At 5:56 AM -0600 2/26/99, Stephanie da Silva wrote:
> I was talking to Cyndi Norman about this the other day - about
> asking permission before using information. IMO, I have found that
> most people don't mind if they're listed in the PAML. If anything,
> it's the opposite, that a lot of people think they're being excluded
> if they're not (which is certainly not the case).
This is pretty much what I'm finding -- I've been more and more
involved with e-mailing using address lists built using opt-in or
opt-out checkboxes on various corporate web-sites. The exact kind of
situation where someone might not notice the opt-in or opt-out
(although my work indicates net users are quite aware of them and
very rarely miss them).
We were very worried starting out that we'd have some significant
backlash, or at least a lot of confusion and unhappiness. hasn't
happened. In the most recent group of addresses, some 200K worth, we
saw maybe 15-20 complaints about UCE/UBE/Spam/etc. Not zero, but
close. And most of those, when I talk to them, are at least
understanding. There's a much larger problem with dealing with
unsubscriptions where the subscribed e-mail and the actual email
don't match, but even that is quite small in percentages (but with
zillions of addresses, 2% of a zillion is still a lot of
administrative overhead...)
And this ties in closely to both Topica, the PAML stuff, and Nick's
criticisms. Not minimizing Nick's criticisms one bit, but I've found
that the people REALLY SENSITIVE to this stuff is a very small,
small, number. Loud and enthusiastic, but not very many. If Topica
added 100K lists to their site, the number of sites that are likely
to react like Nick did is going to be down around 100. 200 maybe.
Which isn't minimizing that their needs and interests need to be
dealt with, but I think we have to back away from the black/white
idea that if anyone, anywhere, anytime is unhappy with something,
then you don't do it. For people like Nick, you have folks standing
by to resolve their issues as quickly as you can, but a basic reality
of life is you won't have 100% buyoff on anything (including the need
for 100% buyoff!). So you do the best you can, and make sure you deal
with the people for whom "they best you can" isn't good enough. And I
think Nick fits in that category.
But that some person, like Nick, is unhappy doesn't make it a flawed
system. it's not a perfect system, but name one. I can't. But a good
system tries to take all of these issues in mind in design (and I
believe Topica did), come up with a compromise that suits most users
(and I think Topica did), and then has the processes in place to
resolve whatever situations are left that need to be resolved. And
from what I've seen, that's there as well.
It ain't spam just because one person doesn't like it and calls it
such. But it seems in some parts of the net, that's all it takes...
--
Chuq Von Rospach (Hockey fan? <http://www.plaidworks.com/hockey/>)
Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
<http://www.plaidworks.com/> + <http://www.lists.apple.com/>
Featuring Winslow Leach at the Piano!
