When the script doesn't work

DJ asks in the comments of Friday’s post:

As Seth said, great reminder. For those that have great processes/channels in place, I’ve found incredible success. However, sometimes I’ve found my answer on Twitter (i.e., @godaddyguy). Also, there have been times where I’ve gone through the script (i.e., shaw.ca) and have never heard back. What then?

This is the reason ISP relations folks get paid the big bucks, DJ! To sort these kinds of problems out.
Generally, if I’m having problems getting a response from an ISP, and a client is having problems delivering mail I sit down with the client to have a discussion about how important that domain is. We look at data including percentage of addresses on the list affected by the block and the monetary value of those addresses on the list. If the client decides that this is a block worth getting lifted then we try to determine the type of block. Content based blocks are different than URL based blocks are different than IP based blocks.
If we decide the block is probably content or URL based then we start making changes to the email to see if that resolves the issue. Most of these kinds of blocks are “bucket” blocks and tweaking things can often keep the bucket from overflowing. Senders have quite a bit of control over what is happening for this type of block, and usually can restart email delivery without contacting the ISPs just by changing how they send email.
If the block is IP based, that’s a little harder to resolve without ISP involvement, but if the block is IP based and the ISP does not respond to requests for help, then that itself is a very telling piece of data. It usually means that something the sender has done has convinced the ISP that the sender is a spammer. The ISP isn’t interested in resolving the issue. If the ISP is large, this can be a problem for the sender and may take enlisting the help of a 3rd party to act as an independent negotiation. If the ISP (or domain) is small, the sender may find it easier to write off those recipients and just ignore the block.
My client base is a mix of issues. Some of them get advice from me and blocks get resolved without having to contact the ISP at all. For those who have hard blocks and ISPs won’t talk to them, most of my time is spent collecting data from the ISPs and providing the client with a roadmap to externally visible changes. Once the changes are implemented, then I approach the ISP on their behalf. Usually, if there are real changes in sending, the ISPs are much more likely to listen, whether I’m using their scripts or using a backchannel.

Following the script
Yahoo FBL returns

Related Posts

Unsubscribes made difficult

Dennis blogs about his experience trying to unsubscribe from classmates.com list over on deliverability.com. His experience touches on a number of points I have discussed recently.
Dennis initially signed up for a free account at classmates.com around 10 years ago, but has asked to be unsubscribed multiple times. Recently classmates reactivated his subscription again, sending him marketing mail he did not want. Reactivating subscriptions is an extremely bad idea. Not only is it a CAN-SPAM violation to send mail after an unsubscribe has been received, but senders really end up annoying recipients by doing this. Think about it, these are people who have actively told the sender that they do not want mail, and the sender goes out and decides to override the recipients wishes.
I can only imagine how horrible the delivery for this mailing was. ISPs measure how many non-existent addresses senders attempt and mailing a list that has addresses accreted over 10 years is going to have a massive number of dead addresses. Not that many people have the same address now that they did 10 years ago. Some of those dead addresses are probably now being used as spamtraps by the ISPs, another hit to delivery rates. Finally, there are the complaint rates to consider.
For those people who received the mail and want to unsubscribe, Classmates.com does everything possible to discourage that. Dennis describes the process he went through.

Read More

McCain Campaign Spamming

As I mentioned in my post on spam from the Obama campaign, there have been reports of spam coming from the McCain campaign. However, the McCain campaign does not seem to be sending the volume of mail that the Obama campaign is, and so they are not as visible.
A recent post over at Denialism Blog shows that the McCain campaign has some of the same problems as the Obama campaign. Chris talks about the unsubscribe options he is presented when trying to stop the spam he is receiving. He suggests the campaign adds another option:

Read More

Following the script

Yesterday I talked about breaking through the script in order to escalate an issue. I briefly mentioned that I always start out following the script and using the channels ISPs have provided. There are a number of reasons to do this all of which benefit you, the sender.
First off, when you use the designated communication pathway at an ISP there is a record of your contact. There are procedures in place to make sure your communication is addressed and you get a response. When you’re escalating to an individual, you’re using their communication channel. IMs get lost, email ends up buried in the pile, other things come up and a week later you’re still waiting for your answer.
Secondly, when you use the designated communication pathway at an ISP your contact is logged and tracked. This means that if the person you’re used to dealing with gets another job, moves on or otherwise isn’t able to communicate with you any longer you have a history with that ISP. The next person to move into the position and deal with issues can see that you’re a legitimate sender with a history of dealing fairly and professionally with ISPs.
Thirdly, handling direct and personal escalations are often outside the official job description the people directly contacted. This means that when they come up for review, the work they’re doing for people who won’t use channels is not as important as the other work they do. Sure, they may get some credit for helping people with problems, but they may not get the review they should get. This hurts not just the senders who believe they shouldn’t have to follow channels but also those of us who do follow channels, particularly in the current business climate. Do you really want to lose that awesome person you use because some dork thought they were too good, too important to use the provided form and that awesome person lost their job because they didn’t meet their official work goals?
Fourth, you’re not the only one escalating. I had the opportunity to visit my friend Anna from AOL a few years ago. One morning both of us had to actually get some work done, so we were parked in her living room on laptops. I was astonished at the number of IM windows she was juggling constantly. We’re talking 20 – 30 separate windows open at once, many of them troubleshooting sender issues. After seeing that I do as much as possible through the official channels that AOL has provided. She is my friend, and a very good one, and I still avoid using her as a contact point unless there is some emergency.
Remember this next time you are searching for that email address of the person from that ISP that’s currently blocking your mail. Use the official communication channels where possible, and always use them first. Using back channels for issues where the intended workflow works causes a lot of overhead and doesn’t scale at all well.

Read More