My email put the "summary" at the start and the "details" at the end (see "> Drilling down some..."). So for brevity
> I lean towards #2 but am also not opposed to #1 as it does provide a nice > alternative. > > I’ve tried to show my thoughts on #2 in past responses (i.e. use targeted > filters to show areas of work/improvement [i.e. items still open, items per > domain, etc.], the dashboards [showing graphical view of issue state], auto > link [linking JIRA to PRs], change control, tribes/subgroups/domain > experts, etc.) > > I still think there needs to be a "#5 Establish, document, and use a > process to manage the issues" that should be addressed. FYI...I did consider (half the morning and more time for previous emails) and edit it (yes it was longer at one point). In the end I'm darned if do (i.e. putting too much in the email that people ignore even if there is value in it) and darned if I don't (i.e. I don't put enough and people don't understand what I'm trying to convey). I'm trying to get better but becoming an eloquent concise writer is a journey not done in a day. Eric Bresie [email protected] On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 9:49 AM Geertjan Wielenga <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry, csn you consider rambling less, responding to threads a lot less, > and formulating your thoughts more concisely? You risk people skipping over > your lengthy responses and your effort being wasted. > > Gj >
