Recent Posts

Reputation

Reputation is the buzzword in delivery these days. Everyone talks about building a good reputation and how to do it. Makes sense, the ISPs are always hammering on reputation and how critical reputation is. The more I talk with delivery folks on the ESP side of thing, the move I realize that there is a fundamental disconnect between what the ESPs mean when they say reputation and what the ISPs mean when they say reputation.
Many people handling delivery think that the bulk of reputation is wrapped up in complaint rates and bounce rates. I think they know the ISPs measure more than just complaints and bounces (spamtraps!) but really believe that most of developing a good reputation is all about keeping those complaints low.
This perspective may have been true in the past, but is becoming less true as time goes on. There are a lot of very smart people managing incoming mail at the ISPs and they are constantly looking for ways to better meet the desires of their customers. Lest we forget, their customers are not the senders, their customers are the end users. Their customers are not senders.
Part of meeting the needs of end users means actually giving them a way to provide feedback. AOL started the trend with the this-is-spam button, and other ISPs (ones that controlled the user interface at least) followed suit. For a very long time, reputation was dominated by complaint percentages, with modifiers for number of spamtrap addresses and number of non-existent users.
The problem is, these numbers were easy to game. Spammers could modify their metrics such that their email would end up in the inbox. In response, the ISPs started measuring things other than complaints, bounces and spamtraps. These other measurements are strong modifiers to complaints, such that mailers with what used to be acceptable complaint rates are seeing their mail end up bulked or even rejected.
Recently, AOL seems to have made some subtle modifications to their reputation scores. The result is mailers who have previously acceptable complaint rates are seeing delivery problems. When asked, AOL is only saying that it is a reputation issue. Lots of senders are trying to figure out what it is that is more important than complaints.
Tomorrow, I will talk about what I think AOL could be measuring.

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

Same old stuff

Al talks about the “new” email preference service run by the DMA. Except it is not actually new nor is it really used.

Read More

Email and the Obama Campaign

Late in the summer there were people talking about the spam coming from Senator Obama’s presidential campaign. At that time, most of the discussion was focused on the open subscription form on their website and that there were some individuals who had been fraudulently signed up and were now receiving email from the campaign.
Last week, the Senator’s campaign again became a topic of discussion among some anti-spam groups. The maintainer of one of the more respected public blocklists and members of his family received mail from Senator Obama’s presidential campaign at their personal addresses. Because the mail was unsolicited and met the qualifications for listing, the sending IP addresses were listed on the blocklist. In response, the campaign’s ESP started moving the Senator’s mail to other IP addresses, resulting in those IPs also being listed on the blocklist as well.
I talked with the blocklist maintainer and I believe that his address, and those of his family members, were added to the Senator’s mailing list as the result of an email append. All of them are registered Democrats and they all live in a battleground state.
This may have made for good campaign strategy, not being an expert I cannot comment on that. It is, however, very poor email marketing strategy.
First, the campaign decided to appropriate permission to send email. There is not ever permission associated with an email append. Just because you have a name and a street address does not mean that you have permission to send email. In very, very limited circumstances, an opt-in append (click here to continue receiving email) may be acceptable. However, that is not how appending is normally done.
There is no pretense of permission to send email. Just because someone is registered to a particular party does not mean they want to receive email from that party.
Second, when the campaign started seeing delivery problems they started sending off different IP addresses. Moving IPs around is out and out spammer behavior, no questions asked.
Now, I know this is a very hotly contested election and I know that some people believe that any method of getting the word out is good. I also expect that there may have been some positive reaction from recipients. The overall reaction, based on the IPs changing, may not have been so positive.
Do I really believe that Senator Obama is a evil and willful spammer? No, not really. But that does not change the fact that the Obama campaign seems to be sending email without the permission of the recipient and seem to be attempting to evade blocks by moving IP addresses.
From a marketing perspective, the campaign may be using email effectively and doing everything right. But from an email delivery perspective, they are getting many, many of the basics wrong and are looking like spammers in the process.
Other news and blogs that talk about spam from the Obama campaign:

Read More

Evaluating email

DJ posts the top 4 reasons an email campaign fails.

Read More

News snapshot

  • The judge in e360 v. Spamhaus has denied Spamhaus’ motion for dismissal. However, the judge also ordered that the 16 new witnesses be stricken and capped damages at the original $11.7M. Mickey has the order.
  • Tuesday the FTC announced it had shut down a major spamming operation. I am not sure the results are visible yet, yesterday there were 2041 spams in one of my mailboxes yesterday versus 2635 a week ago.
  • The FBI announced today it had infiltrated and shut down a international carding ring. While not directly spam related the phishers and carders work together and some of them use spam.
  • Rumor has it that many mailers are seeing problems delivering to AOL the last few days. It seems that AOL is making adjustments to their filtering system. As when any ISP changes filter rules and weights, some of the people just skirting by see delivery problems. What people are hearing is that if they are seeing delivery problems at AOL they need to improve their reputation.
  • Last week Yahoo had another online workshop with the mail folks. They have published a transcript of the talk. I was at the talk and there were only a couple spam related questions.

