Slashdot Mirror


7 Ways to Be Mistaken for a Spammer

ancientribe writes "The "This is Spam" button popping up on many service providers' email services can be empowering for a user, but it can also be the kiss of death for a legitimate business that gets canned with a click of that button. Dark Reading has a story on seven common missteps that can lead to a case of mistaken spammmer identity for a legit business trying to send its marketing email, newsletters or other correspondence."

62 of 383 comments (clear)

  1. No room left for legitimate marketing. by suso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What I hate is that there is little room left on the internet for legitimate advertising. When the first spam messages went out back in the 90s, they didn't try to be as deceptive or fraudulent as they are today. People still hated them, but at least they were being more honest about their practices. Nowadays you have real spammers that are disruptive, invasive, fraudulent and don't care that they are these things. This is the real spam. However there are still a lot of people out there that think that every piece of marketing material whether its legitimate or not should be treated as spam and the person sending it should be hung out on a noose.

    If people are going to have this opinion in a capatalistic society, then that's hypocrisy and I think they need to think a bit more about what they are doing. If these people think that advertising shouldn't have a place in our society then I think they should consider that maybe money doesn't either. Because we can't have both. Capitalism needs marketing,

    When I put advertisements in my signature line, I try not to be invasive, fraudulent or deceptive. But yet people treat me like I'm hell incarnate. I think that's wrong.

    1. Re:No room left for legitimate marketing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Damn you and your subliminal advertising.

    2. Re:No room left for legitimate marketing. by muellerr1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If I want money then I have to put up with advertising? That's just not true. Moreover, I believe that even 'legitimate' marketing materials, when mailed to my house or displayed on my tv count as spam, which to me is unwanted solicitations. In the case of TV I can tivo-skip commercials and with snail mail and telemarketing I can cut it down with the DMA opt-out. So according to you, I'm not really a consumer, even though I spend tons of money each year just living here. I just don't think that capitalism will stop because advertising does. Ads are just a convenient way to supercharge sales at the expense of the consumers.

      Untargeted advertising is not a waste of money for the advertiser if they can get as little as 1-2% of the eyeballs interested. Think about that. That means 98-99% of the people viewing these ads DO NOT WANT YOUR CRAP. Sure, it's good for the advertiser, but terrible for consumers. The more ads show up, the more people try to avoid them. I don't think most people like being marketed at. Even with businesses with whom they have a 'prior relationship'. People tolerate a certain amount of advertising to get the benefits of otherwise 'free' tv (don't get me started on cable tv ads). That doesn't make it any less spam, or any less obnoxious.

      Think of it this way: if in your personal life you spend a portion of each of your conversations with people trying to sell them something, how many of them will try to avoid you at parties? I sure would. Now explain to me why businesses should be any different. I'm not saying that you should not be allowed to do this; I'm only explaining why some people think you're hell incarnate.

    3. Re:No room left for legitimate marketing. by suso · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think you're a bit deluded. You are basically implying that all advertising ever is unwanted. However if that was the case we wouldn't be where we are now. We would be a bunch of people in caves not trusting each other and killing each other because they took your club. People need ways of finding out about things. Even if its done with positive tone (like in a commercial) instead of neutral one (like in an article).

      Myself, I can't stand disruptive and fraudulent advertising (what I consider spam). I have been a system administrator for 10 years now at places and for my own hosting company and have had more than my share of waking up in the middle of the night to block some asshole that is sending 10000s of messages to my mail server or making 100 requests per second to Apache (referal spam). I hate it. I hate it. I hate it. There is a big difference though between this type of marketing, and me putting a single line with a link and a factual statement in my sigline. I'm not being disruptive(I'm not causing CowboyNeal to have to take time out of his day to block me for overusing resources on slashdot), I'm not really wasting your time (you can just ignore it or turn off siglines) and I'm not being fraudulent (I only make statements that I can back up).

      How does any new business get noticed? By article reviews? Not going to happen and too few and far between to be helpful. By word of mouth? Sure, but this is just advertising in disguise. So there has to be some non intrusive way to let people know about your product. I will just do what I consider to be the right thing and be respectful of your time and not waste much of it and be as unintrusive as possible.

    4. Re:No room left for legitimate marketing. by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Marketing makes capitalism worse. It is an attempt to alter demand through psychology. It works. But it doesn't make anything better. Without advertising, consumers would purchase goods more in line with their needs and actual desires.

    5. Re:No room left for legitimate marketing. by hey! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think you're going after a bit of a strawman here.

      It is true that back in the 90s, when the Internet was primarily an academic network, people freaked when it started to be used for marketing. But that's water long under the bridge.

      The problem isn't that deceptive spam makes email useless for legitiamte marketing. The problem is that spam makes email useless for communication.

      Google has shown its not advertising that's the problem. It's interference.

      The fundamental tenet of capitalism is that if people are free to make rational choices, they will optimize their welfare. I think that while exceptions certainly exist to this idea, it is reasonably correct. However, this presupposes that people have the freedom to direct their attention where they would like to, and to make decisions without interference. In other words, capitalism requires not only the freedom of marketers, but the privacy of consumers to achieve optimal results.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    6. Re:No room left for legitimate marketing. by Ihlosi · · Score: 2, Interesting
      However there are still a lot of people out there that think that every piece of marketing material whether its legitimate or not should be treated as spam and the person sending it should be hung out on a noose.



