Is the old fashioned way obsolete?

It's submission time again. I'm thinking about getting all my manuscripts together and sending them out to journals for the next round of rejections. Though I have notice that the methods of submitting my work have changed since I started this.

The first few stories I submitted to magazines or journals must have been in 2004. Then, I had to print it all out, stuff it in an envelope, and bother the postal workers to weigh it for me. I sent it off and usually received the rejection letter within six weeks. This is a stark change from my last submission cycle.

I sent out my last set of submissions in January. All of these submissions were through email or an email form on the website itself. It cost me exactly $0 and I was okay with that. What I didn't really like is that I got rejection letters within six days of submitting my work. I can barely handle rejection as it is, but I think a six day turnaround is a little excessive. You should at least pretend you read the work! I might be going a little overboard, but email submissions have changed the way I react to rejection letters.

For any of you that submit work: do you prefer sending it in the mail or online? There are benefits and drawbacks to both methods, but many journals are moving to email submissions to reduce paper waste and costs. I admire the push to cut out paper waste, but do you get the same feeling when you get an email rejection/acceptance letter as apposed to one you get in your mailbox? I know I don't. With email, I have the chance to read the first few words (usually “Thank you for your submission BUT...) before finishing and usually don't finish what they have to say once I realize what it is. With a letter, you have to read the whole thing, because it is a tangible object resting between your hands.

I might look for journals that only accept old fashioned paper submissions this cycle. Then again, I'm pretty sure I don't want to spend that kind of money. We'll see what happens.