While I might eventually be persuaded of the word's objective merits (at least in the case of eply), I would likely react adversely to any attempts to manipulate or alter my subjective reaction to it.

Stick to your guns, sjmaxq. The "objective merits" are dubious.

The "e" prefix which became ubquitous during the dotcom boom was a true prefix as in "email" or "e-mail". There were exceptions such as "etail" [electronic retail] but these exceptions never took hold and the true "e" prefix itself collapsed with the dot com bust.

At least "etail" had the advantage of being an obvious abbreviation of "electronic retail" whereas "eply" standing by itself is not obvious.

Furthermore, the term "email" covers both originating email messages and email replies so there is no need for "eply". If you ask for a reply in an email, it is obvious you are expecting an email [reply] in return, not a letter.

A reply is a reply whether it is a reply to an email or a reply to a letter. The mode of delivery of the originating communication determines the mode of delivery of the communication in reply. "Eply" adds nothing to this equation.

In summary, "eply" is quaint precisely because there is no real convenience driving its use, and, furthermore, any theoretical convenience is more than offset by the absence of conspicuous clarity.

We can agree on this much, sjmaxq. Your opinion is the only opinion which matters ... if you're right.

And the mgmt says "You're right!"