Katherine Esposito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I'm researching a magazine story on spam and have the following question > about this strategy below.
> Question: It seems that these is all well and good for the very responsible > marketers out there. But what about those who are not so responsible? > What are the percentages of one versus the other? > How many third-party email address providers are completely ethical? > k. Very hard to quantify responsible email marketers, but I'd venture that MY mail is 99% IRresponsible, ie; 1 in 100 isn't spam (and I get a lot of both). *snip* DMA Guidelines for Online Commercial Solicitations approved by AIM's Simple question ... Why should I (or anyone) *have* to opt-out of something they never requested? If mail standards were in any regard consumer-leaning, they would be entirely OPT-IN ! If I didn't opt-IN, then don't send it. The way the DMA is attempting to slant them, they say hurt me until I scream no, (loudly!), I'd prefer they not hurt me in the first place, make them opt-in! Ken _______________________________________________ spamcon-general mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.spamcon.org/mailman/listinfo/spamcon-general#subscribers Subscribe, unsubscribe, etc: Use the URL above or send "help" in body of message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact administrator: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
