If you work in a team, email is limited to the people you cc: while a convo in a slack channel can have people you didn't think of jump in* with information.

See the other point in the article about discouraging one on one private messages and encouraging public discussion. That is the main reason.

* half a day later or days later if you do true async, but that's fine.

▲

dijit an hour ago | parent [-]

I am neutral in this particular topic, so don’t think I’m defending or attacking or anything.

But aren’t mailling lists and distribution groups pretty ubiquitous?

▲

nottorp an hour ago | parent [-]

But - from the people you actually want to get to contribute - emails come with an expectation of a well thought out text. IMs ... less so.

I've been working across time zones via IM and email since ... ICQ.

I'm probably biased by that but I consider email the place for questions lists and long statuses with request for comments, and for info that I want retained somewhere. While IM is a transient medium where you throw a quickie question or statement or whine every couple hours - and check what everyone else is whining about.

	▲	dijit an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I have now been roped into talking more about a topic I have no interest in and am completely ambivalent to… :/ But clearly, thats cultural. If you keep your eyes on the linux kernel mailing you’ll see a lot of (on topic) short and informal messages flying in all directions. If you keep your eyes on the emails from big tech CEOs that sometimes appear in court documents; you’ll see that the way they use email is the same way that I’d use slack or an instant messenger. Thats likely because its the tool they have available- we have IM tools that connect us to people we need (inside the company)- making email the only place for long form content, which means its only perceived as being for long form content. But when people have to use something federated more often, it does seem like email is actually used this way.