      If I feel the need to purchase a product of category X, I'm going to inform myself through hopefully neutral sources. Marketing doesn't count, since it it biased by default.



      Capitalism needs marketing



      I think what you're trying to say is "A free market economy needs marketing". Which still isn't quite true. In theory, a free market economy needs informed consumers that can chose the best product in order to be beneficial as a whole (i.e. produce the best goods at the lowest prices). Marketing, in its purest sense, tries to influence the choice of the customers by trying to replace "the best product" with "our product", usually by exploiting psychological loopholes and intentional misinformation. The resulting "Consumer economy" then does not favor the best products and the lowest prices, but the companies that market their crap best while still being able to overcharge the customer and provide lousy quality.



      How well the latter works is shown by reality(tm). Spout enough marketing at your consumers and they'll buy any crap at any price and put up with even the lousiest quality.

    7. Re:No room left for legitimate marketing. by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Education educates consumers. Marketing misleads them. The statement

      This can only be done when businesses are allowed to market their products and services.
      is patently false. Consumer Reports, for example, won't fold up and die if marketing magically ceased to exist. The situation of consumers doing their own research is infinitely superior than that of producers lying to them.
    8. Re:No room left for legitimate marketing. by Live_in_Dayton · · Score: 2, Informative

      Marketing does not necessarily mean lying or even misleading. There is misleading marketing but marketing is not inherently the spread of false information.

      Consumer Reports is an invaluable resource and the purchasing agent should always do due diligence on the product or service. But, businesses and consumers must be made aware of the options that should be researched. That awareness is done through marketing whether it is done actively through a newsletter or passively through a web site.

    9. Re:No room left for legitimate marketing. by jeffeb3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would like to point out what I would consider a flaw with your reasoning.

      I don't think it's your right to advertise to me. It may be gmail's right to advertise to me, I'm getting a free service from them. It may be NBC's right to advertise to me, I watch the shows they pay for. But people advertising to my inbox, YOU have given me nothing! Why do you think you deserve any of my attention? I don't care if you're best buy, a nigerian prince, or a new startup company. If you want to advertise to me, give me something in return, not a coupon, or a deal, but something I ask for. Slashdot gives me a place to vent, for example. Slashdot, you're OK.

    10. Re:No room left for legitimate marketing. by MobyDisk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We would be a bunch of people in caves not trusting each other and killing each other because they took your club. I too an glad that mass marketers successfully propelled humankind out of caves and into civilization. Anthropologists found that the first Car ads were what taught people how to cook their food, and how to boil water to purify it. Someone might say that they were profit driven, but does that really matter considering how much good they did? Where would we be today if our ancestors hadn't discovered electricity from mass marketing campaigns right to the cave door?

      You are basically implying that all advertising ever is unwanted. Advertising is necessary, but that doesn't mean it is wanted. If I could rid my life of ads I would dance for joy. Don't mistake need with desire.

      P.S. I have sigs turned off
    11. Re:No room left for legitimate marketing. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's a big difference between "push" and "pull" marketing. Or, to use examples, between sending out emails, and putting out a website.

      I don't see any problem with manufacturers putting information about their products in places where an interested consumer can find it, if they're looking. But the problem occurs when companies start pushing that information out at consumers, who many or may not be interested in the product or service to begin with.

      I don't have an issue with corporate web sites, because they require the consumer/viewer to go to them. If I'm looking for widgets, I might type "widgets" into a search engine, and get the website for Widgets, Inc. So I'll go to that page, read about their widgets, and perhaps buy one.

      This is entirely different from Widgets, Inc. buying time in the middle of a TV program that I'm watching, and sending me a message trying to convince me to buy their widgets, when I might or might not have been interested beforehand. The key difference is in who initiates the communication; when it's initiated by the seller, it's advertising, when it's initiated by the consumer, it's research.

      It would be entirely possible to have a world without advertising, and only research. We can argue about whether that would be a good thing or not, but it's certainly not impossible.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  2. Mistaken??? by rednip · · Score: 5, Insightful
    While it is a 'nice' check list for the corporate guy trying to get a handle on the major issues, it boils down to "Ways to confirm that you are a spammer, or a fool", rather than being 'mistaken' for anything.
    1. Ignoring "unsubscribe" requests.

      sending email to people who tell you not to do it anymore makes you a spammer

    2. List "repurposing."

      Selling email addresses to other business, makes you a spammer.

    3. Providing unclear privacy checkbox instructions, and ignoring users' responses

      Ingoring user email preferences makes you a spammer

    4. Losing track of internal desktop and server machines that can be used against you

      Losing track of systems shows you are a fool

    5. Not keeping databases and address lists up to date

      A two-fer both a spammer and a fool!

    6. Having vulnerable mailer forms on your Website

      Poor coding shows you are a fool, in particular as this is an old old trick

    7. Working with non-reputable third-party mailers

      "lie down with dogs wake up with fleas"

    --
    The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
    1. Re:Mistaken??? by Ucklak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have a site that follows said rules.

