by Azriel Winnett
In the much talked about Prodigy case, someone tried to
"frame" an innocent party by sending offensive email
messages in his name. What motivated the culprit I don't
know,but it reminds me of some other despicable acts
that have been perpetrated in the world of email lately.
In a previous article, when discussing the merits or
otherwise of double opt-in procedures, I mentioned how
an unscrupulous person sometimes subscribes to a big
bunch of lists which are then forwarded to a third party -
who, startled by the sudden deluge of emails, complains
he's being spammed.
This is how it works: the prankster sets up a free mail
email account with a service that allows you to forward
email to another address. He doesn't necessarily have to
set it up for forwarding at that point.
He then subscribes that free email account to different
lists, discarding the welcome message and returning the
confirmation request if necessary. Once that is done, they
forward their free email account to the address of a
"victim."
At Sling Shot Media, we've uncovered not a few instances
of this. We've found that in most cases, the victims had
previously complained that they their "persecutors" had
spammed them. This trick was the perpetrators' way of
getting even for being reported.
Obviously, we hold no brief for these sick minds. But all
this does illustrate how nerves are being shattered almost
beyond repair by irresponsible use of the privilege of
access to the inboxes of our fellows.
In a recent article, I stressed that in our experience, spam
complaints for genuine opt-in lists are few and far
between.
Many, on the other hand, don't share this experience.
Why is this? It can only be because there are different
perceptions regarding what "opt-in" really means.
While users of commercial email know that they can
hardly afford to reject the opt-in principle outright if they
want to keep their reputations intact, it serves the
agendas of some of them well if they interpret it in the
widest possible sense they can get away with.
As far as we're concerned at Sling Shot Media, it means
only unambiguous consent to receive the specific email
you're sending right now.
We receive many inquiries from people looking for ready-
made lists comprising email addresses of people who fall
into certain categories. But a list bought from a third
party is not an opt-in list, and we will neither trade in
them or allow their use on our servers. We regularly turn
down about 20 potential customers a week as a result of
our strict adherence to this principle.
The fact is, though, it's not only a matter of principle.
Strict opt-in is sound business economics, because opt-
in is about tighter targeting. Analysts are saying that
email response rates are down to a half of what they were
a year or two a ago, and sinking fast.
We don't see this as a prophecy of an impending
doomsday for email publishers and marketers - far from
it. We see it merely as a challenge to sharpen our focus
with our targeting methods and to strive towards
increased personalization.
The fittest among us will not only survive, but may reap
rewards they dared to dream of. And these will be people
who subscribe to the opt-in principle not only because
they don't want to be accused of spamming, heaven
forbid!
They will also do it because they want their messages to
be opened - and read!
______________________________________________
Azriel Winnett is senior staff writer at Sling Shot
Media,LLC - Your List Hosting SpeciaLists.
<http://www.listhost.net> This article originally appeared
in our weekly newsletter, ListHost News. Subscribe at
our site or email to: news@listhost.net?body=subscribe