|
|
Post by buddysmom on Jul 13, 2016 12:56:25 GMT
If I email Susie and BCC John, when Susie responds to me does John see her response?
|
|
|
|
Post by Meri-Lyn on Jul 13, 2016 12:57:22 GMT
No, he does not.
|
|
|
|
Post by STBC on Jul 13, 2016 12:58:44 GMT
If she were to do a "reply to all" John would not be included (because she can't see that he was included in the original message), so he would not receive her email.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 16:49:06 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2016 13:35:51 GMT
Nope.
But if *John* replies to all, Susie would get it and know he was bcc'ed. Which sometimes can pose problems.
|
|
|
|
Post by SockMonkey on Jul 13, 2016 13:37:24 GMT
I almost never BCC someone unless I also call them or email them separately to let them know. And even then, usually what I'll do is copy the text of what I sent into a separate email. Too much drama with BCC.
An exception would be a group email sent about a common thing and not everyone needs to know who exactly is in that group. Even then, it's rare.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 16:49:06 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2016 13:57:41 GMT
Pretty much the only time I bcc people is when it's a large group and I put *everyone* in bcc and only me in To. That prevents any reply alls from clogging anyone's email.
I'm not a fan of bcc'ing generally and if I'm tempted to do it because I want to hide who is getting the email, I think long and hard about why I'm tempted to do that. I try to be more transparent than that and avoid being secretively CYA, etc. I think most bcc'ing is really passive aggressive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Linda on Jul 13, 2016 14:04:51 GMT
I use BCC only in two types of situations
1) as previous posters have said - when emailing a large group. It keeps individual emails private and prevents reply-all issues. I run a email loop for my GS community and I always BCC everyone so replies come only to me
2) I will occasionally BCC another volunteer - this is a CYA move on my part and I'll own it. We have a specific volunteer in our area who is known for causing issues - it's a good idea to have a 'paper trail' when dealing with her.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 16:49:06 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2016 14:10:37 GMT
I use BCC only in two types of situations 1) as previous posters have said - when emailing a large group. It keeps individual emails private and prevents reply-all issues. I run a email loop for my GS community and I always BCC everyone so replies come only to me 2) I will occasionally BCC another volunteer - this is a CYA move on my part and I'll own it. We have a specific volunteer in our area who is known for causing issues - it's a good idea to have a 'paper trail' when dealing with her. What I have found is that when I openly cc someone else (rather than bcc'ing) and am clear about the reason why (e.g., "We've had communication issues in the past" or whatever), it can actually help improve the problems rather than just documenting for the next time things go south. |
|
|
|
Post by Linda on Jul 13, 2016 14:32:17 GMT
I use BCC only in two types of situations 1) as previous posters have said - when emailing a large group. It keeps individual emails private and prevents reply-all issues. I run a email loop for my GS community and I always BCC everyone so replies come only to me 2) I will occasionally BCC another volunteer - this is a CYA move on my part and I'll own it. We have a specific volunteer in our area who is known for causing issues - it's a good idea to have a 'paper trail' when dealing with her. What I have found is that when I openly cc someone else (rather than bcc'ing) and am clear about the reason why (e.g., "We've had communication issues in the past" or whatever), it can actually help improve the problems rather than just documenting for the next time things go south. and generally, that works, I agree. This specific volunteer (A.) would (and has) taken it as us 'ganging up on her'. I only bcc the other volunteer (B.) so that when A. goes to her and says "Linda said x was fine" or more likely - A. tells staff that "Linda said x was fine" and staff goes to B. and says why is mis-information being passed along. B. knows that what I actually said was 'x is against the rules because y'. A. 'hears' exactly what she wants to hear. I'm the communications volunteer for our area. B. is the volunteer with whom staff works most often. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 16:49:06 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2016 14:40:15 GMT
What I have found is that when I openly cc someone else (rather than bcc'ing) and am clear about the reason why (e.g., "We've had communication issues in the past" or whatever), it can actually help improve the problems rather than just documenting for the next time things go south. and generally, that works, I agree. This specific volunteer (A.) would (and has) taken it as us 'ganging up on her'. I only bcc the other volunteer (B.) so that when A. goes to her and says "Linda said x was fine" or more likely - A. tells staff that "Linda said x was fine" and staff goes to B. and says why is mis-information being passed along. B. knows that what I actually said was 'x is against the rules because y'. A. 'hears' exactly what she wants to hear. I'm the communications volunteer for our area. B. is the volunteer with whom staff works most often. Some people are so delightful  |
|
|
|
Post by monklady123 on Jul 13, 2016 14:42:31 GMT
Pretty much the only time I bcc people is when it's a large group and I put *everyone* in bcc and only me in To. That prevents any reply alls from clogging anyone's email. I'm not a fan of bcc'ing generally and if I'm tempted to do it because I want to hide who is getting the email, I think long and hard about why I'm tempted to do that. I try to be more transparent than that and avoid being secretively CYA, etc. I think most bcc'ing is really passive aggressive.  We started bcc-ing everyone at church when we were in the middle of our reorganization and several bullies were harassing the entire congregation with nasty replies to one of us in the leadership. ugh. Also the bullies were using that entire email list to send out antagonistic emails. The problem with that is that we have a lot of people on the email list who are not church members -- they're regular visitors, or spouses, or people who have moved away. So our pastor would send out the weekly prayer to that entire list and the antis would use it to send something inflammatory.  |
|
|
|
Post by not2peased on Jul 13, 2016 14:59:42 GMT
I hate BCC and find it really unprofessional and don't ever use it
|
|
|
|
Post by cadoodlebug on Jul 13, 2016 15:01:42 GMT
I always BBC on a large group email and I think it's the polite thing to do because there are idiots out there who *respond to all* when it is inappropriate and stupid. I also hate group texts because I start getting replies from people who I have no idea who they are. JMHO of course.
ETA: These are general emails not professional/work emails.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy4scraps on Jul 13, 2016 15:18:19 GMT
I hate BCC and find it really unprofessional and don't ever use it Why is it unprofessional? What I hate is getting an email from someone where my email address and 562 other people's email addresses are all visible, so anyone getting it who might feel inclined to spam a bunch of people for their current MLM scheme suddenly have easy availability to a whole host of fresh "prospects." Umm, no thank you. I think that is unprofessional. Not everyone can afford to use Constant Contact or the like, but anyone can BCC for free. |
|
