Accept & Do Not Send a Response

[Julia Foran]

Hi Calendar Community,

We'd like your feedback & reactions to a change we're considering:

Current experience:

When attendees receive a meeting invite, they are provided with 3 response options:

The first two options (Edit the response before sending & Send the response now) both send an email to the organizer, and the attendee's response is recorded in the organizer's tracking list.

The third option (Do not send a response) does not notify organizer, so the attendee's response remains as "None" in the organizer's tracking list.

What we'd like to change:

Many users report that they expect Do not send a response to be recorded in the organizer's tracking list, but just not to send an email. We are considering updating the behavior so that all 3 response options are recorded in the organizer's tracking list. Attendees can still use the Do not send a response option to avoid sending email to the organizer, but their response would now be recorded & shared with organizer.

Questions to the Community:

1. Do you like this change? Does this match what you & others are expecting?
2. What about when an organizer does not request responses (so there is just a simple Accept button without additional options)? Do you think the intention is to avoid email responses? In other words, would you expect this same behavior (responses are always recorded) to apply even when organizer does not request responses? 

[#2]

Yes and yes to both questions. I think that if the organizer does not request responses is mainly because she doesn't want a bunch of incoming emails, but updates to the tracking list don't bother.

[#3]

Hi Julia,

For 1, yes, this would be a good change. Many a time, we look at tracking status for a meeting, and we have no idea if half the attendees might attend or not.

For 2, probably yes, but only if the lack of options would only apply to full "Accept". Any tentative accept or a decline should always have the option to send a response. For example, if I have overlapping meetings, I may do a tentative acceptance on one of them, and provide feedback to indicate why I'm only tentative. Similarly, if I decline, I should have the opportunity to inform the meeting organizer of the reason as it may prove to be a reason to reschedule the meeting.

[#4]

I'm sure this would cause an issue, the point around 'Do not send a response' is that it doesnt send a response. There can be many reasons why this might be the case, for example if you were forwarded a meeting and dont want to create undue 'stress' to the meeting organiser in advance.

I think the problem here is offering too many choices by intersecting two separate functions, Accepting the meeting request and communicating with the organiser. Would it not be simpler to have a simple Accept Button and a Reply Button next to each other. Then the choice to update the meeting organiser could be treated more like Read Receipts and become a separate user choice.

[#5]

1. YES!!

2. YES!! - Avoid emails please. Give us one button and depending on the organizers setup an email will be avoided or sent.

I just received seven invitations from my Project Manager with 10 participants at each occasion. She now will receive 70 emails just because we want her to know we are coming. I also can't just click accept. I need to click twice on each invitation.

Please read this thread for more input and some takes on how absurd the present option (to hide from the organizer that you are coming) is: https://outlook.uservoice.com/forums/322590-outlook-2016-for-windows/suggestions/13424976-accept-do-...

[#6]

1. I love this change. That would be exactly what everyone is expecting.
2. If the organizer does not request a response, he or she would still like to be able to see if anyone has responded.

I cannot think of any reason why you would not want the calendar item to keep track of responses whereas there are many reasons why one might not want to send an email every time.

[#7]

1.  Yes. The confusion the current behavior causes was so great we recently REMOVED the 'do not send a reply' option through GPO.  Although we'd like to avoid the clutter of unnecessary emails, the attendance tracking is essential.

2. Yes.  Again, attendance tracking is essential.  Even if the organizer doesn't care about attendee acceptance, the presence of the tracking data seems harmless and simply be ignored.

[#8]

Thanks for all the feedback, everybody! We're going to start on this improvement very soon. :-)

[#9]

Yes and yes please - the current response labels do not accurately describe what's going on to the user. The default response should allow tracking but not email, then tracking with plus a user-edited email, then no response (with a clear indication the organiser will not know your response). I have been confused by the current descriptions, like many.

Nobody wants emails from all meeting attendees, this is a vestige of the past.

[#10]

1) Yes to both questions.  

2) Yes - change this as well.

We have confusion within our organization, as everyone we have spoken to has expressed they have the expectations that this already works this way.

Thanks,
James

[#11]

Yes and Yes.  This is an ongoing issue for our organization.

[#12]

Yes and Yes.

[#13]

1. Yes. I & my colleagues always assumed no email was sent but the response was tracked. Irritated to find it was not because I would accuse my colleagues of not replying when they knew they had (because the tracker stated 'no response').

2. I think just an accept button is fine so long as the response is tracked - we dont need confirmation emails if we can rely on the tracker working as above! 

[#14]

1. Yes.

2. I haven't used that option. No experience. But would like to have some autonomy to choice any option.

Accept (allow tracking)

Accept (allow tracking) and send a response mail.

This change might impact Decline. Sometimes you want to Decline without tracking your response!

Consider that option us well.

[#15]

That change is welcome.

[#16]

am having a serious issue here and i dont know where to post this ....i just have to do it here,.....i am migrating users mail boxes from G suite to office 365,after the migration i noticed that the size of the mail boxes on getting to office 365 grows tremendiously,example a user with 6gb in Gsuite now having 18gb in office 365..mehn how can i get help plsssss help!

[#17]

Yes to both! People tend to pick these options to avoid email notifications, rather than to stay anonymous.

[#18]

I also agree to both questions. The option to send invite without receiving notifications and only using the Tracking tool would be enough. Great idea!

[#19]

"Many users report that they expect Do not send a response to be recorded in the organizer's tracking list, but just not to send an email."

Yes! That's exactly what I thought I was doing, so that I was not cluttering up inboxes, but my boss had to let me know it looked like I wasn't replying to anything. >.< I vote yes, please change it.

[#20]

YES TO BOTH!

[#21]

Hi everybody - thanks for all the responses & participation in this thread! We are going to start work on this feature soon :-).

