Jump to content

The Old Post Office - 103sponend.com


PaulW

Recommended Posts

You did put the record straight and I appreciate it.  Your ranges are now blocked on our systems as you have no idea what spam is. Because of this problem you cannot consider yourself an abuse desk. Well maybe you can because you are allowing the abuse.  If it is one time or many time mailing and the recepient did not request it then it is spam. It's a very simple process.

39129[/snapback]

Thanks Merlyn, I wish more admins would be like you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Merlyn, I wish more admins would be like you!

39136[/snapback]

And the top three reasons for his post:

Lexical Contradiction: Spammers will redefine any term in order to disguise their abuse of Internet resources.

Sharp's Corollary: Spammers attempt to re-define "spamming" as that which they do not do.

and finally:

Crissman's Corollary: A spammer, when caught, blames his victims.

<applause> :D <applause> :D <applause> :D <applause> :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if I am replying to my own post, I was trying some humor. Actually there is no humor in the fact that it is really sad when there are so many people providing services that don't have a clue. Some are small and some very large but..............................<you know the rest>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some are small and some very large but..............................<you know the rest>

39139[/snapback]

Um, no, I don't know the rest, and Googling "some are small and some very large" didn't show me anything I thought would apply - unless you are referring to basements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In context with what I was saying about providers not having a clue - some are small and some are large but until they get a clue we will keep getting spam from their customers.

39166[/snapback]

Ah! Thank you. I am enlightened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

There still seems to be some confusion with regard to this so although much of this has been covered already hopefully this will clarify everything.

The opt in list this company send out is very large and thier users are/were very happy with the service, the company built up a loyal and happy subscriber base over a number of years. The client however bought a list not realising how risky this was and merged it to the main list.

This resulted in around 5% of their list being poisoned as some of the list appeared to contain some users that had not knowingly opted in. Unfortunately the list purchased was immediately deleted when they found out making it impossible to tell who had been added. The best solution would be to clean the list up without losing as many of the subscribed customers as possible and at the same time also give minimum disruption to any end users of the list who did not wish to receive emails. It was also noted that not all recipients were unhappy with recieving the list as quite a few new customers opted in when it was first run after being merged with the live list.

The solution proposed was that the mailing list would run once more but only as a double opt-in which means that even existing subscribers would have to 'opt in' to maintain the listing. Although a percentage of the genuine subscribers would be lost this would be a fair compromise to clean the list whilst giving minimum disruption to users that did not want to be on the list. It was also agreed that the list would only go out in small chunks over a period of time to minimise disruption.

It was also agreed that we would underwrite the process. This means that as an ISP we would assure any end users that on that were not happy were reassured by us that they would be removed (not forgetting it was a one time mailing). This process was assisted by the fact that the site did not follow the 'normal' profile of a spammers web site with full contact details and address (including a uk freephone telephone number).

We fully understand and also recommend that users normaly dont click the unsubscribe button however the circumstances on this occasion were totally different. It was also noted that as a one time mailing it was not necessary to unsubscribe anyway but this was to reassure any users that the matter was resolved. Unfortunately we totally failed to anticipate that two users would take such offence to this process and bombard us with requests to switch off the server rather than understand the process that was happening but fortunately there was only two and all the other users have been very understanding and did not consider an extra email as unacceptable (thank you!).

When we received the spam cop complaint we informed them of the circumstances and what we were doing and they agreed that this was ok to do and offered to have the IP address removed from the block list. Although they sent us a link to remove the IP from the black list rather than take this up we suggested that it should also remain in place until the list was clean as an extra filter for users that did not wish to receive the final email.

Well ‘hopefully’ to conclude this matter:

We are pleased to announce that this process is now complete so no further emails will be despatched from this network to users that did not specifically ask to be included so If you do get any, please let us know and we will be happy to deal with it.

We would also like to thank the majority of you for your patience and understanding, the cleint is also grateful to you all for enabling them to save thier business and accept that an important lesson has been learnt.

We have clear guidelines in our terms and conditions about bulk email but We will also be including a warning about buying lists in our next newsletter to our customers to ensure that the same situation does not occur in the future.

Thanks again to everyone.

Abuse - host-it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now see, that doesn't sound nearly as bad as the "opt-out" or you keep getting it scenario that it seemed you described initially. I think a lot of the bad response you got initially could have been prevented by this more thorough explanation up front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, host-it,

...Thank you for your calm and detailed explanation.

<snip>

The solution proposed was that the mailing list would run once more but only as a double opt-in which means that even existing subscribers would have to 'opt in' to maintain the listing.

<snip>

39878[/snapback]

...Ooh, "double opt-in" says "spammer" to some of us! But your next sentence changes this impression (at least, it does for me).
We will also be including a warning about buying lists in our next newsletter to our customers to ensure that the same situation does not occur in the future.

<snip>

39878[/snapback]

...Thank you! I hope you will consider also including a link to Jeff G's article Am I running mailing lists responsibly?.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The solution proposed was that the mailing list would run once more but only as a double opt-in which means that even existing subscribers would have to 'opt in' to maintain the listing. Although a percentage of the genuine subscribers would be lost this would be a fair compromise to clean the list whilst giving minimum disruption to users that did not want to be on the list. It was also agreed that the list would only go out in small chunks over a period of time to minimise disruption.

It sounds to me as though you did the right thing. In anti-spam jargon 'double opt in' is called 'confirmation' I am not sure, but I think some lists periodically have subscribers re-confirm.

It is a shame that the spammers have spoiled unsolicited email for all of us. However, the best way to get new subscribers is to get them to sign up through snail mail, ways of attracting them to your website. As long as you send that 'confirmation' the first time (and do the maintenance to assure people who change addresses and don't inform you are dropped, etc.), you should have few problems. As you know, there are always some people.... a while back someone who had a paid mailing list wondered why a paid subscriber would report a mailing as spam! But if you reply promptly and courteously (as you have here), you, again, will probably have few problems.

Thank you for your interest in maintaining a clean list and for spreading the word.

Miss Betsy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you read the first posting on this thread http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...indpost&p=36350 the 'explanation' does not seem to hold water.

If the client made a 'mistake' and bought a list that added 5% of poisoned email addresses, why could they not simply remove them [go back to the list from a backup, maybe]?

Besides, the first post was on November 21. It doesn't take that long to resolve an unintentional error.

Just my take after reading through this whole discussion as I was looking for other information.

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...