How do you feel when people sign off an email with a single letter?

That feels like overthinking by several orders of magnitude. I don’t think it’s worthwhile to try to read any meaning into email signatures - they’re an archaic holdover from physical mail anyway. With no actual need, and email becoming increasingly rare as a form of communication, you get weirder sigs.

I work at a tech company and people don’t even send signatures in emails.

Oh dear, I had no idea this was a thing that people had feelings about. I always sign with my first initial if I know the recipient at all. To me it seems much LESS pompous. More like a knickname, as Bo seems more humble than Beauregard. Spelling out my full name feels
more formal and I use it when the person doesn’t know me.

I think you're way overthinking this. While I don't do it, I can see it being used for recipients that I am very comfortable with. It feels casual and not pompous to me, but I suppose this is just one of those issues with trying to convey anything that isn't completely clear via text.

I honestly don't care. My work signature block is four lines, essentially just to make sure that the question of 'who am I talking to' is answered when you get to the bottom. It's auto applied to my outgoing emails, with replies getting a truncated version also auto applied.

Plenty of people I work with don't know about this or don't have it setup and will either manually type the block (lunatics) or click the signature drop down to add it. So for at least a few people, typing A is faster, because you both know who they are.

To hit the other comment, some of the most arrogant people I know have excessively long signature blocks that they apply to every email, with their favorite quotes, six forms of contact, and their name and title spelled out over three or four lines. Madness.

But, in fairness, if you're spelling out Best Regards, you can type your full name. Once they start putting B/R, A then they can say they're saving time.

They claim a single letter as their own, ahead of everyone else.

Do you also think anyone named Mike (or any other common name) is pompous because their name isn't unique?

What is the cutoff in your mind, where people become pompous for having a name less than N characters long? Would someone who goes by two-letter initials be pompous, in your book?

IMO it seems like you're just looking for something to get upset about.

Meh. I have their address in a field in my client, I would just chuckle and move on.

Everybody I interact with, be it clients or coworkers, generally has a signature. In chains most don't even sign off later on because we're just banging out responses.

I honestly never thought much about it. I always read it as very casual, not as pompous or self-important. Like, you know their name, why should they type all of it out?

Can't say I mind, probably wouldn't even notice.

My workplace (and the last few I've worked at) doesn't do much communication over email, instead it's mostly over Slack, where punctuation/capitalization and the like are more fluid, emojis are very common, and the notion of signing messages doesn't really apply. If I got an email from someone, I don't think I would notice if they signed it or didn't.

I do it. Mostly because my name is spelt a very specific way that is different to the common British way it is usually spelt (Think "Mikael" rather than "Michael").

The amount of absolute crutons who mis-spell it constantly, just makes it easier to go by "M" sometimes.

People call me "AA" on Tildes & Reddit all the time. That doesn't mean I'm pompous or important. It just means they're being informal and/or lazy... like the person who signs off their email with an initial.

You wouldn't survive long here in Australia! People shorten names as much as possible. If it can be shortened, it will. Three syllables? Too long! Make it two. Two syllables? Too long! Make it one. One syllable? Too long! Make it one letter. Seriously. That actually happens.

I work with:

• a Hanna who's a "Han" or "H"

• a Beatrice who's a "Bea" or possibly a "B" (it's hard to tell when people say her name)

• a Lydia Jones who's an "LJ"

• a "Zoe" who's a "Z" (pronounced "zee" because Australian culture has been colonised by the USA)

... and so on.

It doesn't matter how short your name is... in Australia, it can be shortened.

Almost everyone I work with has a shortened name, and many of them sign off their emails with that short name - or with just their initial.

In fact, to insist on people using your full name, or to sign off an email with your full name, is what's seen as pompous and self-important or overly formal.

Feels a bit lazy or arrogant to me. If you're in a thread with multiple people, then it can get confusing to tell apart who is who like that. Then, you have to result in just using the email itself, which kinda defeats the purpose of the signature.

To me it reads more casual/personal. I've never worked in a very formal office, this job I have now (nonprofit homeless/mental health outreach) is the first job I've had with my own cubicle and we are very informal, so maybe it would be inappropriate in a stricter setting. I certainly wouldn't use my first initial in an email with outside agencies because it would be confusing, but for internal emails and post-its I commonly do (or just don't don't sign at all, because everyone knows my handwriting). I'm not the only one who does this. My work partner is the only "O" in the office, so why shouldn't he sign off like that? It confirms the message is from him and if it saves him 3 seconds, great. We're chronically understaffed and up to our eyeballs with people who need help, so whatever helps him get through the day. I'm not the only "T" and I've chosen to stay on the bottom rung (because I like field work and hate meetings and paperwork, which seem to be encroaching on my time more and more despite my efforts) so I'm definitely not "important", but due to seniority in a field with a ton of turnover I am the T. If I sign off with my initial, it's plenty to remind people who is speaking during long chains.

Maybe your work culture is different than mine and your "A" person is using it in situations that aren't appropriate, but I wouldn't jump to arrogance as a reason. If they are using initials in situations that are too formal/confusing, they might just be comfortable with their place in the company (it's generally a good thing to be comfortable, right?) or naive and maybe a little tone deaf as a result. If it's causing legitimate confusion for clients or other outsiders, maybe pull "A" aside and gently suggest they use a full sig in outside communications for clarity's sake. If it's an inside thing that just happens to rub you wrong, let it ride. If it really is a symptom if arrogance, they'll show it in other ways that will be more important and worth addressing.

Maybe they don't like their name? I've never especially liked my name. Any time I can avoid using a name, I'm happy, though I can't recall if I've ever signed a message, "C." But that's one reason they might prefer it.

And as the comments here suggest, there are probably tons of reasons people might prefer using their initial. I wouldn't read too much into it!

My workplace has required corporate e-mail signature templates for desk mail and mobile, which include a businesslike parting salutation, title, e-mail address, work phone, and work cellphone. The desk version also has a corporate logo image, social media links, and an advertising image with a link to the latest and greatest product.

It's great that contacts always know what I'm responsible for and how to reach me, but the social media links (I recently had to change the Twitter link to the "X") and product ad image/link require periodic updates. All that glitter and noise looks like crap in mobile mail, and just irritates everyone.

I'm happy to respond informally to people with whom I have an established relationship, and I'm not cold e-mailing anyone. But if I'm reaching out to a stranger, my default is formality and including the information they need up front for ongoing communications.

Pet peeve: people who can't spell my name correctly in responses when it's right there. You've just told me you can't be trusted with details.

Second pet peeve: People who use nicknames in e-mail without checking on what people sign themselves as.

Doesn't strike me as weird. I work in a fairly formal setting and signatures vary pretty substantially depending on level in the organization and relationship with the person emailing. My initial email contains a formal signature with name, job title, business logo, and alternate contact information. Follow up emails tend to regress to just a "Thanks, -Name" or none in a long running chain.

It feels weird, unless we're spies. I can't remember people's names or faces, so it's also unhelpful a lot of the time. I prefer email signatures, but Outlook doesn't have an easy enough option to set one (and keep one), so I don't bother with it.

This does not bother me at all. I actually see it inversely to you- as humble. Though reading too much into it in either direction is probably over-analyzing it- but that's something I have a tendency to do myself.

To me, a single letter sign-off is minimal, non-showy / modest, unpretentious. It doesn't need to parade around the full name, title, etc of the person writing. The email address and/or email thread makes it clear who it is, and use of a single letter is just saving time while still wanting to have an iota of formality/clarity as to who is speaking. To me it's literally removing ones' ego from the signature almost exclusively.

I see it as just a way to end an email to someone you know quickly and it's far less formal. I see it mostly from people who do not use email a lot and haven't setup a signature in their email program.

Another possibility is that some people do not want their name on emails. Thought that's likely less common.

