Driving down to that golf tournament last week I was telling my pal, a sincere engineer whose sense of communication is slightly less developed than mine--though more developed than my sense of engineering--about e-mail, and the art of "the strategic no-reply."
This move can be employed only by those of us who regularly get back to people right away. Once in a while, we conscientious types can make an incredibly powerful reply to an e-mail that's dumb or irrelevant or silly or petty, by not replying at all.
I explained this to my pal, and told him a few situations where a "no-reply" works well:
• A colleague sends you some thinly veiled nasty gossip.
• Your favorite uncle sends you a racist joke.
• Your boss cc's on something about a project you'd rather die than be involved in.
• Your mother-in-law sends you a smarmy picture of kittens.
• A subordinate sends you an e-mail asking you something you've already told him is inappropriate for you two to discuss.
In these cases, a no-reply sends the strong message: I don't want to hear about this. In fact, I'm going to pretend I didn't hear about this.
It only works for the most responsive among us--but it's a perk we ought to use.
POSTSCRIPT: The day after the tournament, my friend e-mailed to say he'd won some closest-to-the-pin prize, despite the fact that he finished 68th out of 76 golfers. (I tied for 63rd, and was in no mood to celebrate anything.)
"I rock!" he wrote.
I did not e-mail him back.
"Okay, I get the no-e-mail," he wrote back four hours later, obviously writhing in self-doubt but understanding my lesson well.
Comments (5)
This can also work with blogs. Nothing says "oops" better than posting and never getting a single comment from the usual suspects.
Posted by Tom Keefe | June 13, 2007 8:35 AM
Posted on June 13, 2007 08:35
As Henry David Thoreau once said, the man who waits anxiously for his mail hasn't heard from himself in a long time.
As bloggers and e-mailers and talkers, we must say what we've got to say, hesitating only enough to tend to the reaction, if any, before rolling on.
Posted by David Murray | June 13, 2007 8:46 AM
Posted on June 13, 2007 08:46
test
Posted by Roula Amire | June 13, 2007 2:22 PM
Posted on June 13, 2007 14:22
Roll on, David. Roll on.
Posted by Ron Shewchuk | June 13, 2007 7:13 PM
Posted on June 13, 2007 19:13
Shit -- I tried not replying to this, but I can't help myself.
Will
Posted by Will Daniel | June 15, 2007 12:40 PM
Posted on June 15, 2007 12:40