Someone wrote the following in an email:

Why have you not redirected Simon’s old email address to his new one? This shouldn’t have been killed this soon.

I don't really understand the second sentence in the context of email. Can someone explain what it does really mean?

  • It sounds like some action has been stopped earlier than the speaker had expected. As to which action, I couldn't say without more context. – Teacher KSHuang Jan 10 '17 at 10:53

Simon's email address is changed. Unless the old one is redirected to the new one, any mails sent to the old address will bounce back (not reach Simon's mailbox) since the email is no longer valid. In other words, the old email address is killed.

The sender of the email from which you quote the sentence asks the reason for not doing the redirection. According to him/her, the old email address should still work (via redirection, of course).

  • Thanks for answer. So in other words we can say that the old address shouldn't be disabled yet. In sender's opinion it was done too quick. – Simon Jan 10 '17 at 11:27
  • @Simon Precisely – CinCout Jan 10 '17 at 11:28
  • @ Simon @ CinCout: No. What you say would be true if the remark had been "This [the old email] should have been killed [no longer used] sooner." The remark "This [unclear to what it is referring] should not have been killed [put into disuse/not followed through] this soon [prematurely]. How it relates to failure to redirect content to an old email is unclear. – James Olson Jan 10 '17 at 15:29

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.