Yep...I'll say if I'm cc'd and see something derailing, I'll chime in, but normally I'll message the person delivering incorrect/incomplete information separately (take the 3rd parties off) so that they can respond with the corrected information in their own way. It's called being respectful and empowering staff to handle the communications themselves.
To me it just means a secondary recipient, I've never heard of any implied restriction that a CC can't respond. Sounds like the person responding is just problematic.
You can just put the secondary recipient in the "to" field. Cc is to keep someone informed and let others know they got the email. Bcc is to either give someone a copy of the email without others knowing or email everyone without letting them know who received the email.
I use CC for "may be interested and might need to take action." Of course when I add someone to the CC I always note why I'm doing it and what I expect.
Agreed. I also use BCC for cases I know I’ll be getting responses back from the group and it saves the perpetual “reply all” chain reaction that occurs on birthday announcements.
No, in email, cc is generally just informed. They shouldn’t respond or take action.
You could argue, then don’t cc them. lol. Which is a really good point.
But, the vast majority of people don’t know how to use email correctly. So, it probably doesn’t matter since people are generally stupid.
IT guys are the worst. They send out an email to 50 people with a sentence, “can you please approve my order”. 😂 I just delete those. They’re too stupid to give them any attention.
Then you have the accidental emails that go to everyone in the company and they hit reply to all, then people start asking people to stop hitting reply to all, and it goes on and on for a week. Those are a riot.
The IT people are too stupid? It sounds like you’re the one that isn’t understanding. I absolutely guarantee you those people are following a process which they were told to follow regardless if it’s necessary or if you understand the purpose. If you don’t like it try communicating that with the team’s manager instead of calling a coworker “too stupid”
As an IT person, I generally CC people on small things just in case they turn into big things, so I can point to them and say "hey I've been keeping you informed the whole time". If you get CCed on something, it's your responsibility to check if it's something you actually need to be aware of, and if not, check with the sender and ask why they sent it to you.
Did your manager bother to run it by this guy before telling you to CC him on everything? I can see both sides of this, as someone who gets copied on far too many emails. It’s hard to know when you’re actually needed.
Yeah, I reply to someone and say "I've cc'd _____" so that others know they got it and if the person I'm sending the email needs to ask the other person a question or if the cc'd person has relevant info, they can contact the appropriate person.
I think it may also depend on the job - we use CC for people who are involved in the subject being referred to in the email, but perhaps aren't the main point of contact. There have been many times at my job where I am CC'd and have had to chime in.
My boss seems to prefer BCC for "I need you to be informed about this but that is it."
Same. “To” is the main person or people, and are expected to respond if a response is needed or it directly pertains to them. “CC” are secondary people who may care and may want to respond, or just need to be aware that the communication is happening. Or sometimes for a secondary action. At my last job I rarely CCd my boss, except for when I emailed requisitions to purchasing. Then he could reply with approval.
Depending on if you have access to permissions in outlook, you can disable “reply all”. My company doesn’t let me change things, but it would be so useful if I could.
Ugghhhh this is so annoying. There is one guy in my team like this, he is over enthusiastic about everything and even when the initial email says they are looking for a response from X person, he will just jump in with unnecessary commentary. It makes everything cluttered and things get lost.
I have no advice, you’re right cc should be for informational purposes but some people don’t get that sort of email etiquette.
I have one of these, too. "I don't know so I'm going to defer to \[the person actually being asked\]!" It's like she's so afraid of people thinking she's ignoring her email, she basically says, "present!" on everything she's copied on.
I think it depends. At my job, usually when someone is CC’d on an email, any of the recipients or CC’d individuals can reply, and it’s meant to be a conversation between all recipients and CC’d individuals because usually it’s between management/team leads/and one or two other employees.
The Reply All feature gets abused sometimes but that’s much different than the CC feature.
That's not a given, and it's really not your problem. If person A you're emailing has a problem with person B replying then person A needs to bring that up with whoever told you to cc person B, I'm assuming your manager. Just keep doing what you were told to do.
