Linked – Why Aren’t You Using Email Threading on Every Case?
Imagine if Gmail, Outlook, or Yahoo were incapable of grouping email conversations together. Without conversation grouping, or email threading, you might be able to sort by subject, but the software would not understand that “RE:” and “FW:” should be disregarded. The forwards would be in one group, the replies would all follow, and the original message could be anywhere. If two conversations had identical subjects, even if they were between entirely different people, you would need to manually read the email contents to discover which message belongs to which conversation.
If you had an alternative, would you ever consider using the email software described above?
It does sort of boggle the mind that there are people in the eDiscovery industry who just want to look at email in chronological order.
No, you don’t, you just don’t know how else to ask for it. It should be threaded, so that you can deal with one conversation at a time. Studies have shown, time and time again, that we work much faster when we can focus on one topic at a time. Why would we purposefully do something that makes us flit around from subject to subject on every email?
That’s no way to work.
Follow these topics: Links, LitigationSupport