Brief (but wrong)
The simplification movement has given us advice like this:
The Problem
E-mail takes too long to respond to, resulting in continuous inbox overflow for those who receive a lot of it.
The Solution
Treat all email responses like SMS text messages, using a set number of letters per response. Since it’s too hard to count letters, we count sentences instead.
two.sentenc.es is a personal policy that all email responses regardless of recipient or subject will be two sentences or less. It’s that simple.
That’s potentially great. It’s also potentially disastrous. English, like most languages, requires nuance. If your email message is regarding something more elaborate than, say, “Good. See you there,” it’s not done well in two sentences. Moreover, writing well while writing short is difficult — in many cases, it would take you more time to answer shorter.
I also can’t help pointing out that this bit of communications advice commits an error: They mean to say “two sentences or fewer,” not “less.” If you’re going to be brief, at least be right.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:54 am
Is this right?
February 28th, 2010 at 4:39 pm
Is right yes.
March 2nd, 2010 at 2:17 pm
I definitely find that it takes me a longer to be brief because, like you, I think it’s important to be clear, accurate and thorough.
Of course, the length of my e-mail largely depends on what was in the e-mail to which I’m responding. I had one yesterday in which a director asked me how she could accommodate the venue that wanted to a tax-deduction for the rehearsal space they are donating to her. I pulled the info together for her pretty quickly but with links to fiscal conduits and information on how those work, her one paragraph question needed a three paragraph answer.
And it’s not just because, as Lee knows all too well, I can’t clear my throat in less than three paragraphs (case in point)…
March 5th, 2010 at 10:06 am
Another consequence of using Twitter and our soundbite society.