donhburger: Why does Yahoo sell our email addresses to spammers?
YMailRyan: We absolutely don’t sell your addresses to spammers. No IFs, ANDs, or BUTs about it.
imintrouble: My mom keeps emailing em but I never get it and usually it ends up in my spam box. Why? How do I make this stop? She’s getting pissed that I’m not replying.
YMailTeam: Oh no! Be sure your Mom is on your contact list– this should help keep mom out of spam box and put her back into your inbox.
buergej: Just why do I keep receiving the same kind of spam from a series of what appear to be women day after day after day?
YMailCarl: Spam is, unfortunately a constant problem for anyone using email. The reason you are receiving these emails is because spammers have somehow gotten a hold of your email address and are mailing you their lovely messages. There are several things you can do to assist with this. First, continue to report these messages as “Spam” by clicking the button at the top of the email labled “Spam”. Note that you don’t need to actually look at the message to do this. When you report items as spam it lets Yahoo! know that messages originating from that person are likely spam. This not only helps you, but helps other Yahoo! users as well.
YMailCarl: Second, if the emails are from similar names, you can set up filters in your email account to block those names and send them to your trash or spam folder.
YMailCarl: Obviously these messages you are receiving are not from women trying to sell you products personally – the messages are typically generated by a script which will try to forge or “spoof” the originating address.
YMailCarl: We agree that Spam is a serious issue and have many resources dedicated to fighting this problem.
YMailCarl: You can find some additional information about fighting spam here: http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/mail/original/abuse/index.html
donhburger: Why when I mark Emails as Spam do I continue to get emils from the same persons?
YMailMaryn: When you mark a message as “spam” from within your Inbox that moves the message to your Spam Folder. And all subsequent messages that are sent from that particular sender will not be delivered to your Inbox, but will be delivered to your Spam Folder.

Read More

Spam Royalty

MSNBC has a slide show up about 10 of the worst spammers, which one really is SpamKing?

Read More

Vetting customers: an intro

I promised a couple weeks ago, pre-MAAWG, to write about screening new customers. Things have been a bit busy and I have not had a lot of time for the blog. However, today there has been a long conversation on one of the spam related mailing lists relating to ESPs and customer screening. This conversation inspired me to write this introduction to customer vetting.
I have designed customer screening programs for a number of clients as well as actually had an active role in some of those processes. I also screen my own customers and have taught other people how to vet customers.
When designing a vetting process a company must target the process to the size and revenue potential of their customers. If an ESP has a small number of customers, each having a very large recipient base, one single bad customer has the potential to affect the overall reputation of all the ESP customers. With large number of customers sending to very small recipient bases, then one single bad customer is not going to affect overall reputation as dramatically as larger senders will
Because the larger customers have an actual impact on reputation, it is really important to vet the customer. It’s going to cost money and some time, but responsible ESPs have to do it. Really good customers are going to be vetting the ESP at the same time. They don’t want to go with an ESP that has a poor reputation. It is much like dating, each party is assessing the other party and the suitability of a longer term relationship.
For the tiny mailers, though, there is a very small chance that one, single bad customer sending a single bad mailing will destroy the overall delivery of an ESP and ruin their reputation at large receivers. In this case, it makes a lot more sense, both financially and in terms of resource allocation, to screen the email address list rather than the individual customer. This can be mostly automated, with clearly bad lists being prohibited from being mailed and suspicious lists being kicked to humans for decisions.
Let’s be honest, anyone who comes to an ESP with a list of under 20K names is not a big time spammer trying to steal their reputation. Those are the easy ones to deal with, screen the list, limit the number of addresses that can be uploaded upload and limit, even if just by price, the number of mails that can be sent out during any period. Some ESPs really do cater to the small, community group market and they do tend to screen lists not customers.
For larger customers ESPs have a greater challenge. They must identify the real, legitimate mailers that have permission to send mail and identify the ones that are spammers attempting to steal an ESPs reputation. Spammers attempting to steal an ESPs reputation go out of their way to subvert the screening process. One of the hardest things about screening customers is getting the subversive ones to give an ESP enough information to make an informed decision about that customer. I will not lie, a subversive potential customer is expensive to screen, but that investment protects a sender’s reputation and the reputation of their other customers.
Another thing to remember about vetting is that no vetting process is going to be 100% accurate. ESPs with a good process can screen out 80 – 90% of the bad guys before a single email is sent. Most responsible ESPs do that and then stomp wildly on that remaining percentage that are evil or malicious.

Read More

Email marketing tips from The Onion

Bonnie talks about insightful email marketing tips taken from an article in The Onion.
1/7 – closed comments on this post as it seems to be a magnet for comment spam. 

Read More

Another opt-in in the wild

The EEC has an article today about a poorly done opt-in email that DJ Waldo received. How close is that to what you send?

Read More
Categories
Tags