Comments on: Email Subjects are Irrelevant, Only Sender Matters

By: josh

josh — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 02:12:55 +0000

I actually pretty much agree.

Two stages: 1) initial consumption; 2) retrieval, if necessary.

For initial consumption it is normally only the sender (unless it’s marked as urgent by a second- or third-tier sender) that I would ever sort by.

For retrieval, the subject line helps.

By: Garrick Van Buren

Garrick Van Buren — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 20:40:15 +0000

Ed, so would emails w/o a subject line at all.

By: Ed Kohler

Ed Kohler — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 19:17:10 +0000

If most subject lines have nothing to do with the message inside – as you suggest – wouldn’t people (or businesses) who send emails with descriptive subject lines stand out from the crowd?

By: Erica

Erica — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 19:11:39 +0000

I’m wouldn’t say that the subject line is unimportant.

But the reality is if the email is from my girlfriend or my mom or certain friends, it’s going to get read right away, no matter what.

That’s for my personal email. The subject is most important at work.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 04:18:40 +0000

Most of my subject lines are relevant to me with the exception of bacn. When a subject changes in an email thread, I will literally change the subject line in my reply so future correspondence on that subject matches the subject line.

I have a couple friends that will write email without a subject line and not think anything of it. That drives me up the wall.

When I look at my Inbox at a glance, I generally have a good idea of exactly what’s in it without having to open messages. It really matters to me.

By: Michael

Michael — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 03:52:41 +0000

Yer nuts.

I agree, the sender is probably more important but the subject is really, really important too. One glance at the top of my inbox gives me a lot of information.