      I have a form that sends a verification email to the recipient that the recipient must reply to in order to receive newsletters and to be eligible to win a monthly prize we give away.

      80% of AOL users that fill out the form tell AOL that the verification email is SPAM.

      4% of the AOL users in the current database reports the newsletters as SPAM.

      With that being said, we are seriously thinking if removing all AOL users from our database and not allowing AOL email addresses to be used.
      We've said it time and time again yet we always 'wait another month'.

      --
      if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
    2. Re:Mistaken??? by British · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As an addition to #1, I hate websites that require you to enter a password to UNSUBSCRIBE. Like their marketing emails are so precious that they don't want anyone else unsubscribing you. Yeah.... Most likely you would have forgotten said password.

    3. Re:Mistaken??? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's just life, and stupid users.

      I have a list that is mailman based, double opt-in of course and unsubscribe information at the bottom of every email (plus I'll do it manually if they're too clueless to click a link). Every now and then someone reports it as spam, because they couldn't be bothered unsubscribing or even sending a 'please unsubscribe me' email.

      Heck, mailman even auto-unsubscribes after a small number of bounces, so it's not like it tries too hard...

      90% of ISPs can spot the induhvidual immediately and just ignore them (or maybe send to the x-unsubscribe-email). There are a few where they blacklist the entire mailserver without even checking... then I get the inevitable 'I'm not getting list email any more!' message..

  3. I admit it. by MindStalker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I admit it, I to have purposefully signed up for commercial emails that I later got tired of receiving. Instead of unsubscribing which was difficult I simply hit the Spam button on gmail. Maybe marketters need to make unsubscribing a bit easier and they might not get caught up in service wide filters.

    1. Re:I admit it. by MaggieL · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe marketters need to make unsubscribing a bit easier and they might not get caught up in service wide filters.

      "To unsubscribe, go to our website and edit your preferences with a military-grade password you either don't remeber or never actually set yourself. The 'forgot password' link might actually work, but then again probably not. Why should we care; we'll keep sending you our ads at your expense until you manage to make us stop somehow. Aren't you glad we are *legitimate* spam...I mean...'marketing email'?"

      --
      -=Maggie Leber=-
    2. Re:I admit it. by dawnzer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What about the emails from legit sites where you intentionally checked the stupid little box that tells them you don't want your inbox littered with there newsletters, special offers, etc. - but they send it anyway?!

      Why should I reply to their email with "unsubscribe" in the subject box, when not only did I not ask to receive it, but I specifically asked not to get it in the first place?

      I love the SPAM button in Gmail. I also love the Spam recipes Gmail shows me when I check the SPAM folder.

      --
      "Oh, say, can you see by the dawnzer lee light," sang Miss Binney
    3. Re:I admit it. by Thansal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The fact that most "unsubscribe" links are just ways of letting spammers know that the E-Mail is a live one is the reason I use the spam button.

      also, the articly basicly just lists a number of things that mark spam as spam. IF you are doing any of those thigns you are NOT legitimate, you are spam.

      not keeping up with unsubscribe? well that is then unsolisited email and it is spam.

      --
      Do Or Do Not, There Is No Spoon, There Is Only Zuul. Everything in the above post is probably opinion.
    4. Re:I admit it. by shine-shine · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This brings up an interesting possibility. Since so many users are now using the same few well-established web-based email services, why not establish some sort of a protocol for passing an 'unsubscribe' link in the header, and ask the web-based email service providers to show an 'unsubscribe' button, adjacent or instead of the 'spam' button?

      This leaves some room for exploitation, but this can be resolved if companies get white listed to be able to use this feature.

    5. Re:I admit it. by nath_de · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly, that's the thing making me hit the "Spam" button as well. As long as there is an easy way to unsubscribe I'll use that instead to keep the spam filter rules clean.

  4. hey, pizza hut! by British · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I once did an online order from Pizza Hut, and I've been stuck on their mailing list ever since. I did their unsubscribe spiel, and was aghast: they said it would take 6-8 weeks for me to get off their mailing list.

    In this day and age of computers, 6-8 weeks to be removed off of their mailings is ridiculous. I'm not trying to buy a house here, I just don't want your correspondence.

    Legit marketing emails? Just go RSS or make a web page. Let them come to you.

  5. Only one legitimate point by gravesb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The only legitimate point is users using the "This is spam" button to unsubscribe to newletters they legitimately subscribed to. This isn't fair to an honest company. However, there are risks to advertising through newsletters, and this is one. As long as companies are informed of the risk, and can take steps to mitigate it, then its all fair, I suppose.

    --
    http://bgcommonsense.blogspot.com
    1. Re:Only one legitimate point by NorbrookC · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You also have honest businesses who should know better, and still make it onto spammer lists. Ziff-Davis is a good example. They were using a set of mailers whose headers would trip off a spam filter. I could deal with that, but not their behavior. I signed up for one newsletter - I did not ask for the 20 other newsletters they thoughtfully decided to send me. It took me the better part of a week to get off of most of the mailing lists, but every time I responded to something in the one newsletter I asked for, I was right back on all the lists. That's why I don't subscribe to any their stuff anymore, and yes, they are on my spam list. Yes, I know they're legitimate, they publish some well-regarded magazines, and all that. But damn, they just had to keep shoving stuff I didn't ask for at me, and the annoyance factor just got to be too much.

