You've been sending the message for a couple of years and nobody has ever
asked to be removed, so you must be doing something right.

That said, if someone complained about your mailings to your ISP, they
would be right to call your mail spam.  It falls within every reasonable
definition thereof.

The thing is, you can't write definitions for things like spam with holes
in them.  I can't say spam is unsolicited bulk email unless you happen to
be writing to 800 of your closest friends who will never complain.  Spam
is similar in this respect to the crime of Trespassing.  Obviously there
are ways to trespass which do no harm to anyone.  That doesn't mean that
exceptions should be written into the definition of the word.

Obviously every situation is different.  Obviously spam that makes no
attempt to conceal the identity of the sender is qualitatively different
from spam with forged headers and offensive content.  It's still spam.

My suggestion would be to prominently place a note in the next newsletter
stating that you don't want to send email to anyone who doesn't want to
receive it, and request contact via a specific email address for removals.
Honor any remove requests you receive.  Put into place an automated
mechanism for subscription and unsubscription.  Then, don't add anyone to
the list in the future unless they've specifically opted in.  For a list
of the size you're describing, I think those techniques would be
sufficient to consider your list clean (non-spam) going forward.

David Chaplin-Loebell
Klatha.com


On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Chateauneuf wrote:

> I have been having a rather spirited discussion in another forum. I
> mentioned that a couple of years ago, we began sending out quarterly news
> letters to an affinity group (about 800 executives). I know all of these
> people personally. I see almost all of them at least once a year and and
> either meet or have telephone contact with  most of them far more
> frequently. Nobody ever opted in. Nobody has ever asked to be removed.
> While nothing is being sold, it does further the corporate image so it is
> commercial email and it is unsolicited. Yet, I have a hard time accepting
> that this is no different from the anonymous, untraceable mailers who want
> to enlarge my penis, sell me Viagra or entice me to view "Three Teenage
> Virgins, Two Goats and  a Python in the Frat House."
>
> I am amazed at the level of vitriol this inspired. Help me out here folks.
> What do you think?
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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]
>


_______________________________________________
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]

Reply via email to