Re: Water tight opt-in (yet another FUSSP)

On January 4, 2014 at 13:43 [email protected] (Steve Atkins) wrote:
 >=20
 > If you=92re considering email that people have asked to receive,
 > are happy receiving and which all entities involved with it are
 > quite happy to be involved with the delivery of as =93spam=94, then
 > you=92re far enough from anything remotely operational as to be
 > entirely irrelevant to actual problems.

If you'd been following the discussion you would know that the note I
was responding to listed several areas of grey covering a wide range
currently considered by unilateral fiat to be email you are happy
with, such as when you order a book on UI design and the seller sends
you nearly daily pitches for every vaguely related book their fuzzy
matchers can possibly come up, as well as passing your contact info on
to many others they consider partners and leaving it up to you to try
to opt-out of each of them.

It's a (too) vast spectrum currently defined by often nothing more
than you inquired about a product, or certainly if you had the
temerity to actually buy something.

Whether you're happy with the subsequent explosion in email being sent
to you may be nearly irrelevant or, as the cognitive scientists might
say, just accepting a situation you can't change anyhow (see Stockholm
Syndrome.)

And as I said the sheer volume is burying even that email, often in
itself.

 > Laughing you off the stage is the only reasonable response
 > to that line of argument, I=92m afraid.

Now that adds a lot to the discussion...

I take it you differ in opinion?

I guess that better not happen again.

The situation changes, it has changed, thousands of so-called
"legitimate" entities are taking up email for much the same reason
(less the purely malevolent intentions) that spammers took it up.

This evolution calls for an examination of assumptions.

It's one thing to have a door to door salesman knock on your door once
in a while, the poor saps are just trying to make a living, versus
when there's a line out your front door all day.

Again, quantity effects (and affects) quality and basing definitions
purely on intent as you imply loses its utility.

Every one lined at your door to knock may have wonderful products you
have indicated an interest in but that comes to be besides the point
as your door bell rings yet again.

I think we've reached that point.


--=20
        -Barry Shein

The World              | [email protected]           | http://www.TheWorld.c=
om
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Cana=
da
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*
-
This is the asrg mailing list.  To change your subscription settings, see
http://lists.services.net/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr/domain=3Dlists.gurus.org