  6. opt -in by Markspark · · Score: 2, Insightful

    All the mail i receive from companies that i have not requested, is from my point of view Spam, and therefore gets reported as spam. I fail to see why many companies still believe that they have some right to mail me their commercials.. if I'm interested, i find their webpage. / Mark

    --
    i find your lack of faith in science disturbing!
  7. No need for marketing. by r00t · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Capitalism does not need marketing,

    Without marketing, will I starve to death? No, of course not. I will seek to buy food.

    Will I not have a car? No, of course not. I will seek a place to buy one.

    I might not buy a pet rock, chia pet, or similar. Oh well. That's a gain for me.

    We could really use more stuff like Consumer Reports, but funding is difficult.

    A good start though: strict truth-in-advertising laws. Today it is considered "free speech" for a company to lie about their products, subject to very few limitations. If the soap gets whites whiter, there ought to be published research indicating so. If a product is "the best", it ought to be truly the best from the consumer's viewpoint in at least one normal and legitimate way.

    1. Re:No need for marketing. by owlnation · · Score: 2, Funny

      It wold be great to see that happen, but I suspect it won't, far too many lobbyists.

      Just imagine..."I can't believe it's not butter" would be become "I believe it's a petroleum industry by-product"

  8. eMail Layout by tancque · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It also helps when you consider the layout of your eMail carefully. It has happened several times now that users come complaining that our mailserver tags their mail as spam. When investigating the eMail it is virtual in distinguishable from real spam. Some users even think that spam-layout and tricks to fool rulebased anti-spam programs is a "standard" for advertising, and things like obfuscating words are "Cool". (Really, I'm not joking)

    --
    Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast!
  9. Different approachs. by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    #1. Since you're sending out HTML email anyway, why not put the unsubscribe button at the top of the message? If you're going to be funny and make it an "unsubscribe from this particular spam run" then you need to add a second button, again at the top of the message, that will unsubscribe the recipient from ALL of your mailings. ALL of them. Not most of them. Not some of them. Not everything except the ones the marketing department really wants to get out. ALL OF THEM.

    #2. If that's too much work for you, try an automatic opt-out program. Send a message once a month saying that you're still subscribed ... but that your subscription will end on (insert date) of this year UNLESS you click on the "continue my subscription for another year" button at the top of the message or copy this URL to your browser.

    I am not going to waste MY time trying to find where you've hidden the unsubscribe option.

    Spammers often do not have an unsubscribe button/link (those that do usually collect the addresses). If I cannot INSTANTLY find the unsubscribe button then I'm going to treat you like a spammer.

    Oh, and one other item - USE YOUR OWN FUCKING DOMAIN.
    If I look at the headers and I see that you claim to be a@b.com but the sending server's IP is tied to c.com then I'm going to blacklist c.com as a spammer.

    Okay, one last item, if I put the sending server's IP address into a browser and get a generic "unsubscribe" page, yeah, you're a spammer.

    If I put c.com (from the above example) into a browser and you don't have a webpage, yeah, you're a spammer.

    1. Re:Different approachs. by araemo · · Score: 2, Informative

      What he said. ;)

      On a more general note, in my opinion, spam is this:
      Unsolicited Bulk Email.

      It doesn't matter if it is commercial. It doesn't matter if you have a business partner I once bought a chia pet from.

      I did not solicit your email, and you sent it in bulk to many people. It IS spam, no matter how legitimate your business is.

      Many 'legitimate' companies have been put on my spam lists because they have sent me emails when I never gave them my email address. Yes, this would be a much smaller problem if other companies weren't selling my email address. However, there are some where I literally do not have a choice, and I know some of my credit cars are selling some of my info, and have little control over what is done with it once it is sold.. and I like getting payment reminders and the like by email.

    2. Re:Different approachs. by Fozzyuw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On a more general note, in my opinion, spam is this: Unsolicited Bulk Email.

      I'd go a step farther... SPAM is bulk unsolicited correspondence of any kind. The keywords being bulk and unsolicited. All these damn 0% pre-approved credit card applications I get every day (probably 2-3) is not only spam, but a huge waist.

      At least I can click a button to remove spam from my email inbox. =)

      Cheers,
      Fozzy

      --
      "The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
    3. Re:Different approachs. by Zenaku · · Score: 5, Funny

      All these damn 0% pre-approved credit card applications I get every day (probably 2-3) is not only spam, but a huge waist.

      You aren't supposed to be eating them, silly! Just throw them out!

      --
      If fate makes you a motorcycle, you become a motorcycle.
    4. Re:Different approachs. by PFI_Optix · · Score: 4, Funny

      All these damn 0% pre-approved credit card applications I get every day (probably 2-3) is not only spam, but a huge waist.

      Calling them "spam" may be true, but it's just insulting to imply that they're fat, too.

      --
      120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
    5. Re:Different approachs. by Fozzyuw · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Define unsolicited.

