Most people know a bad email when they receive one. The passive-aggressive follow-up. The wall of text that buries the actual question. The "per my last email" that nobody interprets as friendly.
What's harder is recognizing the same patterns in your own drafts before you hit send.
This guide breaks down 10 unprofessional email examples — the specific mistakes, why they land wrong, and what to write instead.
1. The Passive-Aggressive Follow-Up
Bad:
Hi Marcus,
Just following up on my email from last Tuesday, and the one before that. I know you're busy but this is pretty time-sensitive on my end.
Let me know.
Best, Sarah
What's wrong: "I know you're busy but" is not a softener — it's an accusation. "The one before that" is a pointed reminder that the recipient has ignored you twice. "Let me know" with no specific ask leaves them nothing to act on.
Fix:
Hi Marcus,
Still hoping to connect on the proposal timeline before the 20th. Does Thursday or Friday work for a quick call, or would you prefer I send a summary by email?
Sarah
Specific date, two clear options, no subtext.
2. The Wall of Text
Bad:
Hi,
I wanted to reach out because I've been thinking about the quarterly review process and I think there are some things we could improve upon, specifically around the way we handle the initial submission phase which I think is causing some confusion for people because they don't know whether they should submit through the old system or the new one and also there's the question of who actually reviews the submissions once they come in because right now it seems like different managers are handling it differently and that's creating some inconsistency in terms of feedback quality and turnaround time, and I think if we could get everyone on the same page about the process it would save a lot of time and confusion.
Thoughts?
What's wrong: One unbroken paragraph, no line breaks, no structure. The actual request ("thoughts?") is buried at the end and doesn't specify what kind of response is wanted.
Fix:
Hi,
The quarterly review process has a few friction points I think are worth addressing:
- Submission system: It's unclear whether to use the old or new system. Can we pick one and communicate it clearly?
- Reviewer consistency: Different managers are handling submissions differently, which affects feedback quality and turnaround.
Would it make sense to schedule 30 minutes with the team leads to align on the process? Happy to draft a proposal first if that's more useful.
Structure shows you've already thought it through. A specific next step replaces a vague ask.
3. The "Per My Last Email" Move
Bad:
Hi Derek,
Per my last email, the deadline is Friday, not Monday.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks
What's wrong: "Per my last email" is understood by everyone as a polite way of saying "you should have read this already." Even if the sender is right, the tone creates friction and puts the recipient on the defensive.
Fix:
Hi Derek,
Quick note: the deadline for this one is Friday the 18th — I should have made that clearer in my original message. Does that timeline still work for you?
Taking partial ownership of the confusion removes the subtext and gets a real answer faster.
4. The Overly Casual Professional Email
Bad:
Hey!!!
So excited to connect with your team!! We've been huge fans of what you're building and would love love love to find a way to work together somehow :)
Lmk when you have a sec!
xo
What's wrong: Multiple exclamation marks, "lmk," "xo," and triple adjectives signal a mismatch between the message's energy and the context. This might be appropriate for a friend — it's not appropriate for a first professional contact.
Fix:
Hi [Name],
I've been following [Company]'s work on [specific thing] — genuinely impressive.
I'm [role] at [Company], and I think there's a natural overlap between what we're both doing around [shared area]. Would you be open to a 20-minute call in the next two weeks?
Match the tone of the recipient's industry and communication style. Enthusiasm is fine; "xo" is not.
5. The Buried Ask
Bad:
Hi Linda,
Hope you're having a good week. I've been working on the Q3 report and wanted to share some updates with you. The data from the first two months looks strong, especially in the enterprise segment where we saw a 22% lift compared to Q2. The SMB numbers are more mixed but I think that's partly a seasonal thing. I've also been looking at the competitive landscape and there are some interesting moves happening there that might be worth discussing.
Anyway, just wanted to keep you in the loop. Talk soon!
What's wrong: There is no actual ask. The email shares a lot but doesn't tell Linda what to do with any of it, whether she needs to respond, whether a meeting is needed, or whether this is just FYI. "Talk soon!" is not a call to action.
Fix: Either make it a clear FYI ("No action needed — just flagging the Q3 highlights before our Thursday meeting") or make the ask explicit: "Can we schedule 30 minutes this week to discuss the SMB numbers and competitive angle?"
6. The Too-Long Subject Line
Bad:
Subject: Following up on our conversation last Tuesday about the revised proposal timeline and whether we should move the kickoff meeting to accommodate the new stakeholder availability
What's wrong: Subject lines get cut off in most email clients around 60 characters. This one is 146. The recipient has no idea what action is required before opening.
Fix:
Subject: Kickoff meeting timing — quick decision needed
Front-load the most important word. Include a signal about what's required (decision, update, FYI).
7. The Aggressive Deadline
Bad:
Hi,
I need this by EOD today.
Thanks
What's wrong: "I need" is a demand, not a request. No context explains why EOD is the deadline. No acknowledgment that this may be difficult. This email puts the recipient in a position of either complying or explaining themselves.
Fix:
Hi,
We're presenting this to the client at 4pm today — is there any chance you can get me the numbers by 2? If that's not possible, let me know what you can send by then and I'll work with it.
Context turns a demand into a collaboration. An alternative option makes it easier to say yes to something.
8. The Reply-All That Shouldn't Be
Bad situation: Someone sends a scheduling email to 12 people. You reply-all with "I'm free Tuesday!" — and then eight other people do the same, filling everyone's inbox.
The etiquette issue: Reply-all is appropriate when the entire thread needs your response. It's not appropriate when only the sender needs it.
Rule: If the email is asking you for something, reply to the sender. Reply-all only when your response adds value for every person on the thread.
9. The Ambiguous Tone Email
Bad:
Hi Tom,
Noted.
Thanks
What's wrong: "Noted" is the most ambiguous word in professional email. It can mean "understood and I'll act on it," "I read this but disagree," or "I'm irritated." Tom now has no idea whether he should follow up or consider the matter closed.
Fix: Confirm what you actually mean. If you're acting on it: "Got it — I'll update the draft by Wednesday." If you're flagging a concern: "Thanks for sending this over. I do have some questions about the timeline — can we connect tomorrow?"
10. The Email That Should Have Been a Slack Message (or Vice Versa)
Bad: A 400-word email thread that consists of:
- "Does 3pm work?"
- "Let me check."
- "Yes, 3pm works."
- "Great, see you then."
- "One more thing — is it video or phone?"
- "Video."
What's wrong: Four people are included, six replies were generated, and the net information exchanged was: video call at 3pm. This belongs in Slack, not email.
The flip side: A complex decision that requires a paper trail, documentation, or a considered response from multiple stakeholders should not be handled in a chat thread.
Match the medium to the complexity and permanence of the communication.
The Common Thread
Most unprofessional emails share one of three problems:
- Unclear intent — the reader finishes the email and still doesn't know what they're supposed to do.
- Mismatched tone — too aggressive, too casual, or too passive for the context.
- Poor structure — the important thing is buried, the subject is misleading, or the email should have been shorter.
AI email tools often make these problems worse, not better. They default to filler openers, verbose phrasing, and generic sign-offs that add length without adding clarity. The result reads like it was written by someone who wasn't sure what they wanted to say.
ForthWrite drafts from your voice and focuses on what the email actually needs to accomplish — not what a statistically average professional email sounds like. If you find yourself cleaning up AI drafts more than you're using them, it's worth trying an approach built on how you write, not how everyone else does.