Talk:Email

Unfinished merge of Email systemEmail system

From a search through Email's revision history, it seems the merge of Email systemEmail system was never completed. It is worth attempting, as email systems are a robust topic of study. Tule-hog (talk) 22:49, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To not merge; unsuitable target; there is some sense that topic related to apnea might be a better target. Klbrain (talk) 18:46, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

---

@JJelax: I propose merging Email apnea into Email#Issues due to the lack of notability, small size, and overlap. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 02:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Oppose. I disagree with merging. The email article is about the technology while email apnea is about something comparable to sleep apnea. Email apnea is really about apnea while working or using a screen; the use of the word "email" in the name of the concept is an instance of synecdoche. We wouldn't merge butt dialing into buttocks. Quarl ^(talk) 03:56, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Just to clarify that Email apnea is a Phenomenon not a validated health condition like sleep apnea. The same argument could be made that “Email bankruptcy” isn’t related to email because it’s a type of fatigue. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 21:34, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

No opinion on the merger, but this should be listed at WP:UA lol. JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 08:26, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Just add it yourself! :) I can do stuff! (talk) 22:00, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Oppose. Email Apnea is just the name for the effect that happens as a result of Email or computer use as a whole. I really don't see how email apnea can be merged into email. I can do stuff! (talk) 14:54, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Energy use vs snail mail

I often hear people claiming that the energy use of email are higher than post mail. A fact based conclusion here would be good! Nallebrean (talk) 10:52, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

There's no mechanism for making a firm factual answer. A google search reveals lots of speculative articles and claims, some saying email uses more, some saying it uses less. It seems 'obvious' to me email uses less, considering the energy involved in manufacture of paper, ink, the fuel used by trucks to drive letters to and from source and destination. But we don't add speculative claims where there isn't a strong consensus among the sources. If you want a riposte for what other people claim, perhaps direct them to this article - , taking strong note of the title - "thought experiment", not verifiable fact. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 16:58, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

If you include the energy use of a server, likely running 24/7 though most of the time might not be doing anything, it might be more. But most often, servers are doing something, or at least need to be available for other uses. Reminds me of someone considering the energy use to run the clock in a microwave oven, compared to the energy used to heat food. But they are very efficient in heating food, compared to traditional ovens. And one might otherwise need a regular electric clock. You have to be careful how you calculate the energy cost. Gah4 (talk) 06:31, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

DECnet

It seems that the article leaves out much of DECnet and the mail system it had starting early 1980's. Partly, it was slow in implementation with the cost of DECnet, and especially the cost of long distance networking. In the earlier years, it was only within a school or other organization. But through much of the 1980's, DECnet mail existing along side SMTP on IP networks. There were gateways, often Ultrix machines. There were machines that would forward mail between them, even for users without an account on the machine. Maybe by 1990, VAX/VMS had enough support for SMTP that people stopped using DECnet mail. Gah4 (talk) 06:45, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

The article also omits AOL, which was a major player in the e-mail business, best known for its unsolicited coffee coasters ;-) -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 13:29, 2 September 2026 (UTC)