May 13, 2008

Sweet so is Google a Spammer Now?

Security flaw turns Gmail into open-relay server... so does this mean that they should be blacklisted? How does an issue like this when it comes from an ISP deserve to be treated by other ISPs? Do they give a courtesy to one another when this happens? I know that if it happens to a corporate mail server it gets slammed and blocked faster than me accepting and Irish Car Bomb drink on St. Pats. AND that is fast.

Security flaw turns Gmail into open-relay server A newfound flaw in Google's Gmail allows would-be spammers to treat the service as an open-relay server. Compounding the issue is the fact that services such as Hotmail and Yahoo "trust" Gmail. This may facilitate e-mail delivery, but it also makes it easier for spammers to reach their intended targets.

Read the Full Story

Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 4:01 AM | Permalink

May 2, 2008

Happy Birthday Spam, Now Die

Really it is 30 years today that the first documented spam email was sent. And look where we are today, still fighting the battle that Gary Thuerk started. Interesting history on Wikipedia, but would be even more interesting if we could mark this the year that we killed it off.

Mashable has a good article around it as well.

What can we do this year as email marketers to make it die a painful death?

1. Stop sending to people that don't want your email. Sure they opted in in 2002, but they have not read it for the past 3 years and you keep them on your active email list. Time to purge them. They are of no value to you and you are of no value to them no matter what you think.

2. Start segmenting your lists and send relevant campaigns based on their profile, what they tell you, and past behaviors.

3. ESPs need to be more vigilante on the lists that their clients load into their systems. Although sometimes tricky when you are bringing a client onto your email platform that you have no history with, you need to set some guidelines, educate them, and keep your eyes on the feedback loops and bounce reports from an account by account level.

Help us all help each other. No one no matter who they are want spam emails. Really.

Comments (1) | Posted by dylan at 4:00 AM | Permalink

April 25, 2008

Yahoo Mail Blows Up

Over on the Yahoo Mail Blog they stated they have been doing work on Yahoo Mail classic, and of course, anytime they do work, there are bugs.

http://www.ymailblog.com/blog/2008/04/24/update-to-yahoo-mail-classic-has-resumed/

The postmaster and development teams at Yahoo have been using the blog to communicate changes, and actively read comments from users. If you are experiencing problems, it is a good place to post or read comments from other users to see if they are already aware of the issues.

Comments from the WEB on this:

Someone was asking about problems with Yahoo yesterday. I use Yahoo Classic for my personal emails and I noticed yesterday and today that it's making emails that I haven't opened as read. If I mark those as unread, it then marks other unread emails as read. So perhaps there's not a deliverability issue but one with open and click rates because subscribers are not reading messages because Yahoo is telling them that they've already looked at the emails. Anyone else seeing this?
------------

I'm seeing similar problems in the new version of Yahoo Mail. Over the past week, in my personal account:

Previously read & deleted emails have returned to my inbox as unread
The inbox has failed to load & generated JavaScript errors
Individual messages have been failing to load, generating internal Yahoo error messages to try again

It seems as if they may be doing some behind-the-scenes work that's negatively impacting the user experience--and, in some cases, making select messages unreadable for a period of time.

Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 11:01 AM | Permalink

April 22, 2008

Anti-Spam Bill Being Crafted in CA

From Ken Magill on DM News. Worth the read. Will the state by state insanity ever stop? Can't they involve the marketers, ISPs and ESPs when they go to create a new bill? We all want it to stop, as it would only benefit our double opt in, above board clients.

Not Again: Anti-Spam Bill Being Crafted in CA A bill is working its way through the California legislature that supporters contend would strengthen its anti-spam laws and could go in to effect as early as this fall, the San Francisco Chronicle reported last week.

Why is it that so many anti-spam activists refuse to understand that spammers are generally breaking about 142 laws every time they hit "send" already, and that a 143rd magical piece of legislation will do nothing to fix the problem that can't already be accomplished with existing law?

Click here to read about another misguided effort at trying to legislate spam out of existence.

Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 2:23 PM | Permalink

March 31, 2008

Buying Remanent Email Space

Buying Remanant email at yahoo/msn etc? Have you ever heard about this? I heard this topic from an email marketing person that said that they do this every once in a while for clients through MSN and Yahoo. What this immediately made me think about is:

Does it have an impact on delivery? Does this help with getting more email from your brand into the inbox through these ISPs and help on your reputation with the links, domains and sender from lines you use?

Does it help protect feedback loops if timed with house lists? Why I thought of this was if I was dropping a massive double opt in confirmed campaign for a client from their house list, would there be an impact in delivery scores IF I had a timed drop with in house ISP remanent emails? I would think that in the grand scheme feedback, unsubs and other scores would be better balanced if I was doing this?

Is this a trick? Is is a way to leverage the ISPs to deliver 3rd party emails on your brand's behalf? Seems a little fishy to me? But then this is the first time I have heard of doing this?

Anyone have any experience with this practice?

Comments (1) | Posted by dylan at 4:00 AM | Permalink

March 28, 2008

ISPs Need To Overhaul Spam Reporting System: Survey

From Mediapost by Tanya Irwin

The definition of spam has changed from the permission-based regulatory definition of "unsolicited commercial email" to a subjective, perception-based definition centered on consumer dissatisfaction, according to a recent survey.

Jointly conducted by Chicago-based Q Interactive and Warren, R.I.-based MarketingSherpa, the survey's goal was to reveal consumers' perceptions of what they consider to be spam, why they report emails as spam and what they think happens when the "report spam" button is clicked.

An overwhelming number of consumers misuse and misunderstand the definition of spam, ultimately hurting legitimate marketers--but also consumers themselves who are seeking the messages they want, but instead are automatically being unsubscribed, said Arend Henderson, Q Interactive's chief analytics officer.

There is confusion among consumers regarding what they believe will happen as a result of clicking the "report spam" button. Over half of respondents (56%) reported it will "filter all email from that sender"--while 21% believe it will notify the sender that the recipient did not find that specific email useful, so the sender will "do a better job of mailing me" in the future. About 47% believe they will be unsubscribed from the list by clicking "report spam."

"The people I found to be really interesting were those who thought (by hitting the spam button) they were notifying the sender that they didn't find that particular email useful," Henderson said. "The marketer then has to reply to this potentially very engaged email consumer by never ever messaging them again. Who knows how valuable those people are, because most responsible marketers never email to them again."

When it comes to utilizing the "report spam" button, nearly half of respondents (48%) provided a reason other than "did not sign up for email" for why they reported an email as spam. In fact, underscoring consumers' varying definitions of spam, respondents cited a variety of non-permission-based reasons for hitting the spam button, including "the email was not of interest to me" (41%); "I receive too much email from the sender" (25%); and "I receive too much email from all senders" (20%).

The survey found that a large number of consumers (43%) forgo advertiser-supplied unsubscribe links in email and simply use the ISP's "report spam" button to unsubscribe from an advertiser's list--regardless of whether or not the email fits the consumer's definition of spam.

Read Full Article

Of those surveyed, 56% reported: "Marketing messages or newsletters that are "just not interesting to me" from known senders as "spam" and 21% knowingly report email that is not spam as spam. Furthermore, 43% believe using the "Report spam" button will unsubscribe them from a list, and 21% believe clicking the "Report Spam" button will notify the sender they did not find that specific e-mail useful, so the sender will do a "better job of mailing me" in the future. About 50% of respondents consider "too frequent emails from companies I know" to be spam, and 31% cite "emails that were once useful but aren't relevant anymore" (Respondents could select more than one answer for multiple questions in the survey.)

To address this problem, Q Interactive calls for ISPs, marketers, advertisers and publishers to come together with industry associations such as the Interactive Advertising Bureau to agree on a solution that is beneficial to consumers and all interested parties. The firms are calling on ISPs to replace the "report spam" button with buttons that more clearly indicate consumers' intentions, such as an "unsubscribe" button and an "undesired" button. ISPs should categorize email senders based on their practices to identify and reward senders who follow best practices in transparency and permission, Henderson told Online Media Daily.

In the meantime, marketers need to do a better job of educating consumers as to what they will receive if they sign up for an email list and what the mechanism is for unsubscribing. They also need to continuously look at the frequency of their email blasts and the relevancy, Henderson said.

Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 8:40 AM | Permalink