Is it really necessary to have an all-empty inbox?

[crazlunatic]

I know people like to go minimalist and believe an all-empty inbox will keep them organized. But is it really necessary? Especailly when you get 20+ emails per day, wouldn't it be even more productive to just read the headline, and dismiss it, instead of selecting them and pressing delete.

[yogesh sarkar]

I almost never delete emails, unless they are spam. Why would you want to delete a piece of conversation, if you can keep it as archive and refer to it at a later stage?

Also with the mail boxes growing in size, one rarely if ever hits the maximum storage capacity.

[Tayrak]

It's a personal choice. I keep a lot of emails, some for reference, just yesterday I dug through 20 pages to find the one I wanted. I couldn't remember the headline so I couldn't do a search. Yeah a little tidying up wouldn't do any harm.

[Lucas]

Originally Posted by crazlunatic

I know people like to go minimalist and believe an all-empty inbox will keep them organized. But is it really necessary? Especailly when you get 20+ emails per day, wouldn't it be even more productive to just read the headline, and dismiss it, instead of selecting them and pressing delete.

Is it necessary? Nah, not at all, however, I get a satisfaction when I get my inbox to zero and make decisions about my emails. Its either, Delete, Archive or Action. It's a good feeling that you are doing stuff now and not putting it off til the next time you go to your inbox. That mindset also got me to unsubscribe from tons of newsletters too, and now I only get essential items, only need to check my mail once a day, and process to zero each time. It works when I get 5 emails a day and when I get 25. I love it.

I press the buttons as I am reading, its simple to hit archive or delete, and would only save a negligible amount of time doing nothing.

[silicon toad2000]

I believe it is something we should aim for.

I create subfolders for storing emails once they have been dealt with. Every email, once dealt with goes into a subfolder in relation to the project or subject the email pertains to.
I find that way it is much easier to follow threads of emails and find information.
I'm a bit of a student of the toyota production method, especially 5S sort, sweep, simplify, standardise and sustain. All you tools should be in their place, for an office worker those tools are often bits of information in emails. A mechanic doesn't keep all the tools in one box, they are carefully sorted into their rightful compartment.

[z1freeride]

I love gmail for its awesome search feature. I never have to dig through pages of email - just type in a few keywords and you'll find it easily. (btw, I rarely delete emails also.)

[gberardi]

It's not about being minimalist. It's about being decisive. Could you imagine keeping large stacks of mail on your kitchen table, and then having to go through junk mail and letters from your grandmother before you can find the bills that were due yesterday?

That's why you bring it to zero. Each piece of mail has a purpose. You can save it on purpose, delete it on purpose, or do something with it on purpose, but if you just leave it there, it is now clutter.

When I ask people questions at the day job, it is amusing when they start scrolling up and down through the inbox that holds everything to try to find an answer. Why waste all that time when you could have your archived emails in appropriate folders? Your inbox should be where email goes to say "I have arrived" so you know you need to address them. It should not do double duty as your inbox AND default archive.

But of course, that's personal preference. I'm just saying that it isn't about minimalism. It's about organization, and it isn't the zero inbox that makes you organized. It's a symptom of the fact that you are organized.

[Gene]

Originally Posted by crazlunatic

I know people like to go minimalist and believe an all-empty inbox will keep them organized. But is it really necessary? Especailly when you get 20+ emails per day, wouldn't it be even more productive to just read the headline, and dismiss it, instead of selecting them and pressing delete.

I keep most email that is really relevant when I receive it. I have email stored that is more than ten years old and sometimes refer to that body of information to clarify what was said to whom.

That is just my method though. I have friends who keep nothing after they read the email.

[mentalken]

I'm a keeper. I tend to keep any emails that aren't spam. I also creaye sub-folders so it's all quite tidy really. Every now and again I'll go through them and delete the really old ones.

[crazlunatic]

I see where you guys are coming from. What I currently do is read the emails I need to and if they're important, I archive them. If they're not, I leave them in the unbox unopened or even opened but not important. So I guess I'm doubling my inbox as an inbox AND trash, and I find that it saves time.

One problem I just realized was that I don't think you can view ONLY your archives since that option would be All Mail, can you?

[JohnMack]

I do exactly the same. I've set up about a dozen filters in Gmail to automatically identify and label things like receipts, mails from my regular correspondents, mails from important websites, and misc others that I want to separate from the herd for any reason. After I read them they get archived. Everything else gets left in the Inbox. It's currently about 50 pages long. This system (and it is a system!) means I only ever handle mail that I deem important. Everything else stays put and can stay there forever. You might think there'd be a danger of missing important mail, but for me that hasn't happened yet. New mails stay on the front page for a couple of days, on average, and I always see what I need to see.

[growingintoyou]

Originally Posted by gberardi

It's not about being minimalist. It's about being decisive. Could you imagine keeping large stacks of mail on your kitchen table, and then having to go through junk mail and letters from your grandmother before you can find the bills that were due yesterday?

That's why you bring it to zero. Each piece of mail has a purpose. You can save it on purpose, delete it on purpose, or do something with it on purpose, but if you just leave it there, it is now clutter.

When I ask people questions at the day job, it is amusing when they start scrolling up and down through the inbox that holds everything to try to find an answer. Why waste all that time when you could have your archived emails in appropriate folders? Your inbox should be where email goes to say "I have arrived" so you know you need to address them. It should not do double duty as your inbox AND default archive.

But of course, that's personal preference. I'm just saying that it isn't about minimalism. It's about organization, and it isn't the zero inbox that makes you organized. It's a symptom of the fact that you are organized.

I agree...I think you should treat your e-mail like your desk. Everything you get should have a place or be deleted. If not, it can lead to chaos and added stress in your life.

[crazlunatic]

Originally Posted by growingintoyou

I agree...I think you should treat your e-mail like your desk. Everything you get should have a place or be deleted. If not, it can lead to chaos and added stress in your life.

I see where you are coming from. I've TRIED keeping my inbox organized but due to the LARGE number of emails, I probably spend 5X less time on email if I didn't delete and clean my inbox

[growingintoyou]

Originally Posted by crazlunatic

I see where you are coming from. I've TRIED keeping my inbox organized but due to the LARGE number of emails, I probably spend 5X less time on email if I didn't delete and clean my inbox

What do you do when you are done reading the e-mail? Instead of just moving on to the next item, delete, or move the message to an appropriate folder and be done with it. If you do this to every message, it doesn't really take any extra time...just the consistent actions to keep your inbox clear.

[Yennifer]

As for me "empty inbox" doesn't mean zero messages in your mail box. For me it means no messages waiting for my processing.

You can not concentrate on the work entirely if you have any decision to take.

[veranadine]

I have tried both the "all empty" approach and the "never empty" approach.

Finally I settled on a rather complicated hierarchical folder structure.

I worked like that for several years and it kinda helped me keep on top of things, but not completely.

My fiance is an organization and process-building genius.

He helped me see that a dump it and only keep what is actionable in the inbox approach would work better.

Though I can't handle the chaos of dumping all things into one folder.

So I have now implemented this email processing approach:

1. Based on subject line I sort the inactionable (ie. no action needed or deserved) emails into appropriate subfolders.

2. I leave whatever is actionable within the next 2-14 days in my Inbox and work down them as needed, moving to subfolders when action is no longer needed on them.

3. To find emails I am finally coming around to the "Search Don't Sort" way of thinking. It is much faster and less annoying.

My productivity has definitely increased. We'll see if I can stick with it.

Blessings,