I think this is a great example of how it's not easy to interpret written things. In some cases, a sentence could have as many meanings as people looking at it and they could all be wrong. If it makes you angry, but to do that you had to assume something then it's often best to rethink the assumption and see if there could be a positive or less negative interpretation. Doing things this way will greatly reduce needless stresses in life. :)

Meh, I'm kind of with you, using a single letter like that just hits me as being kind of off (My gut reaction is "what, do you think you're a member of MI6 or something?")

But honestly, it's just my own baggage and thought process fueling that. There's nothing honestly wrong with it.

One thing to note, a lot of people sign off the way they do and construct their signatures based on where they've worked in the past and where they work currently. Everywhere I've ever had company-based email account has a fairly rigid signature format, typically driven from the top down in the hierarchy. So maybe they have seen people higher up or that they respect sign off with a single letter and are emulating it based on that?

As a personal example, before my signature I typically always sign off with a "R/", which is shorthand for "Respectfully,". This is just a holdover from my military days when everybody in my command used that or V/R (for "very respectfully"). I like it for a few reasons, and doubt I will ever change it, but I've certainly had some people give it the side-eye and question it before.

It makes me feel like the sender and I are spies corresponding during wartime, lovers being coy, or penpals sharing gossip 😂

Although what's actually happened to me is none of the above. It's just some friends who do this with me and vice versa. So to me it feels intimate rather than pompous :)

xoxo,
F

I feel like the time gained just doesn't outweigh the clarity lost by only typing a single letter..

For the most part it doesn't make a difference to me, but in terms of social norms and procedure, signing off with a letter is mildly annoying. The only email clients that can't automatically append a signature are ancient legacy programs that pretty much nobody uses anymore, so if you are acting in a professional position there's no excuse not to have a full signature.

On the other hand, if it's a personal message, a quick note between colleagues, or even a reply to an email I sent, I'd actually prefer no signature. I already know who you are.

This makes me think of all the teachers who asked us to call them 'Mr. S.' instead of 'Mr. Smithers.' (Always male teachers iirc).

I never really thought about it tbh. Most people don't really end their emails with a signature unless it's something a bit more official but I have never seen that kind end with a single letter.

I guess the ones I have seen end their email like that may have an awkward name, maybe with weird spelling?

Work in Middle Office finance, email is the main form of communication for us apart from giving brokers/custodians a call.

It's cliché but there are certain standards we (I) keep purely for simplicity as, on average, I'll send approx 50-100 meaningful mails a day depending on what checklist I'm covering. Most of the time when I'm signing off my hands just go into autopilot mode/muscle memory. "Kind regards, Tescolarger' or throw in a thanks if I've asked them to do something.

The signature/sign off shouldn't mean anything, it doesn't mean anything, but it still irks me when I see a deviation away from it that is overly casual. For example, an intern was shadowing me for the last two months. Gave him a relatively simple task to get started, follow up on existing mails when the brokers short deliver shares on failing trades. He sent about 30 mails off with "Cheers, name" - I broke my shite laughing and asked him to stick to the usual ones, he's representing ourselves to an external party.

Away from the little ramble above, and to answer the question using the context I've given, if I see someone signing off like that I wouldn't be too impressed. It's a pain in the hole if I've to call them after and jump through hoops trying to guess their name when I greet them. If I was to ring up and ask for A, I'd feel like I'm in gossip girl...

I don't really care. A couple of people I work with do this, and I've never really thought anything of it. They're certainly not people that I would consider to be "pompous" in any way.

I don't recall ever encountering this—which is not to say it hasn't happened; if it did, it just did not leave any lingering impression on me. However, I do encounter a variety of different signature styles (as well as different introduction styles, writing styles, etc.). I would not say that I have an emotional response of any sort to any of them.

I think I am, in general, not the kind of person to read much meaning into "first impressions". For example, I don't agree with people who say that the way a person dresses tells you a lot about them. That just has not borne out at all in my experience; I think it is more likely that people who are inclined to experience strong first impressions allow that impression to color all subsequent impressions.

I never pay attention to email signatures at all unless there's a phone number in there that I need.