<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: You had me at hello</title>
	<atom:link href="http://clarkbw.net/blog/2008/05/21/you-had-me-at-hello/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://clarkbw.net/blog/2008/05/21/you-had-me-at-hello/</link>
	<description>Change thrives on me</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 17:18:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://clarkbw.net/blog/2008/05/21/you-had-me-at-hello/comment-page-1/#comment-5440</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 17:57:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clarkbw.net/blog/?p=344#comment-5440</guid>
		<description>Yes, absolutely -- GMail and Outlook have it right.  I can trash messages much faster with just a few lines of context.

I would love it if Thunderbird did the same thing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, absolutely &#8212; GMail and Outlook have it right.  I can trash messages much faster with just a few lines of context.</p>
<p>I would love it if Thunderbird did the same thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate Straz</title>
		<link>http://clarkbw.net/blog/2008/05/21/you-had-me-at-hello/comment-page-1/#comment-5421</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate Straz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 12:09:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clarkbw.net/blog/?p=344#comment-5421</guid>
		<description>IIRC from statistics, you can discard any data that is more than two standard deviations from the mean since that should account for 95% of the data.  Since your data set is pretty large, you should be able to drop those 500+ word emails and get a more meaningful average.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>IIRC from statistics, you can discard any data that is more than two standard deviations from the mean since that should account for 95% of the data.  Since your data set is pretty large, you should be able to drop those 500+ word emails and get a more meaningful average.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Illsley</title>
		<link>http://clarkbw.net/blog/2008/05/21/you-had-me-at-hello/comment-page-1/#comment-5419</link>
		<dc:creator>David Illsley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 07:32:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clarkbw.net/blog/?p=344#comment-5419</guid>
		<description>FWIW, I do prefer GMail to my work inbox precisely because GMail shows the first few words and my work e-mail client doesn&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FWIW, I do prefer GMail to my work inbox precisely because GMail shows the first few words and my work e-mail client doesn&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Luis Villa</title>
		<link>http://clarkbw.net/blog/2008/05/21/you-had-me-at-hello/comment-page-1/#comment-5418</link>
		<dc:creator>Luis Villa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 06:13:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clarkbw.net/blog/?p=344#comment-5418</guid>
		<description>Getting the message across quickly and succinctly has always been a hallmark of good writing (&#039;tell them what you&#039;re going to tell them, tell them, and then tell them what you told them.&#039;) I agree that the tools do reinforce that message, but they aren&#039;t the cause.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Getting the message across quickly and succinctly has always been a hallmark of good writing (&#8216;tell them what you&#8217;re going to tell them, tell them, and then tell them what you told them.&#8217;) I agree that the tools do reinforce that message, but they aren&#8217;t the cause.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bryan Clark</title>
		<link>http://clarkbw.net/blog/2008/05/21/you-had-me-at-hello/comment-page-1/#comment-5417</link>
		<dc:creator>Bryan Clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 03:24:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clarkbw.net/blog/?p=344#comment-5417</guid>
		<description>Ken: Its completely possible that you&#039;re dead on here and the machine is making our world.  Hopefully I&#039;ll be able to document all the different clients so we can see clearly how they are representing mails like this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ken: Its completely possible that you&#8217;re dead on here and the machine is making our world.  Hopefully I&#8217;ll be able to document all the different clients so we can see clearly how they are representing mails like this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken Crandall</title>
		<link>http://clarkbw.net/blog/2008/05/21/you-had-me-at-hello/comment-page-1/#comment-5414</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken Crandall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 00:21:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clarkbw.net/blog/?p=344#comment-5414</guid>
		<description>Bryan,

Is it possible that the fact we can glean so much meaning from the first 2 sentences of an email is a learned behavior?  

We&#039;ve all probably had bosses or other people who said &quot;Your message was too long, I didn&#039;t bother to read it.&quot;  Most likely this is because Outlook (by far the most widespread corporate email client) and most other email clients, at this point, have &quot;Summary View&quot; or something similar which shows the sender, subject, and the first 2-4 lines of the message.  If people want to get their message noticed, they would squeeze 1-2 summary sentences into the space that those two lines would accommodate.  

I&#039;m not criticizing, by any means.  I think that you&#039;re dead-on.  This is also why I think that the summary and 3-pane views in Outlook/Entourage/etc. provide this little bit of email for context.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bryan,</p>
<p>Is it possible that the fact we can glean so much meaning from the first 2 sentences of an email is a learned behavior?  </p>
<p>We&#8217;ve all probably had bosses or other people who said &#8220;Your message was too long, I didn&#8217;t bother to read it.&#8221;  Most likely this is because Outlook (by far the most widespread corporate email client) and most other email clients, at this point, have &#8220;Summary View&#8221; or something similar which shows the sender, subject, and the first 2-4 lines of the message.  If people want to get their message noticed, they would squeeze 1-2 summary sentences into the space that those two lines would accommodate.  </p>
<p>I&#8217;m not criticizing, by any means.  I think that you&#8217;re dead-on.  This is also why I think that the summary and 3-pane views in Outlook/Entourage/etc. provide this little bit of email for context.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.289 seconds -->