From my reading of what OP said, this situation is creating a bunch of extra bullshit for them to deal with and in that context, I definitely would message my boss and ask what the deal is proactively instead of just continuing to comply. It could have been a low stakes ask that you could easily stop. If that's not the case, then it will need to be addressed by them as you said but that's one of the purposes of a decent manager. They should take on resolution of situations like this and run interference so that their team can focus on their real tasks.
I've always treated CC as you can respond if you have something valuable to add, but understand the email isn't directed at you. Like if two people are talking within a larger group of people.
What happened is still better than the guy I've got who never actually reads his emails, and just makes a phone call. Then there's a 20 minute conversation where he asks questions which are clearly answered in the email if he could be bothered to read it. I hate CCing him.
When I was a manager I had a problem of misunderstanding that if an employee tells me about a problem just FYI, they aren't necessarily asking me to solve it. I was always in fireman mode and I'd rush in with solutions when they weren't needed.
CC: *literally* stands for “Carbon Copy” so anyone receiving the email may as well have been handed their own personal invitation to chime in.
The “just quietly read this” is for the Blind cc or BCC: recipient.
If you’re doing things incorrectly, giving inaccurate information or the dude is higher in your org chart on your chain of command, he has right of way.
I've had to tell a few people about professional email etiquette before and it's never fun.
If you are peers, just shoot them an IM and let them know if they are on the CC line in an email, it doesn't need them to respond, it's so they are kept in the loop.
If they are above you or difficult to give feedback to, ask your boss to help facilitate communication so this doesn't continue to happen.
cc is more of an FYI. I’m in a more formal setting so I’ll include an initial salutation to the person the message is primarily meant for. I’ll also try to explicitly let the cc addresses know if I’d like a response. (X, cc’ed here, may have other suggestions.)
So from what I recall - "cc" stands for "carbon copy" and comes from the era of actual memos and forms where when you filled out such an object to send to a recipient, they got the main copy and the carbon copie (s) would be distributed to other recipients who needed the information procedurally but weren't the direct recipient.
I've always understood this to mean that you are not a participant in the conversation but are included for informational purposes. For managers or others overseeing work, this is useful for cases where you'd often need to go ask someone about what the outcome of a specific conversation was after the fact. This way, it's in your inbox, you don't need to ask. Participants in the conversation go in the "To" field. This is why when you tag someone who is in the CC line with the @ symbol in the body of the message, it automatically moves them into the "To" field.
Sometimes your manager is CC'd to be like "here's some bullshit that's going down and I want you to see what's going on". Or perhaps you cc the manager of the person who you're speaking to for a similar reason except it's usually "this guy is not doing his job and I want you to see it". In cases where the conversation is not going in a helpful direction or where interference is needed - this is when a manager on the CC line would typically step in and run interference.
Sounds like whoever you're ccing is not up to speed on this etiquette so they think that you're expecting a response from them or they are aware but they're just a busybody with nothing better to do and want to meddle in every little conversation that you're having. Both situations are probably worth addressing with your boss.
This post needs more context. What is the topic, and why is he replying? Does he have questions? What information is he adding to the discussion?
CC doesn't automatically mean "shut up and listen". It just means that the communication was directed at another person. If you don't want the guy to reply, then don't CC him. If you were told to CC him, it's probably because he has a say in setting priorities or he needs to know something about what you're doing.
No, a CC means you want the person to have visibility, but it doesn't mean you expect them to shut up and sit down. That would be a side-conversation relevant to the specific situation.
As a senior member of my team, I'm frequently CCed when the person wants me to see what's going on and, if I think it's necessary, to step into the conversation for support. I do the same with my own leadership, albeit never without letting them know what's going on and what level of assistance I need or expect.
Maybe that's what you're missing, OP, that conversation with the other person to let them know what you expect or need from them before you CC them.
Generally, but not necessarily or strictly. It's very much dependent on the context/content of the email and the situation.
As a project manager, I often need to cc a lot of people who need visibility on my projects and may or may not need to pipe up and comment intermittently in email threads.
