eBay : Where "Opt-out" Means "Keep Trying"

Cadrys writes "Like anybody tired of spam, junk mail, and telemarketers, I opted out of all of the above when I signed onto eBay. Today I got this letter (text below) where they decided--for me--to reset my preferences. " I got the same letter today, which really irritated me. I had *purposfully* said no to most of the "notifications", and just because I haven't opted in to what they want doesn't mean they have the right to change my preferences. I mean, that's why they are my preferences. So, today, eBay lost at least me as customer. .

<Quoted letter follows>

Dear cadrys,

Several times a month, eBay sends out valuable email communications with news, offers and special events that help you buy and sell. Unfortunately, we have noticed that an error occurred during your registration process that prevented you from receiving these communications. Many of your Notification Preference defaults were set to "no" rather than to "yes", which means that unlike other eBay members, you're not receiving these types of communications.

We'd like to resolve this problem quickly and efficiently. Therefore, on 1/8/01, we returned all your Notification Preferences to the standard default of "yes" to put you in line with the rest of the eBay community. However, we want you to choose your Notification Preferences rather than rely on our standard defaults and will therefore not include you in any communications until 1/23/01. This will provide you with some time to evaluate these choices and modify your Notification Preferences. You will, however, continue to receive certain administrative emails that are part of executing your eBay transactions.

<Quote ends>"

Comments

and in Palm Beach....

[Anonymous Coward]

Quoted letter follows

01/07/01

Dear Floridian Voter,

Every four years, the Government holds an election. Unfortunately, we at the Democratic Party have noticed that an error occurred during your voting process which may have prevented you from voting Democrat. Your Voting Preference was "Republican" rather than "Democrat", which means that Al Gore was not receiving your vote.

We'd like to resolve this problem quickly and efficiently. Therefore, on 11/8/00, we began reinterpreting all your Voting Preferences to the standard default of "Democrat" to put you in line with the rest of our community.

However, we want you to choose your Voting Preferences rather than rely on our standard defaults and will therefore not include you in any communications until the next election. This will provide you with some time to evaluate these choices and modify your Voting Preferences. Your November Vote will, however, continue to be counted for Al Gore in our continuing recount effort.

She Didnt REALLY mean NO, Your Honor

[somethingwicked]

I don't think this line of reasoning would work in court very well:

Yes, Your Honor, She said "NO!" to all my come-ons.

But most of the other girls I have asked have said YES, so her answer MUST have been an error.

So I just put her in line with the rest of the community...and well, you know

Kind of like...

[Black Parrot]

This is kind of like when that Hot Babe opts out of a torrid sexual encounter at your place. You wait five minutes, quaff another brewsky, and ask again.

--

Re:pouting faux-boycotts

[Lemmy Caution]

However, many defenders of the libertarian credo imply that either some optima will be achieved by market pressures, or that a viable alternative will always be created in the market. At its most basic, this overlooks network effects and entry barrier costs. Network effects are especially powerful in more technologically advanced markets - if 80 percent of your infrastructure already relies on a vendor, platform, or standard, producers which don't have access to those standards will not be able to offer a viable choice, and a consumer will not be reasonably able to avoid sourcing from those producers. Just like the only way to avoid taxes is to live a below-the-poverty-line Unabomber-like existence in the woods, the only way to completely step out of the emerging lock-in of proprietary systems, platforms, and protocols is to simply buy nothing: in terms of the practical demands of day to day life, it isn't really an option.

Ironically, you've mentioned an example for which real-life free-market analogs exist. Even if you don't use a microsoft product, you pay the "Microsoft tax" for systems from well over 95% of the vendors (the exceptions are out of the mainstream market, and due to economies of scale often not even any cheaper) because of the dynamics of contractual agreements between producers - no government involved. Unlike the public sector, where you can actually vote and even run for a seat on the school board 9and probably win,) there is virtually no chance of you being able to change the relationships between the Microsofts and Dells and Intels and Compaqs and IBMS and the like.

"Your selection is an error"

[Grab]

Nice to see that selecting "no" is an error! :-) What's next then? Maybe they'll have a "no" option in the sign-up, but when you click "Submit", it'll come up with "Error - you failed to fully sign up for mailbox-clogging shite. Please try again."

Grab.

Good point, but:

[crucini]

The fact that most of us are essentially at the whim of the big players of the system in which we choose to participate is an uncomfortable one.

Your mailbox is at the whim of any idiot with an internet connection. As long as a person's emotional well-being is linked to the contents of his mailbox, he is doomed to frequent bouts of anger. That's why I think the 'war on spam' is ultimately a dead end - there's always one more idiot ready to spam.
The guy who wrote '7 Habits of Highly Effective People' (what's his name?) talks about reducing your circle of concern to match your circle of influence. You can control your mail server and filtering software; you can't control the internet.
The MPAA executive has a heart attack because he can't control the spread of information on the internet. The geek has a heart attack because he can't control the flow of mail into his system.
Maybe there's a parallel with household phones. In the 1970's it was normal that if you dialled a house a loud alarm-like bell went off, and the occupants dropped whatever they were doing and answered the caller. That worked until it was systematically abused by pranksters and telemarketers. Now the norm is for an answering machine to screen the call, and increasingly caller ID is required.
Any protocol which allows you to make me jump via remote control is broken and will be exploited eventually.

That "default" spam opt-outer in full

[squiggleslash]

Reproduced here as formatted on eBay's sign-up form...

Do you want to receive junk mail from eBay?

No--> o
o<- PattBuchannan
Yes-> o

--

When you receive the emails...

[Thalia]

I believe the difference between your settings and mine may only be that I have the following two set to yes:

Legal Notices

User Agreement Changes
Receive notice from eBay if the current User
Agreement changes.

Privacy Policy Changes
Receive notice from eBay if the current Privacy
Policy changes.

I want to know if their policies change in either of those two areas. I don't want any other junkmail. And I didn't get one of those letters.

But it is certainly odd that they'd assume it was an "error" especially if you've had these settings for some months.

Thalia