On Sun 22/Mar/2026 04:20:52 +0100 Randolf Richardson, Postmaster via mailop
wrote:
On 21.03.26 14:02, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via mailop wrote:
Operating public mailing lists with no double opt-in is a no-go for a
long time.
Please use the term "configmed opt-in" - it's not "double" as nobody is
required to sign-up two times. The confirmation it really important.
Technically it is also a double opt in as "opt in" does not mean
"subscribe", but is defined as "choose to participate in something" in
the Oxford English Dictionary.
While one is a confirmation, both actions are a choice.
Indeed, although the phrase "confirmed opt-in" includes the fact that
"consent to be subscribed" was knowingly confirmed (at least in the
context of eMail, that is). The phrase "double opt-in" doesn't go
this far, which is why "less reputable" eMail marketers prefer it.
I'd argue that COI is a nuisance for newsletters. Email marketers would rather
look for Javascript code that can automate subscriptions. On the other hand,
newsletters don't have the DMARC problem, so COI is somewhat less relevant for
them.
COI could be used to resolve the DMARC issue for mailing lists. It would be
sufficient to have the subscriber's mailbox provider run the COI, instead of
the mailing list manager. This way, that specific list could be trusted for
that specific user.
(This whole conversation came up in NANAE back in the 1990s multiple
times, and "confirmed opt-in" was always the preferred narrative
among the anti-spam community as I recall.)
Could be, "Thomas invented LISTSERV, the original email list manager, in 1986
and added the subscription confirmation feature, also known as double opt-in,
to the version released on March 15th, 1993"
https://www.lsoft.com/news/2018/double-optin-25years.asp
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
[email protected]
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