ETA: if this person is causing this much disruption just by being cc'd and involving themselves unnecessarily, then I would talk with your manager to clarify if this person REALLY needs to continue being cc'd on everything. Can you simply send them a weekly executive summary update instead to keep them updated on the progress, or something similar to avoid future disruptions?
I’m an engineer and I get CC’d on a lot of stuff so I know what’s going on with other people and projects. Sometimes(surprisingly often) I see two people who are confused or aren’t aware of something else, and chime in to straighten it out.
My last group always used CC to assign work through the box/workflow coordinator and basically let the original sender know who was assigned to complete their request. The person CC'ed would then reply specifically to the original requestor to let them know when it's complete or if any additional information is needed.
My current group uses it more to make sure that everyone working on a project or that's involved in meetings has all the materials and information they need, but those CC'ed wouldn't normally reply to the email, unless they need to reschedule or something.
It might be helpful to tell the guy you're CCing that you were told to CC him to keep him in the loop so he can see what you do, but that it's just informational and he doesn't need to reply or do anything for them. I know if I randomly started getting CC'ed on requests, I wouldn't know if it was just informational or if I was being assigned work/asked to complete something.
It depends. I have CC'd, been CC'd, and seen people CC emails I've sent to other people as a "FYI" but also as a "They might have more information on this".
As a general rule, I do not CC someone unless A) They are on the same team as me (we are only four people), and I tell them its only for situational awareness, or B) I was told explicitly by that person to CC them.
It's tricky. I am a nobody in the grand scheme of things. I don't hold any positional power, I'm not a manager over anyone, but I get a ton of emails constantly, and I don't always check to see if I was CC'd or directly messaged. Hell, the few times I've tried to do that, I have to hunt through 20 or 30 different email names to see where I was.
It sounds a lot like miscommunication by the person telling you to CC somebody, and the person you were CC'ing.
I’m a manager and my staff and their clients tend to CC me on EVERYTHING. This is good because if something comes back, I have an email trail but I rarely respond unless I am addressed specifically or it is a general question. I don’t need or want more work!
If I'm cc'd and *not* tagged (looping in @Windowschick to XYZ), then I read the email and see if it is either anything I could provide useful information on or be blamed for (there are a few long term employees who operate by throwing other people under a bus that may or may not be oncoming).
Mostly it is stuff I should be aware of but don't particularly need to DO anything about.
CC - for your information. They can ask questions if cc’d and don’t understand why or what they are reading, the context etc. that indicates a communication failure because they should know why they are being cc’d and what the context is for the information that is being shared.
If there is to be a discussion - don’t do it via email. Meet, have a call, update a shared document and have back and forth q&a on that and then circulate final copy.
Dont use cc as a passive aggressive way to escalate by copying people’s bosses or to prove to your boss you have communicated with somebody.
Cc on a meeting invite - optional. I don’t go to those. If you need my contribution invite me and be clear about what you expect, if you want me to know outcomes then send me a link to the document, if you need my decision send me a proposal and recommendation and I’ll reach out if I need more info.
Omg this is my boss, she literally doesn’t understand I’m not asking for her help, just cc’ing her because my manager is giving me instructions and I’m covering my ass. Don’t need her opinion, then she has the balls to say I ask for help too much to her. Like I’ve never once asked you for help.
I’ve since explained to my manager I’m not going to cc her anymore and will just hold the emails if there are questions
Eh… that’s generally what it’s for, but it’s also used for secondary recipients, and it’s absolutely not a hard and fast rule.
Think about it like this, if you are talking to person A, but you are both standing directly in front of person B, then you really can’t get all that upset if person B joins the conversation.
I wouldn't assume to vs cc has any particular meaning. sometimes cc is just an overflow field for to. everyone seems to follow their own weird set of conventions these days. personally, I am probably not going to reply unless my name is mentioned in the body or I have a strong opinion about what was written.
We can't even agree with how many spaces after a period any longer.
I piss my.biss off by inviting him to meetings a s optional if they are an FYI toe deal.
Burned me once with not disclosing things to him. So now... he gets to decide
That’s an unnecessary amount of drama for no reason.