      I'm a member of Blockbuster Online (use to be NetFlix). I sometimes get emails from Blockbuster on in-store sales... heck, I even got one asking me to join Blockbuster online, months after I was a member! Oddly enough, I checked off all the 'send me special offers' boxes in my account, but I still get these emails a couple times a month. These, while technically 'unsolicited', I do not consider spam because of my membership status. If I where to stop being a member, and receive these emails, I would consider them spam.

      Likewise, my company sends out an E-Newsletter to many of reps, customers, and showrooms. Most of these people have not specifically opted in to the newsletter in the first place, but due to the business relationship, also do not (generally) consider this spam.

      Now speaking of Netflix, I will get an email on rare occasions from them. "Rejoin now for only $X.XX". I'll get this maybe 1 every couple months, and less frequently as time goes on. I consider this spam. Why? I was a member of Netflix? Yes, but the reason I consider is spam is because the $X.XX is NOT a special 'rejoin' offer price. It's the standard list price. They have no need to tell me to rejoin at the regular price. I already know that. It's a tricky attempt to deceive a customer and I do not appreciate that and consider that spam. If it was a real 'special offer', then I would be ok with that.

      I hope that clears up some of your question. Strictly 'unsolicited' is not what I'm going for. And likewise, in the case of Blockbuster, I get 2 emails a month (besides my 'your DVD has shipped/returned'), I do not consider that bulk. If I got 1 Credit card letter a month, I wouldn't be so bothered by it. Instead, I usually get 1 a week... from (what it feels like) every credit card company/bank. =)

      Cheers,
      Fozzy

      --
      "The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
  10. This is a real problem by Overzeetop · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I am on a mailing list for a local (okay, regional) club that has about 150-200 members. You have to opt-in to get on the list. Well, seems that one or two members didn't (or couldn't figure out how to) unsubscribe when they didn't want to read the list - they just hit the AOL "this is spam" button. That would be fine, except that AOL started blocking the listserve machine completely, and nobony who used AOL get their list emails. It took a while to petition AOL to get white listed, then some idiot got us re-blacklisted.

    To get around it, the list admin ended up reworking the list so that each recipient got thier own, personally addressed email. Not to stop the spam-blocking, but to find the "problem" user. A lot of work to get the list back up and running for those on AOL.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  11. 1, 2 and 3 is spam by gorbachev · · Score: 3, Informative

    1. Ignoring "unsubscribe" requests.
    2. List "repurposing."
    3. Providing unclear privacy checkbox instructions, and ignoring users' responses.

    If the "legitimate" emailer is doing any of these, that's not "being mistaken for a spammer". That's good old fashioned spam, pure and simple.

    1) and potentially 3) are violations of the CAN SPAM Act and will land the "legitimate" marketer in legal trouble (well, they would, if someone was actually enforcing the CAN SPAM Act).

    --
    In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
  12. Important issues come to light. by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is especially frustrating to me, as it just so happens I am actually an exiled Nigerian prince who makes a perfectly honest living selling male potency supplements. Badly designed spam-blocking systems have made it incredibly difficult for me to find a complete stranger who will let me deposit sixty millions of American dollars into their bank account for completely legitimate reasons.

  13. Re:Marketing is not "legitimate" by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "All commercial e-mail is Spam"

    Wrong.
    Legally there are commercial emails that aren't spam.

    And I want an email from several companies we do business with. These are all BnM stores usually sending us coupons.

    A lot of people do business with companies that they have done business with in the past.

    ""I'm not a murderer - I strictly adhere to the ethical standards and guidlines of the American Association of Professional Dismemberers and Disembowlers, and never splatter gore on your lawn."

    That example is in the top 100 worst example ever posed on slashdot.
    I am nearly speechless at how inept it is. It's like a 5 inch penis at a porn convention. Lost AND unwanted.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  14. Re:Dynamic IP Adderesses by arkanes · · Score: 2, Informative
    But this brings up the crux of the problem: should companies assume that any IP in a dynamic range is a spammer email?

    My email server, my rules. Anyone who has a legitimate internet presence has access to a correctly configured mail server in a static IP block. I'm surprised you didn't run into it before, actually, because blackholes for dynamic IP blocks are very common.

    You don't have to own your own netblock, you just have to have an IP in a range that isn't marked for dynamic addresses. That's what the "business level" DSL and hosting services your ISP provides are for. If you are in such a block, send your email via your ISPs mail server. That's what it is for. You don't need to receive email that way, only send it. If you're smaller than "small business", like a couple guys working out of an apartment, trying to look bigger, then you need to be aware of stuff like this. If you really are a small manufacturer, get better hosting.

  15. Love of capitalism does not imply love of ads. by Valdrax · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If people are going to have this opinion in a capatalistic society, then that's hypocrisy and I think they need to think a bit more about what they are doing. If these people think that advertising shouldn't have a place in our society then I think they should consider that maybe money doesn't either. Because we can't have both. Capitalism needs marketing,

    What sort of nonsense is this? If you accept the concept of a free market, then you must accept the fact that there is a market for businesses that do not perform an action that irritates a segment of the market. Capitalism in fact demands that businesses must consider and respond to whether or not customers appreciate marketing. If you fail to meet this demand, then do not have the hypocrisy to whine about consumers having choices.

