Recent Posts

More about the mail.ru FBL

Len Shneyder has a really interesting post up about the mail.ru feedback loop and the broader message this sends about the intersection of social media and email marketing. Go read it!

Barack Obama vs Mitt Romney

@LorenMcDonald over at SilverPop has an interesting comparison of the email marketing habits of the two presidential campaigns:

Letting people stop transactional mail

The question of putting unsub links on transactional messages came up on multiple lists recently. As with any question that has to do with email and controlling it, there were a lot of different opinions.
A number of people believed that transactional mail should never, ever have an unsubscribe. Their argument was that transactional mail is too valuable to allow recipients to unsubscribe from it.
Other people argued that the recipient should always be able to stop mail and that an unsub link was important, even in transactional mail.
A third group pointed out that under CASL transactional mail to Canadian residents may have to have an unsub link, even if the sender doesn’t want to add one in.
As with most questions, I don’t think there is necessarily a single answer for every mailer or sender.
There are absolutely cases where transactional messages should have an unsubscribe. Twitter notifications and Facebook notifications are just some of the examples of mail a lot of people just want to stop.
But should companies allow recipients to unsubscribe from receipts? Some people feel very, very strongly that recipients should never be allowed to unsubscribe from receipts.
The problem with that stance is it ignores the fact that people don’t always correctly type their email addresses and end up giving the address of another person as part of a purchase. Al found a report at the Consumerist where someone is getting flooded with receipts for Nook books she’s never purchased.
This isn’t the first time this has happened, not by a long shot. In fact, in the past year I negotiated a Spamhaus delisting for a very large company that wasn’t confirming email addresses of their customers. This company sells a service that sends email alerts triggered when certain actions happen. Because they were not confirming their customer’s email addresses, they ended up sending alerts to spamtraps. The alerts triggered a SBL listing.
I don’t think that the Nook owner or the alert purchaser are actually malicious or that they purposely gave the wrong email address to their vendors. But it happens, and it happens not infrequently.
What do I recommend?
Transactional mail that is only ever a single event and where that address is not associated with an account don’t need to have an unsubscribe link. If it’s a one-time email, then it’s OK to not have an opt-out link. It’s OK to have an opt-out link, but not necessary.
Transactional mail that’s associated with some sort of account should have a process in place to make sure that mail is going to the right person and if it’s not, that the wrong person can make the mis-directed mail stop. There are multiple ways to do this. One is to confirm the email address associated with the account during the account creation process. Or you can allow anyone receiving the mail to click on a link and opt-out of receiving mail.
Whatever it is, it needs to be effective and protect everyone involved. Requiring the victim recipient to hand over a bunch of personal information, like Virgin Mobile does, helps no one. Continuing to send purchase receipts to an unrelated third party is poor business practice, particularly when you’ve been informed that this is the wrong person.

Leaving money on the table

On August 1 two domains in the Netherlands are going away: wanadoo.nl and orange.nl. Current users of these domains are being transitioned to new addresses at online.nl. Mailchimp has more information and links.
This is a good time for all of us to consider how easy it is for a subscriber to change their address of record. Some senders just have the subscriber unsubscribe from one address and resubscribe for another. This sounds like the simplest way to do things, and it certainly doesn’t take much engineering effort.
But what information do you lose by simply asking subscribers to unsubscribe and resubscribe? It depends on what you’re tracking, but you do lose everything that you track. Preferences, interaction history, purchase history, it’s all gone. Providing a simple way to change an email address of record preserves the information related to that subscriber.
For some senders, keeping subscriber information through different ISPs and email addresses will pay for the development of a preference center. For others, there’s no real value there. How much money are companies leaving on the table by not providing a mechanism for recipients to change their email address?

Reputation is more complex than a single number

I checked our SenderScore earlier this month, as quite a few people mentioned that they’d seen SenderScore changes – likely due to changed algorithms and new data sources.

It sure looks like something changed. Our SenderScore was, for a while, zero out of a hundred. That’s as bad as it’s possible to get. I didn’t get a screenshot of the zero score, but I grabbed this a couple of days later:

Are ReturnPath wrong? No. Given what I know about the traffic from our server (very low traffic, particularly to major consumer domains, and a negligible amount of unavoidable backscatter due to our forwarding role addresses for a non-profit to final recipients on AOL) that’s not an unreasonable rating. And I’m fairly sure that as they get their new algorithms dialed in, and get more history, it’ll get closer. (Though I’m a bit surprised that less than 60 mails a day is considered a moderate volume.)
But all our mail is delivered fine. I’ve seen none of my mail bounce. It’s very rare someone mentions that our mail has ended up in a bulk folder. I’ve received the replies I’ve expected from all the mail I’ve sent. Recipient ISPs don’t seem to see any problems with our mail stream.
A low reputation number doesn’t mean you actually have a problem, it’s just one data point. And a metric that’s geared to model one particular sort of sender (very high-volume senders, for example) isn’t going to be quite as useful in modeling very different senders. You need to understand where a particular measure is coming from, and use it in combination with all the other information you have rather than focusing solely on one particular number.

Phishing and trust

Tom Sather has a great post up on the RP Email marketing blog discussing phishing. His point is that phishing lowers the overall trust in email marketing. He lists a number of things marketers should consider doing to counteract that loss of trust.
I rely heavily on the use of tagged addresses to deal with phishing in my own mailbox. If an email doesn’t come to the right address, then it’s immediately tossed as a phish. Unfortunately, as data leaks increase this is becoming less effective as a strategy.

J.D. Falk Award

This morning M³AAWG announced the creation of the J.D. Falk award to recognize and honor people like J.D. who work to make the Internet safer for all users.

Nameless and faceless

Ken Magill wrote about Spamhaus last week. In the article he commented about the volunteers.

New Feedback loop

There’s a new feedback loop at mail.ru. This is a DKIM based FBL (like Yahoo) and is designed primarily for ESPs. I am hearing there is an IP based FBL for ISPs in the works, but there isn’t a firm release date for that yet.
Senders and ESPs can signup for the new FBL at http://postmaster.mail.ru/. One caveat is that you must have a mail.ru account in order to get access to the stats page and there isn’t currently an English webmail page. I tried but couldn’t get online translators to work on the signup page.

Policing customers

In yesterday’s post about Cloudflare and Spamhaus Fazal comments that Cloudflare may have been asked by law enforcement to leave the website up.
This does happen and it’s not totally out of the question that’s what is going on with this particular website. But I used the malware C&C as an example of the poor behaviour condoned by Cloudflare, it’s certainly not the only bad behaviour. There’s also the issue that Cloudflare disavows all responsibility for the behaviour of their customers.