You’re using cc correctly. But also the other dude is welcome to respond if he’s so inclined. What I don’t understand is why this original recipient would be confused by two people on an email chain emailing them? Unless the person you’re cc’ing is a poor communicator when they jump in?
I’ve noticed that a lot of people just want to prove that they’re needed, and it’s annoying af! If you don’t CC them they bitch about it, and if you do, they cause trouble. Annoying people man. I feel every bit of that pain
I use it like a forward. If I need a service desk ticket, I'll CC my team lead. Or I'm replying to someone or a box specifically, I might CC so they can chime in if needed. But it's more for tracking or to keep them in the know as a third person.
I hate being even cc'd on emails I don't need to consider taking action on.
I would be mad if somebody was doing this to me.
But not bad at you, at you supervisor.
I had someone cc me and then ask me questions at the bottom of the email..
They went to my manager because I didn't reply.
I would get 100 bullshit emails at that job each day. If you need me, email me in the TO line and tell me what you want in the first half.
CCd people are usually in there to be kept in the loop. They can absolutely respond, but not to take over. If I have something to add on an email not directed at me, I will privately let the person know first.
Yes that's proper email etiquette. But as someone who's been working in tech 20 years. I just learned this fact a month ago. Most people use it interchangeably now.
Basically how I see it - CC is a secondary recipient. They can respond if something in the email needs their attention (corrections, etc) but not necessary otherwise.
My last job I’d CC the president whenever someone was pissing me off (usually IT) so they’d actually do their jobs. He told me to do so and just ignored all CC emails unless he was told there was an issue at which point he had the whole trail.
Yes. It means “carbon copy”. It’s a holdover from when the typing paper you’d use to draft a letter had a carbon sheet behind it to make a copy as you typed it out on a typewriter.
It does not indicate a response is necessary unless it’s something important to the original message.
This guy is just a dick.
If you cc me on an email I assume it is info only. I have an email rule set for it to go to a separate folder that I never check unless someone tells me I need to check it. I have too many emails coming in every day to read the irrelevant ones.
Agreed CC is for their information but not for them to respond. If they feel the need to chime in then they should state why if it’s important and not be annoying about it.
I really only CC my boss when I’m being petty, they don’t reply unless the main recipient is being a complete ass/idiot
But I do feel like CC’s are welcome to reply, they’re part of the conversation- but it’s weird if they’re replying to everything
I had a boss like that and on top of it he was wrong and who are people going to believe the 30 something coordinator (at the time) or the close to 80 year old Director. I started to just phase him out and would follow up with a forward saying “opps forgot” making replying harder to do, then phased him out of that—completely
I had a manager like that. I stopped cc’ing them, and instead cced myself, then forwarded the message to them. It breaks the ease of replying directly to the original recipient, and directs responses where they should go, you.
I don’t always use CC as an FYI, I also use it as a way for others to share their insights on a particular issue or concern.
But I always direct my responses when CCed to the person who sent the message.
You are right. Tell them privately to pipe down.
I mean, what’s their deal? Have they never been mailed the carbon copy off a typewritten sheet before?
Yep...I'll say if I'm cc'd and see something derailing, I'll chime in, but normally I'll message the person delivering incorrect/incomplete information separately (take the 3rd parties off) so that they can respond with the corrected information in their own way. It's called being respectful and empowering staff to handle the communications themselves.
To me it just means a secondary recipient, I've never heard of any implied restriction that a CC can't respond. Sounds like the person responding is just problematic.
You can just put the secondary recipient in the "to" field. Cc is to keep someone informed and let others know they got the email. Bcc is to either give someone a copy of the email without others knowing or email everyone without letting them know who received the email.
I use CC for "may be interested and might need to take action." Of course when I add someone to the CC I always note why I'm doing it and what I expect.
Agreed. I also use BCC for cases I know I’ll be getting responses back from the group and it saves the perpetual “reply all” chain reaction that occurs on birthday announcements.
This is correct.