    Capitalism does not mean that society must roll over and accept anything that a business does.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  16. Advertising/Marketing by simpl3x · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm currently working in advertising, and increasingly we're finding that, no capitalism doesn't need advertising or marketing in this sense. There are a lot of very relevant ways to attract people to products that are not intrusive and can be interesting. Somebody stated that, perfectly targeted advertising is no longer advertising, but information.

    Once this hits the mobile, the distinction will be important.

    Also, sending emails every other day is a damn good way to be listed as spam!

  17. And the solution to the problem is... by AndySilva · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... actually getting rid of spam...

    I know, I know, it's a beaten-to-death subject, but there are many valid commercial offers to many interested parties. Spam made all this marketing mess.

    We need to purify email, by means of a new protocol (another beaten-to-deatch subject)...

    Have you already checked EmailXT (http://www.emailxt.com/)? It's a protocol that promotes a simple transition path from the current email system, removes unsolicited bulk email (spam/viruses ) from existence, and adds new features like, for instance, easy removal from mailing lists.

    However it still has a long path to go (alpha stage, buggy prototype), but it's real and it's promising. My opinion, of course...

  18. Spam, spam, spam, spam, lovely spam by JustNiz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >> lead to a case of mistaken spammmer identity for a legit business trying to send its marketing email,

    If its unsolicted advertising its spam. It doesn't matter if the company thinks itself is legitimate or not.
    spam is not required to be all about p3n1s enlargement.

  19. Missing by WedgeTalon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There's a major one missing:

    If you have a customer that cancels their account with you, take that as being an opt-out! If they cancel and then a month or so later receive an email from you, they will more likely than not just mark it as spam (with the other couple messages that got through their filters) rather than bother with opening your large, image-filled email just to click a link to go to your slow website to politely stop receiving your email.

  20. Re:It's not just email! by mpe · · Score: 2, Informative

    I once attended a seminar on buying businesses. One of the methods of getting capital is to sell the customer list of the business you acquire. It doesn't matter what the original owners promised their customers, you own it now and there's nothing they can do about it.

    Only in the absense of data protection laws. Try this in the EU and the fines will be a lot more than whatever you might have made by selling the list.

    That's something to remember, even the current owners promise that they won't pimp you data, it doesn't prevent future owners from doing so. ANd even then, management changes or business starts take a downturn, it's amazing how "privacy policies" that "are subject to change at anytime" do so.

    Even without such a clause these things are pointless. They only exist in the absense of laws to either protect personal data or punish liers.

  21. Re:Marketing is not "legitimate" by edgr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is no such thing as "legitimate marketing". All commercial e-mail is Spam
    This is patently false - I am on a couple of lists of small local companies. I signed up for these by writing my address on a physical piece of paper in the shops. One sends a newsletter every month with new products etc, another sends a newsletter every couple of months with useful articles, as well as an occasional email about a sale.

    I signed up for these emails, I like getting these emails, and I could easily unsubscribe to these emails. However, I know that at least one of these lists has had trouble with getting spam-filtered.
  22. The sound of a tiny violin... by radarsat1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Let me just clear the tears out of my eyes.. phew, okay.

    Excuse me if I don't worry too much about businesses trying to send "legitimate marketing emails". Think about it...
    What is their motivation?
    Email is a good delivery platform because everyone reads their email.
    However, spammers have ruined email for "legitimate businesses", by making us develop better and better filters to automatically remove spam/marketing from our inboxes.
    What is the consequence? That email is no longer a viable transport system for marketing. Hear that? Spam proves that email is NOT a good marketing channel.
    Simple: they will go back to their previous techniques.
    I don't see how this is a problem. The public has made it clear: Email is not intended for marketing. Use other channels.
    We have simply drawn a line in the sand, the existence of spam filters is a message to companies out there who want to abuse email: "We don't want it." I don't see how this is a problem. Marketing has plenty of other tricks up their sleeve, they don't need this one.

  23. "Unsubscribe" links are harmful; don't click them. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not only that, but unless I can consciously remember signing up for a particular mailing list, I'm not going to use its unsubscribe link -- I'm just going to mark it as Spam.

    Why? Because an "unsubscribe" link can just as easily be an "this email address is live, sell it to all the other scumbags" link. Unless I know that the organization it's coming from is legit, clicking on an 'unsubscribe' link in an email is considered harmful, and I won't do it.

    If you want to send out bulk emails (and I think this is a pretty terrible idea to begin with), you should carefully cull your lists if you don't want to be marked as a spammer. I don't want to get messages from someone for the rest of my life, just because I bought something from them once. At best, that's going to make me regret ever doing business with them. Just because I bought something from your crummy web store, shouldn't give you the right to send crap to me forever; if I haven't made another purchase in a few months, I'm probably not coming back. Roll the old address off of the list, and move on -- you're probably just going into a junk-mail box somewhere anyway. (Or more likely, being "eaten" by Spam Gourmet after the 10 messages from you I told it to let through have come and gone, because I didn't trust your ass not to spam me in the first place.)

