frighteningly ambitious’ way to improve email
#16I feel like Mailbox (that new iPhone app) provides EXACTLY this, except in a much more elegant package. Email as a to-do list is pretty brilliant.
Re: A ‘frighteningly ambitious’ way to improve email
#17So if both sender and recipient are using this, they'll end up demanding increasing classifications from each other in an infinite loop? I think the actual solution will turn out to be something like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Mail_2000 The important difference is that the master copy of the email resides at the sender, which means it is possible for them to update and revise it. With current SMTP the…
I was just complaining about this problem today. If I'm CCed on an email exchange and 4 or 5 messages go back and forth then the problem is solved, i still have 5 unread measages in my inbox. In reality, I should have zero messages because the problem has been resolved but SMTP doesn't allow for that.
Re: A ‘frighteningly ambitious’ way to improve email
#18This is a push notification system - it turns the recipient's problem into the sender's. This is fine if communicating across a hierarchy or for a public address. It could be obnoxious, however, with peers, particularly those outside tech.
Consider, instead, a pull notification system. The first time a sender emails the recipient they are sent a link (also in the recipient's signature) to a page providing expected response times for various email forms along with the option to convert your already-sent email into a short-response form, e.g. yes/no.
Re: A ‘frighteningly ambitious’ way to improve email
#19So if both sender and recipient are using this, they'll end up demanding increasing classifications from each other in an infinite loop? I think the actual solution will turn out to be something like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Mail_2000 The important difference is that the master copy of the email resides at the sender, which means it is possible for them to update and revise it. With current SMTP the…
> So if both sender and recipient are using this, they'll end up demanding increasing classifications from each other in an infinite loop?
Presumably the system would only kick in for threads of discussion initiated by others and not yourself. So if you send an email, any replies to it would behave as normal.
Re: A ‘frighteningly ambitious’ way to improve email
#20Yep.
http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/3313/imagekm.png
Give more power to benevolent senders. I've had similar thoughts.
I don't want to waste other people's time, but the current email protocol forces me to. There is no way to specify if your email is...
1. "Check this out sometime during the week, it's funny stuff, if you have time. You need a 24"+ screen and 10 mins, so don't even look at this email on your phone"
2. "I NEED A REPLY ASAP, ARE YOU THERE?"
It appears as a (1) on your phone and I have no power over that to make things easier for the recipient... (other than perhaps send an email at a specific time which is less likely to interrupt your work)