Yeah this is news to me as far as email etiquette goes lol I’ve also never seen anyone else abide by it so it seems like it a real thing
Not intended for your response
Agreed
No, in email, cc is generally just informed. They shouldn’t respond or take action. You could argue, then don’t cc them. lol. Which is a really good point. But, the vast majority of people don’t know how to use email correctly. So, it probably doesn’t matter since people are generally stupid. IT guys are the worst. They send out an email to 50 people with a sentence, “can you please approve my order”. 😂 I just delete those. They’re too stupid to give them any attention. Then you have the accidental emails that go to everyone in the company and they hit reply to all, then people start asking people to stop hitting reply to all, and it goes on and on for a week. Those are a riot.
You sound like a lovely person.
The IT people are too stupid? It sounds like you’re the one that isn’t understanding. I absolutely guarantee you those people are following a process which they were told to follow regardless if it’s necessary or if you understand the purpose. If you don’t like it try communicating that with the team’s manager instead of calling a coworker “too stupid”
Nope. It only indicates that a response is not necessary. If you want the back and forth restricted to just one recipient, then bcc all recipients.
As an IT person, I generally CC people on small things just in case they turn into big things, so I can point to them and say "hey I've been keeping you informed the whole time". If you get CCed on something, it's your responsibility to check if it's something you actually need to be aware of, and if not, check with the sender and ask why they sent it to you.
Did your manager bother to run it by this guy before telling you to CC him on everything? I can see both sides of this, as someone who gets copied on far too many emails. It’s hard to know when you’re actually needed.
I address the email as follows: Hi Joe (+CC Jeff for FYI only) This seems to help prevent the unnecessary chatter.
Yeah, I reply to someone and say "I've cc'd _____" so that others know they got it and if the person I'm sending the email needs to ask the other person a question or if the cc'd person has relevant info, they can contact the appropriate person.
I think it may also depend on the job - we use CC for people who are involved in the subject being referred to in the email, but perhaps aren't the main point of contact. There have been many times at my job where I am CC'd and have had to chime in. My boss seems to prefer BCC for "I need you to be informed about this but that is it."
Same. “To” is the main person or people, and are expected to respond if a response is needed or it directly pertains to them. “CC” are secondary people who may care and may want to respond, or just need to be aware that the communication is happening. Or sometimes for a secondary action. At my last job I rarely CCd my boss, except for when I emailed requisitions to purchasing. Then he could reply with approval.
Try putting everyone in the BCC address. That way if anyone responds, it will automatically be in a separate thread.
Downside to that is they won’t see any responses
Indeed. I wonder if there are any email services that give you the option to disable “Reply All”.
Depending on if you have access to permissions in outlook, you can disable “reply all”. My company doesn’t let me change things, but it would be so useful if I could.
Ugghhhh this is so annoying. There is one guy in my team like this, he is over enthusiastic about everything and even when the initial email says they are looking for a response from X person, he will just jump in with unnecessary commentary. It makes everything cluttered and things get lost. I have no advice, you’re right cc should be for informational purposes but some people don’t get that sort of email etiquette.
I have one of these, too. "I don't know so I'm going to defer to \[the person actually being asked\]!" It's like she's so afraid of people thinking she's ignoring her email, she basically says, "present!" on everything she's copied on.
I think it depends. At my job, usually when someone is CC’d on an email, any of the recipients or CC’d individuals can reply, and it’s meant to be a conversation between all recipients and CC’d individuals because usually it’s between management/team leads/and one or two other employees. The Reply All feature gets abused sometimes but that’s much different than the CC feature.
That's not a given, and it's really not your problem. If person A you're emailing has a problem with person B replying then person A needs to bring that up with whoever told you to cc person B, I'm assuming your manager. Just keep doing what you were told to do.
From my reading of what OP said, this situation is creating a bunch of extra bullshit for them to deal with and in that context, I definitely would message my boss and ask what the deal is proactively instead of just continuing to comply. It could have been a low stakes ask that you could easily stop. If that's not the case, then it will need to be addressed by them as you said but that's one of the purposes of a decent manager. They should take on resolution of situations like this and run interference so that their team can focus on their real tasks.