    The ultimate definition of "Spam" is pretty simple: it's email that people don't want to receive. If you're sending out email to people who would rather not be getting it, you're a spammer, plain and simple. It may not be illegal (yet), but it doesn't mean that it's not obnoxious.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  24. First poster is right, but with wrong POV by gurps_npc · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I agree that there is little room left for legitimate mass emailing.

    In fact, I would say there is NONE.

    Look, we don't let people go around in the street, sneaking their hand into our pockets and putting their business card into it. Why? Because it is too close to an illegal act called pick-pocketing. Similarly, as much as the business men WANT to send out mass mailing, it is time to say:

    Hey your business model is too close to an illegal act, so stop doing it.

    There are alternatives, and frankly Email is NOT the best way to deliver 're-occuring' messages. You can do things like push technology where someone agrees to have a web site automatically background downloaded into a cache whenever they log on to the internet and stay on for more than 1 minute. A flag can pop up on your tool bar, saying you have unreviewed downloaded pages. I know push technology has failed, but that was in part due to email already being accepted. If we outlaw the email reoccuring mass-mailing, then that will give some form of Push technology an opportunity to fill the niche that email used to take care of.

    If we ever want to clean up email, we need to STOP mis-using it ourselves.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  25. Re:It's not just email! by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 3, Informative

    Only in the absense of data protection laws. Try this in the EU and the fines will be a lot more than whatever you might have made by selling the list.

    It's more than that Firstly (at least in the UK) it's a criminal offence, for which you get a record, and the fines are unlimited (for a large breach you can write off your company there and then). Plus they can serve you with an enforcement notice - preventing you from processing personal data (wave byebye to your customer database) and that's backed by criminal law too.

    See the out-law summary

    Needless to say here we take the DPA *very* seriously.

  26. Re:"Unsubscribe" links are harmful; don't click th by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Another favorite gimmick they use is the "You asked to receive email on this crap or from a partner". Fine, show me where I asked for this. Who is this partner? When did I ask to receive my millionth email for refinancing or for V1gr3ra? It is just a transparent attempt to get around any laws saying you can't send it unless it was asked for or you did business with them.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  27. How the hell is the parent insightful? by fluxrad · · Score: 2, Insightful

    All commercial e-mail is Spam

    That's the silliest thing I've read in a long time.

    I subscribe to a number of mailing lists to find out when sales at companies I like are going on. I get mail from REI, Campmor, Frontier, Newegg, and a few others. I save money this way. I like money. When I want to unsubscribe from these emails, I click on the link - I don't report mail as spam unless it's actually spam. All of those newsletters I just talked about are commercial email.

    Do you consider catalogs you subscribe to junkmail?

    Do you consider coupons you get from companies you've asked to receive coupons from junkmail?

    Unfortunately - it's viewpoints like that of the parent that are contributing to the spam blocking problem, creating a huge gray area of marketers who get caught in all kinds of filters because users are "complaining" about email they once opted in to, but are now too lazy to click the "unsubscribe" link.

    --
    "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
  28. No, not really by Moraelin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are basically implying that all advertising ever is unwanted. However if that was the case we wouldn't be where we are now. We would be a bunch of people in caves not trusting each other and killing each other because they took your club. People need ways of finding out about things.
    Heh. No, not really. Now I'm all for comerce, and can even see some (indirect) benefit in (honest) advertising, but basically claiming that marketters are what got us out of the caves is... rich. No, seriously, I can only hope that was tongue in cheek, because it's outright funny in its silliness.

    People have better ways to find things out than being fed lies, deception and FUD. We have schools, we have newspapers (or had, before the PR assholes started disguising FUD and deception as articles), we have libraries, etc, to actually find things out.

    If you look at history, we remember stuff like, say, the great library of Alexandria, _not_ some big Egyptian marketting campaign. We remember the schools of ancient Greek and Roman philosophers, _not_ some great ancient spammer. And if that information even got to us, we can thank some monasteries who worked dilligently to copy the manuscripts, not some medieval "enlarge thy phalus to the size of the Spanish Armada" spam campaign.

    Here's some information: until _very_ recently (as in 19'th century or so, and even then in homoeopathic doses for anything that wasn't snake oil) marketting wasn't even need at _all_, and tended to not even exist. In an economy of scarcity, you don't need to distort everyone's perception to sell your stuff, you just need to bring it to the market. It'll sell itself. Trust me, when Venice or later Portugal brought a ship loaded spices from Asia, they didn't need to bulk-send leaflets hyping them: people would buy them anyway.

    The disproportionate need for marketting to sell stuff is _very_ recent and a result of the economy of abundance. Large companies are no longer limited by how much they can produce, but by how much they can sell. Everyone can over-produce pretty much anything. Coca Cola or Pepsi could ramp their production to drown the whole world, Nike could make shoes for everyone on the whole planet, etc. The limit is demand nowadays. And we've already been at the point of just trying to produce more and dump them cheaper, that's how the Great Depression happened. So nowadays we end up hiring more people to create an artificial demand by marketting, than to actually produce stuff.

