Live data from Hacker News

Email Introduction Etiquette

blog.42floors.com

111–120 of 120 posts

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#111
post #51
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

`Blog' and `tweet' are at least neologisms. `Ask' on the other hand has been a verb for a very long time, and has so far resisted being made a noun. That suggests to me, and probably to most people, that it's a verb, solidly so, and not to be used as a noun. Fighting this kind of tradition will be an uphill struggle. A losing battle. A tall order. (For those still in primary school, those are all different ways of sa…

You have never hear some one say "thats a big ask"?

Eg Vince cable saying "the royal mail was not under priced" leads to the response "thats a big ask"

Its more a political slang/jargon term that formally correct English.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#112

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 am the recipient of a lot of these, as an angel investor. I insist on the double-opt-in. It saves me time, and it saves the introducee time.

Here's a simplified view of my email life: I have a couple hundred people (the intermediaries) I have worked with before or am friends with who each work with or talk to many entreprenuers. Each of these people knows dozens of investors. When they like an entrepreneur, they try to decide which investors would be interested in that entrepreneur. This isn't easy because angel investors change what types of things they are looking for and whether they are looking for anything at all all the time (based on what they have already invested in, on how much time and money they currently have to invest, etc.) They then send out intros to many investors. I get about a thousand of these a year.

Now, there are two types of intros. The most common is "[Founder] is looking for an investor for his company, which looks like [company]." The second is "[Founder] asked to be specifically introduced to you." If the latter, I always take the introduction. If the former I filter for only the stuff I might actually invest in. This saves me time because--since I have a pre-existing relationship with the intermediary--I can say something like "I don't invest in companies like [company], I am looking for [thesis] right now." This takes 30 seconds. If I was to reply to the founder, it would take a lot longer not to be rude. Rudeness is discouraging (I know, I raised money for my own company, lots of investors were rude), and it burns bridges. If an entrepreneur told an intermediary she thought I was rude in my reply, that intermediary may no longer send me anything. I know I, when I've been the intermediary, have stopped sending people stuff because the feedback from the entrepreneur was that they were rude.

Also, the whole point of the intermediary is to save the entrepreneur time. The intermediary sends out a score of emails asking who is interested, and some smaller number reply. The intermediary then makes the connection. Now the entrepreneur only has to deal with the people who have self-qualified as potentially interested. This saves them time (and also puts them in a slightly better negotiating position.)

The only negative to this process is the time it takes for the intermediary. I am an intermediary as much as, or more than, I am a recipient of these intros. It takes time. I've often thought about how to automate much of this introducing work: deciding which people would be most likely to want the intro, sending the emails, tracking replies, making the intros, and tracking which intros worked to feed back into the process. I suppose this is what software like Salesforce does for salespeople, but I've never found a personal CRM that can do this for me. Would love to have one.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#114
This is generally the protocol I use. I like to use BCC during the handoff if the referral is coming to me. I'm surprised at how often I get pulled into conversations that I don't need to be a part of, because someone doesn't BCC me in return.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#115

> 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…

The whole phrase means "asks for something specific". However, using words like 'something' make you sound vague even if you aren't, and using jargon like this signals "I'm in the crowd that gets you". Most people do these things without thinking.

There is no 'ask' on its own and no one would refer to the ask on it's own. The entire phrase is an idiom. An ugly sounding one, but one that's here to stay, like 'day of' and 'going forward'.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#116
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

so if one person opts in, and the other does not, do you just tell the first: "sorry he wasn't interested in meeting you"?

I guess it just shifts the dilemma to the person setting up the interview - which is what makes it more polite.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#117
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear it occasionally. I hear its equally-appalling equivalent all the time: "Please join Mary and I in welcoming John to our team." Of course, prescriptive grammar is for the birds, anyway.

That's surely just an over-reaction to people being told "and I " in response to a sentence like "Mary and me would like to welcome John to the team". You can't win.

As a kid, you get 'Me and Mary' as the subject corrected to 'Mary and I' for reasons of both grammar and politeness. Some people don't understand or remember the compound reason and just use 'and I' everywhere.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#118
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

so if one person opts in, and the other does not, do you just tell the first: "sorry he wasn't interested in meeting you"?

This has always been my issue with these e-mails.

Either way, it will be awkward, and checking in with someone to see if they can be introduced just adds another e-mail to the chain.

Maybe I'm just overly choosy with who I introduce, but I have never had someone not respond, or say "No, I don't want to be introduced to that person." It just always seems to add an unnecessary step.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#119
post #64
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people don't make a good use of BCC. Another instance where it is useful is when asking a question at a mail list but asking that anyone who answers only addresses the you not the whole email list. Just send the email with the list in BCC, and that's gonna be automatic.

That's a pretty rude and selfish way to approach a mailing list. I wouldn't be surprised if such a question goes on to be ignored.

Imagine the maillist of all your coworkers and you want to let them know you are selling a few items. It's not rude to force responses to be only to you. This reduces the amount of email everyone gets.

Re: Email Introduction Etiquette

#120
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people don't make a good use of BCC. Another instance where it is useful is when asking a question at a mail list but asking that anyone who answers only addresses the you not the whole email list. Just send the email with the list in BCC, and that's gonna be automatic.

No, that's what Reply-To is for.

Except gmail doesn't support reply-to in a per message basis.
Post reply on HN