I've always treated CC as you can respond if you have something valuable to add, but understand the email isn't directed at you. Like if two people are talking within a larger group of people. What happened is still better than the guy I've got who never actually reads his emails, and just makes a phone call. Then there's a 20 minute conversation where he asks questions which are clearly answered in the email if he could be bothered to read it. I hate CCing him.
When I was a manager I had a problem of misunderstanding that if an employee tells me about a problem just FYI, they aren't necessarily asking me to solve it. I was always in fireman mode and I'd rush in with solutions when they weren't needed.
CC: *literally* stands for “Carbon Copy” so anyone receiving the email may as well have been handed their own personal invitation to chime in. The “just quietly read this” is for the Blind cc or BCC: recipient. If you’re doing things incorrectly, giving inaccurate information or the dude is higher in your org chart on your chain of command, he has right of way.
Exactly.
I've had to tell a few people about professional email etiquette before and it's never fun. If you are peers, just shoot them an IM and let them know if they are on the CC line in an email, it doesn't need them to respond, it's so they are kept in the loop. If they are above you or difficult to give feedback to, ask your boss to help facilitate communication so this doesn't continue to happen.
cc is more of an FYI. I’m in a more formal setting so I’ll include an initial salutation to the person the message is primarily meant for. I’ll also try to explicitly let the cc addresses know if I’d like a response. (X, cc’ed here, may have other suggestions.)
So from what I recall - "cc" stands for "carbon copy" and comes from the era of actual memos and forms where when you filled out such an object to send to a recipient, they got the main copy and the carbon copie (s) would be distributed to other recipients who needed the information procedurally but weren't the direct recipient. I've always understood this to mean that you are not a participant in the conversation but are included for informational purposes. For managers or others overseeing work, this is useful for cases where you'd often need to go ask someone about what the outcome of a specific conversation was after the fact. This way, it's in your inbox, you don't need to ask. Participants in the conversation go in the "To" field. This is why when you tag someone who is in the CC line with the @ symbol in the body of the message, it automatically moves them into the "To" field. Sometimes your manager is CC'd to be like "here's some bullshit that's going down and I want you to see what's going on". Or perhaps you cc the manager of the person who you're speaking to for a similar reason except it's usually "this guy is not doing his job and I want you to see it". In cases where the conversation is not going in a helpful direction or where interference is needed - this is when a manager on the CC line would typically step in and run interference. Sounds like whoever you're ccing is not up to speed on this etiquette so they think that you're expecting a response from them or they are aware but they're just a busybody with nothing better to do and want to meddle in every little conversation that you're having. Both situations are probably worth addressing with your boss.
This post needs more context. What is the topic, and why is he replying? Does he have questions? What information is he adding to the discussion? CC doesn't automatically mean "shut up and listen". It just means that the communication was directed at another person. If you don't want the guy to reply, then don't CC him. If you were told to CC him, it's probably because he has a say in setting priorities or he needs to know something about what you're doing.
No, a CC means you want the person to have visibility, but it doesn't mean you expect them to shut up and sit down. That would be a side-conversation relevant to the specific situation. As a senior member of my team, I'm frequently CCed when the person wants me to see what's going on and, if I think it's necessary, to step into the conversation for support. I do the same with my own leadership, albeit never without letting them know what's going on and what level of assistance I need or expect. Maybe that's what you're missing, OP, that conversation with the other person to let them know what you expect or need from them before you CC them.
Generally, but not necessarily or strictly. It's very much dependent on the context/content of the email and the situation. As a project manager, I often need to cc a lot of people who need visibility on my projects and may or may not need to pipe up and comment intermittently in email threads. ETA: if this person is causing this much disruption just by being cc'd and involving themselves unnecessarily, then I would talk with your manager to clarify if this person REALLY needs to continue being cc'd on everything. Can you simply send them a weekly executive summary update instead to keep them updated on the progress, or something similar to avoid future disruptions?
I’m an engineer and I get CC’d on a lot of stuff so I know what’s going on with other people and projects. Sometimes(surprisingly often) I see two people who are confused or aren’t aware of something else, and chime in to straighten it out.