    But again, that's a very recent phenomenon. If you picked even someone from the 17'th or 18'th century, much less a caveman, and try to tell them that somewhere there's a society where you need to beg and convince people to buy your goods, they'd think you're seriously deluded or telling them some kind of fable. The whole notion was simply alien, as the wold economy was simply always at a point where agregate demand vastly outstripped aggregate supply. Even if one place had an exceptional year and over-produced grain, two-three other places were having a severe famine, so some merchant would come and buy your grain anyway.

    So basically, oh please. If you're trying to tell me that marketters got us out of the stone age and got us educated, that's on par with claiming that Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy did it. It's just that ludicrious.
    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:No, not really by RowanS · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But again, that's a very recent phenomenon. If you picked even someone from the 17'th or 18'th century, much less a caveman, and try to tell them that somewhere there's a society where you need to beg and convince people to buy your goods, they'd think you're seriously deluded or telling them some kind of fable. The whole notion was simply alien, as the wold economy was simply always at a point where agregate demand vastly outstripped aggregate supply.
      Actually advertising, at least in England, became important in the 18th century. Some newspapers started as collections of advertising in the 1700s and added news later. But it does seem that the rise of adverstising was due to surplus as you said, in this case the increase in surplus income of the middle classes, which allowed the purchase of luxury goods. See http://www.umich.edu/~ece/student_projects/adverti sing/placeanadd.html
    2. Re:No, not really by OhBoy! · · Score: 2, Interesting

      two-three other places were having a severe famine, so some merchant would come and buy your grain anyway And this merchant would know that you have extra grain to sell... how? Did the farmer tell the pub owner who then told the visiting merchant? That was marketing. He didn't have sophisticated methods of today's marketing at his disposal, but that is still marketing, as much as an ox cart is a vehicle. I do not think scarcity on supply side simply explains it. People didn't have the means we have today, and there was scarcity of demand as well. Just as machinery and science and social services, etc, are more sophisticated today, so are marketing tools and methodology. We hate it, but it will not go away: it works. Only when we become sophisticated enough as consumers to actively punish intrusive marketing will there be any change. I'm not holding my breath.
    3. Re:No, not really by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Oh, and one relevant thing I forgot to mention. I can't find the source now, but I believe it was the eminent Bucky Fuller who predicted that if we eliminated the extra effort going towards the "status" or "positional" aspect of the goods we consume, we could satisfy all of our needs PLUS entertainment wants on two hours of work per week. I think that's an exaggeration, of course, but I'd agree a huge fraction is due to zero-sum status games.

    4. Re:No, not really by Bruce_Nash · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well put. If you assume that marketing is only done by commercial enterprises.

      All the things that you mention (the Great Library of Alexandria, ancient monks copying manuscripts) happened because someone had a vested interest in those things happening , and successfully sold them to someone else who had the means to make them happen. The connection might not be direct. e.g. The monks were driven by their beliefs to copy manuscripts (primarily religious texts), because they had been "sold" the idea that Christianity was the way to eternal salvation.

      If you look at other ancient marvels, the marketing connection is more obvious... with apologies to the followers of Horus, the pyramids were built because the religious leaders found a good way to pump up the egos of the Pharoahs.

      What happened was that marketing moved from being an activity pursued mainly by kings and religions to become something that business did as well. Actually, I think you'll find marketing by businesses started to happen as soon as businesses began to compete on a broad geographical basis, which was basically when the roads and rail systems became efficient and there was a reliable monetary system (see e.g. Neal Stephenson's The Baroque Cycle vol. 43, pp. 5,292 - 5,313).

      I'm not saying marketing is a good thing. Just that it's been around for a lot longer than you acknowledge, and is probably inevitable given freedom of speech, and an incentive to do so.

  29. Send it back! by rabel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No! Remove any self-identifying information and then tear up the paperwork and send it back to them in their own postage-paid envelope. Toss some small rocks in there just for good measure since they pay the return postage by weight. Once you've done this a few times, it become second nature and only takes a moment.

    1. Re:Send it back! by Syrrh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Amen! Keep your postal services workers paid and employed on the backs of garbage-mailers.

      I receive several monthly mailings for credit cards, the ones with a 'customer identification' barcode on the back always bring a gleeful smile as I cram that sucker as full as possible without wasting a half-cent's worth of tape on their sorry envelope.

      I was infuriated to no end when they started printing a phone contact to stop receiving applications only to end up at a non-working number, that one got special treatment.

      As a curious side-effect, I still get basically the same number of mailings, but I've stopped receiving the beloved Val-Pak coupon brick to use as stuffing material.

  30. Assume-deny. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But honestly, how do they KNOW you don't want it unless they give it a try? (I'm 100% serious here. I want your response.)

    Easy; assume I don't want it unless I request it. If I write a personal email to someone, like to customer service, I expect a response. If I order something, I assume they'll send me a confirmation. I don't want an email a week for the next 50 years.

    That's just common sense: if you don't know whether the person on the other end will want to receive something or not, don't send it.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:Assume-deny. by Poruchik · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, no, no. The emails you send to their customer service are considered SPAM . They don't want them.

      They want to you to go to the 'checkout' page without any pesky customer service requests.

      --
      $signature =~ s/$signature//;