The example above (which comes from NY Times) may not take advantage of some of the tips we mentioned, but it’s great because it’s so short. Due to its absent-minded straightforwardness, such a message can be perceived as a real, non-automated reply — as if you were so busy that you only carved out a few seconds to type these five words.
There’s a grim, apologetic vibe to these messages — I’m sorry I’m taking time for myself but I’ll try to check in on occasion! They’re a vivid reflection of a work culture that valorizes constant productivity and the near-total overlap of work and life. But they’re also do a terrible job of what they’re intended to do, e.g., set realistic expectations for both sender and recipient. A vague OOO message traps both parties in an uncomfortable liminal space where both productivity and rest go to die. The original sender is left unsure if they’ll be getting a timely response or a whether the email will go ignored for a time or forever. The original recipient has taken what is a rock solid excuse (time off) and cheapened it, offering a backdoor for email guilt to creep in.

Hi, I’m out of the office until [MM/DD] with limited access to email. But don’t worry! I’ve left you with some helpful article to read and share in the meantime. I look forward to connecting with you when I return.
I dunno – I think it says more about the writer than the culture. I worked in tech where there were always a handful of people who would do stuff like this, but most people would keep it basic. I just think some people love putting funky or gimmicky twists on rote stuff.