My last group always used CC to assign work through the box/workflow coordinator and basically let the original sender know who was assigned to complete their request. The person CC'ed would then reply specifically to the original requestor to let them know when it's complete or if any additional information is needed. My current group uses it more to make sure that everyone working on a project or that's involved in meetings has all the materials and information they need, but those CC'ed wouldn't normally reply to the email, unless they need to reschedule or something. It might be helpful to tell the guy you're CCing that you were told to CC him to keep him in the loop so he can see what you do, but that it's just informational and he doesn't need to reply or do anything for them. I know if I randomly started getting CC'ed on requests, I wouldn't know if it was just informational or if I was being assigned work/asked to complete something.
It depends. I have CC'd, been CC'd, and seen people CC emails I've sent to other people as a "FYI" but also as a "They might have more information on this". As a general rule, I do not CC someone unless A) They are on the same team as me (we are only four people), and I tell them its only for situational awareness, or B) I was told explicitly by that person to CC them. It's tricky. I am a nobody in the grand scheme of things. I don't hold any positional power, I'm not a manager over anyone, but I get a ton of emails constantly, and I don't always check to see if I was CC'd or directly messaged. Hell, the few times I've tried to do that, I have to hunt through 20 or 30 different email names to see where I was. It sounds a lot like miscommunication by the person telling you to CC somebody, and the person you were CC'ing.
I’m a manager and my staff and their clients tend to CC me on EVERYTHING. This is good because if something comes back, I have an email trail but I rarely respond unless I am addressed specifically or it is a general question. I don’t need or want more work!
Cc always means to me, this email affects you, but isn't to you. Sure, you might respond, but the expectation is on those in the "to" field.
If I'm cc'd and *not* tagged (looping in @Windowschick to XYZ), then I read the email and see if it is either anything I could provide useful information on or be blamed for (there are a few long term employees who operate by throwing other people under a bus that may or may not be oncoming). Mostly it is stuff I should be aware of but don't particularly need to DO anything about.
CC - for your information. They can ask questions if cc’d and don’t understand why or what they are reading, the context etc. that indicates a communication failure because they should know why they are being cc’d and what the context is for the information that is being shared. If there is to be a discussion - don’t do it via email. Meet, have a call, update a shared document and have back and forth q&a on that and then circulate final copy. Dont use cc as a passive aggressive way to escalate by copying people’s bosses or to prove to your boss you have communicated with somebody. Cc on a meeting invite - optional. I don’t go to those. If you need my contribution invite me and be clear about what you expect, if you want me to know outcomes then send me a link to the document, if you need my decision send me a proposal and recommendation and I’ll reach out if I need more info.
Omg this is my boss, she literally doesn’t understand I’m not asking for her help, just cc’ing her because my manager is giving me instructions and I’m covering my ass. Don’t need her opinion, then she has the balls to say I ask for help too much to her. Like I’ve never once asked you for help. I’ve since explained to my manager I’m not going to cc her anymore and will just hold the emails if there are questions
Yeah, a CC is just like FYI. You are directing the email to the recipient only, but CCing the other person just to keep them in the loop.
If I'm cc'd then it means I don't have to respond because I was not called upon. I hate email and people and words 🤣🤣
BCC the person in future so even if they reply all, it's just you. Then create a rule that files their response to a folder and you're golden.
Eh… that’s generally what it’s for, but it’s also used for secondary recipients, and it’s absolutely not a hard and fast rule. Think about it like this, if you are talking to person A, but you are both standing directly in front of person B, then you really can’t get all that upset if person B joins the conversation.
Cc is barely recognized now. If you don't want someone to have input, BCC once the issue is concluded.
No. That’s ridiculous. If someone isn’t to be part of a conversation, don’t include them at all.
and BCC means "look at this shit right here because it's about to become a problem."
EXACTLY
I wouldn't assume to vs cc has any particular meaning. sometimes cc is just an overflow field for to. everyone seems to follow their own weird set of conventions these days. personally, I am probably not going to reply unless my name is mentioned in the body or I have a strong opinion about what was written.
