5 min read
|
Saved February 14, 2026
|
Copied!
Do you care about this?
Ploum argues that people should not feel the need to apologize for delayed email responses unless there’s an explicit urgency. He emphasizes the nature of asynchronous communication and suggests that acknowledging receipt or simply not replying can often be more appropriate.
If you do, here's more
Ploum argues that there's no need to apologize for delayed email responses, especially when the sender isn't waiting for an immediate reply. He points out that the rise of instant messaging has created an uncomfortable culture around email communication, where people feel pressured to explain their delays, even for trivial matters. The author emphasizes the asynchronous nature of email, stating that once he sends a message, he typically forgets about it. He encourages recipients to feel free to read, discard, or reply when convenient, without feeling guilty about timing.
He also highlights the unnecessary burden that comes with stating intentions to reply later or providing detailed explanations for delays. A simple acknowledgment suffices, and if someone does choose to respond, they should remind him of the context since he might not remember the initial conversation. Ploum suggests structuring emails clearly and using bottom-posting for replies, making it easier for both parties to follow discussions. Ultimately, he insists that the pressure to respond promptly is unwarranted, advocating for a more relaxed approach to email communication.
Questions about this article
No questions yet.