Comments for Mickey Chandler's Spamtacular

Comment on Prior Business Relationships are irrelevant by mickc

mickc — Tue, 08 May 2012 02:11:51 +0000

The \”pre-existing business relationship\” (PBR) bits that everyone keeps looking for don\’t really exist.

CAN-SPAM presupposes a right to send mail, so setting an exception for the PBR doesn\’t make a lot of sense.

The point of this post is that looking to the \”Transactional or relationship message\” parts of CAN-SPAM as though it excuses behavior (like not including an unsubscription link) is counter-productive and doesn\’t even track what the law actually says.

I\’d suggest you look at the \”Pre-existing Business Relationships Don\’t Matter\” post for more information. There\’s a pingback link to it just above your comment.

Comment on Guest Blog: I am not a spammer – so why have I been blocked? by Cian A

Cian A — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 07:59:10 +0000

Very interesting Richard – is that the entire summary of Spamhaus' policy on spammer identification or do they go into more detail somewhere?

Comment on Dela’s Challenge by Richard Bewley

Richard Bewley — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 21:11:00 +0000

Interesting view there.

However, there is plenty of evidence to illustrate that failing to remove inactives (no stipulation of age here in your response… 6 months? 12? 24?), does land the most respected of brands in the hottest water.

Inactive email addresses can unfortunately be converted to SpamTraps, which vary considerably in their severity. SpamHaus for example may well be subscribed to by 60% of a sender’s receiver list – the moment an SBL is in place, email performance radically demises.

The pain to weed these traps out, out from the sender’s perspective is potentially excruciating.

Comment on Prior Business Relationships are irrelevant by thekatalist

thekatalist — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 15:03:04 +0000

At first i was confused by the title of your blog and now…I'm still confused. I have been conducting some research for my company as I have always advised not to use a third party list rental UNLESS the owner did the mailing on our behalf. The reason being that I believe a company should have a prior business relationship in order to directly email a prospect. But now I can't find language to support this anywhere; not even on the fcc or dma website. Have I gone nuts? This language/clause was there years ago and now it's gone. Can you help me find it? Besides it being a law, I just think it's bad business.

Comment on Dela’s Challenge by Dela Quist

Dela Quist — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 18:11:13 +0000

Hi Mickey

Thanks I think a lot of marketers will find that very useful although perhaps unsurprisingly you approached it from a deliverability perspective

May i suggest a few tweaks.

A marketer and I consider myself to be one would be thinking about this the other way round. They don't care about deliverability until it hurts their program. So the scoring would be 1 for the lowest risk and 10 for the highest risk, which would make appending a 9 and not a 2

In addition I would imagine they would expect consistency in the presentation of the options in terms of danger so what would the risk factor be if you did not remove spam complaints? If you did not remove inactives? If you do append etc.

Finally, does everyone in your world agree with your ranking? i personally find marking the risk factor of not removing inactives at 5 is a tad high

Feel free to post this as comment on Kens blog it I think it will be seen by more marketers.

Comment on Dela’s Challenge by Al Iverson

Al Iverson — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 15:55:41 +0000

Good post, Mick!

Comment on The difference between triage and planning by Six months or out – Word to the Wise

Six months or out – Word to the Wise — Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:11:18 +0000

[...] Chandler has a great post up about Triage vs. Planning. Where he talks about the decisions you make differ depending on the [...]

Comment on The difference between triage and planning by @andrewkordek

@andrewkordek — Wed, 28 Sep 2011 01:46:40 +0000

Dude,

Glad I could provide you with some blog fodder.

Andrew Kordek
Co-Founder, Trendline Interactive
A Email Marketing Agency
Twitter: @andrewkordek & @trendlinei
Email: andrew@trendlineinteractive.com

Comment on And the verdict is…. by Annalivia

Annalivia — Thu, 08 Sep 2011 08:29:40 +0000

Steve White, as predictable as rain in Seattle.

Good luck with trying to cause legal trouble for a company that is not American. No jurisdiction. And an EU court would laugh you out the door.

I fully support Al’s idea. Get on that, dude.

Comment on And the verdict is…. by Al Iverson

Al Iverson — Wed, 07 Sep 2011 17:21:39 +0000

I think we should start a Tumblr Blog wherein we can post things that have nothing to do with anything, and then Steve White can comment on every single one, pointing out how evil Spamhaus is and how ISPs are going to get their comeuppance someday. It can be, like, pictures of kittens and turtles, and Steve can post, LET'S NOT FORGET! SPAMHAUS STILL LOST!