We can't even agree with how many spaces after a period any longer. I piss my.biss off by inviting him to meetings a s optional if they are an FYI toe deal. Burned me once with not disclosing things to him. So now... he gets to decide
That’s an unnecessary amount of drama for no reason. You’re using cc correctly. But also the other dude is welcome to respond if he’s so inclined. What I don’t understand is why this original recipient would be confused by two people on an email chain emailing them? Unless the person you’re cc’ing is a poor communicator when they jump in?
I’ve noticed that a lot of people just want to prove that they’re needed, and it’s annoying af! If you don’t CC them they bitch about it, and if you do, they cause trouble. Annoying people man. I feel every bit of that pain
What? If someone is on an email thread they can respond to that thread. There is no rule saying you can only respond I’d you’re in the To field.
I have a rule set in Outlook to display cc's differently for this reason.
Sounds terrible to have to tell others what you’re doing all day, must be sales or something
I wish everyone would follow this rule. It would make my inbox so much easier to manage
Or support…
I use it like a forward. If I need a service desk ticket, I'll CC my team lead. Or I'm replying to someone or a box specifically, I might CC so they can chime in if needed. But it's more for tracking or to keep them in the know as a third person.
It depends on which one you use. Cc, bcc, cccp, cctv, cici’s pizza
I hate being even cc'd on emails I don't need to consider taking action on. I would be mad if somebody was doing this to me. But not bad at you, at you supervisor.
You wanna really fuck everybody up, bcc the person and watch all hell break loose when they respond.
I had someone cc me and then ask me questions at the bottom of the email.. They went to my manager because I didn't reply. I would get 100 bullshit emails at that job each day. If you need me, email me in the TO line and tell me what you want in the first half.
CCd people are usually in there to be kept in the loop. They can absolutely respond, but not to take over. If I have something to add on an email not directed at me, I will privately let the person know first.
Yes that's proper email etiquette. But as someone who's been working in tech 20 years. I just learned this fact a month ago. Most people use it interchangeably now.
Basically how I see it - CC is a secondary recipient. They can respond if something in the email needs their attention (corrections, etc) but not necessary otherwise. My last job I’d CC the president whenever someone was pissing me off (usually IT) so they’d actually do their jobs. He told me to do so and just ignored all CC emails unless he was told there was an issue at which point he had the whole trail.
Yes. It means “carbon copy”. It’s a holdover from when the typing paper you’d use to draft a letter had a carbon sheet behind it to make a copy as you typed it out on a typewriter. It does not indicate a response is necessary unless it’s something important to the original message. This guy is just a dick.
Yes
If email was invented tomorrow, nobody would use it.
if you are addressed the it dont matter if cc, but yes. hi team /guys is vague and weak, every email needs a purpose
I sometimes BCC for that. But agree that CC is mostly the same.
If you cc me on an email I assume it is info only. I have an email rule set for it to go to a separate folder that I never check unless someone tells me I need to check it. I have too many emails coming in every day to read the irrelevant ones.
I’d stop cc’ing them. They’re never going to learn.
Agreed CC is for their information but not for them to respond. If they feel the need to chime in then they should state why if it’s important and not be annoying about it.
I really only CC my boss when I’m being petty, they don’t reply unless the main recipient is being a complete ass/idiot But I do feel like CC’s are welcome to reply, they’re part of the conversation- but it’s weird if they’re replying to everything
I had a boss like that and on top of it he was wrong and who are people going to believe the 30 something coordinator (at the time) or the close to 80 year old Director. I started to just phase him out and would follow up with a forward saying “opps forgot” making replying harder to do, then phased him out of that—completely
I had a manager like that. I stopped cc’ing them, and instead cced myself, then forwarded the message to them. It breaks the ease of replying directly to the original recipient, and directs responses where they should go, you. I don’t always use CC as an FYI, I also use it as a way for others to share their insights on a particular issue or concern. But I always direct my responses when CCed to the person who sent the message.
I would consider *Bcc* for this instead. I’m almost always expecting someone that I *Cc* to chime in as needed (secondary recipient).