[#22]

Yes - this change is absolutely necessary. Our institution is highly dependent on this function. Many community members are not aware of this issue which has most likely been causing frustrations for many years. This change matches what everyone is expecting.

The intention is to no flood the organizers inbox with 100 emails when sending out to a broad group. So yes, to avoid email responses.

Responses should always be recorded except in the instance where the organizer does not request a response. If that option is selected, attendance obviously does not matter to the organizer.

Thanks.

[#23]

Yes absolutely! In fact, I was certain that it already worked this way and it has caused a lot of confusion within our organization. My expectation is that the response would be recorded (and properly tracked) but the organizer would not receive an email notification. I see almost no legitimate use cases where the attendee would have a need to have their response not tracked (if that's the case then... just don't respond). If such a case does exist, it would be the rare exception rather than the rule.

[#24]

I would be concerned if the actual action is not what it says the action is.  If the action is do not send a response and it sends a response then it is misleading and wrong.  If there is a problem with the option then remove it.  I use the option as it is described.

[#25]

I totally agree! Simplify please!

[#26]

Yes to both please.

This would be very welcome feature across our user base.

[#27]

Have there been any updates on this? I see the original post is from February. I know my company would much appreciate a function that would update the tracking list without sending so many emails. Please let me know if there is a beta test or more information on rolling this out!!

[#28]

Hello Julia, Please can we have an update? L

[#29]

Hi -- we started work on this a few weeks ago, and are still investigating how to make it work for all Outlook clients. Each of them send meeting responses in different ways, so it's a larger effort than changing a couple values unfortunately.

I don't have any updates yet on timelines, but as soon as I do, I'll update this forum!

[#30]

I would love to see the Accept but do not send Response option update the Tracking info.  I would not expect the same outcome when the organizer does not request a response. 

[#31]

Yes and Yes.  This is an ongoing issue for our organization.

[#32]

Yes I support this entirely, I always accepted without this thinking that I would prevent clutter in other peoples inboxes, never thinking it would not tell that I had responded as this is completely illogical, I was surprised that it worked as it did currently to be honest. A must update in my opinion

[#33]

1. I like the option. I am one of those who expected my scheduling would show in the assistant, regardless of sending an email. I figure the organizer would know my response when they look at the scheduling assistant. No need to generate an email that will probably be dismissed.
I would note that some people do want their privacy, and maybe a fourth option along the lines of "Do not track my time" would be useful. This would allow the responder to completely disregard the invitation.
Thanks for taking our feedback!

[#34]

I agree with the rest of the community, the logical option for the organizer is to know who has accepted or not in the tracking status. When will we have this option available?

Thank you for considering our opinions!!

[#35]

1. Yes!!!  Most people believe when they choose do not send response that it eliminates the email but still is visible in tracking.

2.  Yes!!!  I don't wan't to be flooded with emails, but I still want to track who is coming.

[#36]

Don't click the link in that post from r.othhenry7 !!! It is a phishing attempt.

[#37]

Don't click the link in that post from r.othhenry7 !!! It is a phishing attempt.

[#38]

Yes, that is a great idea. That is the most intuitive approach. I always thought that was the purpose of "Do Not Send a Response." Since you are clicking on "Accept" the organizer should be notified that you accepted the invite by going into the tracking feature. I just learned this morning that it doesn't show you've accepted the meeting on the organizer's end.

[#39]

Yes, PLEASE PLEASE make this change. We have terrible miscommunications because people think they responded by picking "Yes - Do not send response". They're trying to keep an email from cluttering my inbox, but instead it results in wasted time, reminders and back and forth's. I would REALLY REALLY like if people could say YES and it NOT send me an email letting me know. I schedule hundreds of events and it's so annoying and overwhelming to get all of their email responses when all I have to do is open the event to see if they're coming or not.

[#40]

I am so happy to finally see this topic come up. It has been a pain point for me, who sends out invitations frequently, to chase after the "Do not send a response" people only for them to yell back "I did see I accepted" and shove their laptops at me - no man I CAN'T see. Seems like common sense to have it automatically update the organizer's tracking list. I hope to see this implemented very soon.

[#41]

Thanks everybody for the responses. We're actively working on fixing / changing this to match what y'all describe above.

[#42]

Thank you Julia! This has been an issue for so many years. 

[#43]

YES!!! Meeting organizers almost always want to know how invitees have responded, but we don't want to get thousands of emails. How soon will this change be made?

[#44]

YES!!! Meeting organizers almost always want to know how invitees have responded, but we don't want to get thousands of emails. How soon will this change be made?

Yesterday would be good :)

[#45]

This suggested change could be restated as fixing a bug. Absolutely should be changed - "do not send a response" means don't send an email but accept and be on the tracking list as accepted.

Options should be: "Accept" "Accept with notification email" "Accept with custom email"

1 & 2) yes & yes. 

[#46]

I always thought this was the way it worked.  I would love to see this change.

I want to see responses by going to the meeting details, but not get the emails.

[#47]

When will this be done? It would have been useful yesterday... :) 

[#48]

I would fully support that in the case I use "accept event, don't send the response" that the organizer sees that I'm joining (I accepted right ?!) but that I wanted to prevent spamming the organizer. Especially for people/assistants who are sending out invites for their bosses/teams, it's crazy that they get thousands of unecessary emails. I might be wrong but I think most people are used to check the invite to see who joins and they will not in their inbox try to find 12 people who confirmed (or declined) ..... Please, please, change this asap :-), it will help a lot

[#49]

Thanks Julia, you would become my biggest hero when you fix this one ;-). Let me know when ready

[#50]

hello Julia, 

when can we see this actioned? Your initial conversation thread was March, I think. Lx