Skip to main content
edit, added clarifications.
Source Link

You send an e-mail with three questions to a colleague. They reply but only answer the first question. The questions are strongly related so you don't want to send three separate e-mails. However you need all three answers and it's clear they are only skimming what you've written and answering the first question they see.

How can you approach this without looking like a nag or a psycho who sends a bazillion e-mails about everything? Should I just routinely number my questions? I've considered that but thought it might look a little pointed/officious.

edit: "routinely" may have been slightly over egging the pudding, but it has happened enough to bother me, and with different people over the years, not just one problem person.

To those asking how many questions I think I asked above, the answer is two. There are two question marks therefore there are two questions that I want answers to. I think that's the common understanding of how question marks work i.e. "please respond to this statement" and that's how I have always used them. However the consensus seems to be that bulleting / numbering them is helpful for recipients who are busy, disorganized or both, as is limiting the number of questions per communication to a minimum, ideally one.

You send an e-mail with three questions to a colleague. They reply but only answer the first question. The questions are strongly related so you don't want to send three separate e-mails. However you need all three answers and it's clear they are only skimming what you've written and answering the first question they see.

How can you approach this without looking like a nag or a psycho who sends a bazillion e-mails about everything? Should I just routinely number my questions? I've considered that but thought it might look a little pointed/officious.

You send an e-mail with three questions to a colleague. They reply but only answer the first question. The questions are strongly related so you don't want to send three separate e-mails. However you need all three answers and it's clear they are only skimming what you've written and answering the first question they see.

How can you approach this without looking like a nag or a psycho who sends a bazillion e-mails about everything? Should I just routinely number my questions? I've considered that but thought it might look a little pointed/officious.

edit: "routinely" may have been slightly over egging the pudding, but it has happened enough to bother me, and with different people over the years, not just one problem person.

To those asking how many questions I think I asked above, the answer is two. There are two question marks therefore there are two questions that I want answers to. I think that's the common understanding of how question marks work i.e. "please respond to this statement" and that's how I have always used them. However the consensus seems to be that bulleting / numbering them is helpful for recipients who are busy, disorganized or both, as is limiting the number of questions per communication to a minimum, ideally one.

Tweeted twitter.com/StackWorkplace/status/1480555052796366849
Post Reopened by motosubatsu
Question Protected by Lilienthal
Became Hot Network Question
Source Link

Colleagues routinely only answer the first of my questions?

You send an e-mail with three questions to a colleague. They reply but only answer the first question. The questions are strongly related so you don't want to send three separate e-mails. However you need all three answers and it's clear they are only skimming what you've written and answering the first question they see.

How can you approach this without looking like a nag or a psycho who sends a bazillion e-mails about everything? Should I just routinely number my questions? I've considered that but thought it might look a little pointed/officious.