Would this still be valid if "quick response" gets renamed to "template" as we discussed?

I also think the main problem here is that participants did not know the function "responses" and couldn't imagine what this function does and how it works. Renaming the function should solve this problem in my opinion

@bohlender
I actually think yes because the problem here was not that the participants didn't understand that "Responses" ("Schnellantwort") is the button they need to click on, but rather that this button wasn't visible in the first place! So they had to realize themselves that they first needed to click on "Reply" so that this function would appear (instead of the program simply "offering" them this option)! Yet of course one can argue if "Responses" (or however it might be called then) is important enough a function that it need be shown on one "level" with the most "general" functions such as Reply, Forward etc. ... (@Viktoria what do you mean here, for example?)

I referred to the discussion we had on the function "responses" after the heuristic evaluation. Like @bohlender noted, we agreed on renaming the function "responses" into "templates" because this name describes the function better (-->the function can also be used when the user writes a "normal" e-mail, i.e. no reply). And when the function is called "templates", I think the user will recognize that when he wants to reply to an e-mail with a template he has to click on "reply" first and then insert the template there.

@Viktoria
Yes, my point was, as I wrote, that anyway the user first has to realize that he has to click on "reply" (1.) and then on "templates" (2.).
But maybe this is really not such a big problem, then we can also close this ticket...