Is opt-out a viable concept?
This is, to me, the fundamental question I have been wrestling with. Opt-out
has always on the face been the paradigm to 'protect' legitimate bulk eMails.
But to me it seems a specious answer to a more complex 'back-office' CRM
problem with eCommerce (as well as a privacy/consent issue). I would be
interested in delving into that topic as categorization of content seems to me
a wholly subjective pursuit (all of the very intelligent exhortations not
withstanding). It seems we have been down that road (and it's pretty well
paved) what about the road less traveled, per se, can a successful 'Opt-in'
(not whitelist) strategy be deployed/developed that enhances CRM and protects
end-users from what many consider 'spam' (or at minimum communications that
are so peripherally related that they 'rise to the level' of spam)?
BTW, I think that transactional messages are all explicit opt-in messages (this
I derive from anecdotal experience with eCommerce purchasing, e.g. send
confirmation in e-mail, reading the consent agreement at transaction completion
that stipulates confirmation will be sent via e-mail), this does not include
however the attachment of additional information unrelated to confirmations but
MAY include additional information related to retrieving related items e.g.
account access, additional downloads/peripherals needed. There is a rub on
where that line is and is (perhaps) a CRM issue that can/would be worked out
based on consumer feedback.
Any comments?
-e
On Saturday, May 03, 2003 11:21 AM, Olson, Margaret
[SMTP:molson(_at_)roving(_dot_)com]
wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Vernon Schryver [mailto:vjs(_at_)calcite(_dot_)rhyolite(_dot_)com]
There is always one particular context that matters, the mail sender
talking to the target. It is practically impossible to characterize
variations of that context with content labelling such as "transactional"
vs. "advertising." It is difficult enough to distinguish "mail sender
sending bulk mail to many targets" from "mail sender sending private
mail to one or a few targets," but it can be done if only by having
targets care notes.
Combining context/content labeling with permission labeling might get
something more useful, for example:
Person to person
Transactional - implicit permission. If I buy something, it's fair for the
vendor to assume I want the email verification.
Bulk - explicit proven permission, usually called verified or confirmed opt
in. (I heard some strange definitions of at the FTC conference; by verified
or confirmed opt in I mean the permission level that most readers of this
list want.)
Bulk - implicit permission (previous business relationship or unverified opt
in, a.k.a. single opt in). Maybe these two should be broken out into two
categories.
Bulk - no permission
I probably left out several useful combinations. This is really just
permission labeling with a little bit of context, and some combinations are
clearly nonsense (transactional - no permission, for example).
This gives the MUA (or MTA) a short list of filters that an end user might
reasonably be willing to deal with.
We're probably stuck with the transactional messages that are also full of
ads - I don't know about you guys but almost every bill I get is stuffed
with ads of some sort.
Margaret.
<< File: ATT00007.htm >>
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg