Posted by Matthew Weier O'Phinney on 03/27/05 00:02

* Jason Barnett <jason.barnett@telesuite.com>:
> --------------enig95F502C374775F42772D3BEB
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Scott Haneda wrote:
> ...
>> I use it to create HTML emails, send them to 1000's of people. I think I
>> did a test to 30K or so, it handled it fine using mail locally.
>
> HTML emails [shudder]
>
>> As for tracking, what we do is embed a image bug in the html and track when
>> that loads, it is getting less reliable in todays anti spam world, but in my
>> case these are paying subscribers so they generally want to get these
>> emails.
>
> [shudder]
> The above paragraph is why I abhor HTML emails, and why I am glad that
> Mozilla lets me block all remote images (and click to view if I *really*
> want to see them).


And this illustrates why the HTML image method of tracking mail open
rates is completely unreliable: some mail programs allow the user to
block all images from loading (indeed, some have this turned on by
default), and if the client is text-only, the image will never be
loaded.


>> To track your users, at least the bounces we set the bounce address
>> (return-path) to mysql_user_id@domain.com and POP check domain.com every few
>> seconds. We then scan for the bounce address and mark that user as bouncing
>> x times, if they go over y we cancel the account.
>
> Now this is interesting... so you're telling me that all I have to do to
> get you to stop emailing me, is to bounce back all of your messages?
> Sure I'll have to forge a few headers to make it look like the mail
> server daemon didn't recognize my address... but THAT sounds like time
> well spent!!!
>
> OK, OK, I'm being a little harsh here. Because after all you're sending
> emails to customers that have at least opted-in (or so I hope). But
> there are so many shady ways of getting someone to opt-in, or making it
> hard to opt-out, or just plain harvesting emails and ignoring the wishes
> of the users.

There really *are* legitimate reasons to send large numbers of mail
items. Think of organizations like MoveOn, or companies like Amazon --
you opt-in, they send you mail, you opt-out, they stop. The idea is that
they send mail to those who want to receive it; they also happen to be
popular internet sites.

Legit organizations such as these need to do some due diligence to make
sure they aren't perceived as spammers, and also to ensure that those
receiving their emails don't get their rights trampled -- or their
inboxes stuffed. Additionally, sending email is *not* free, as many
believe; it costs in bandwidth, CPU time, etc. So the bounce-back
address is supposed to (1) automate pruning of the list (if somebody
switches services and forgets to unsubscribe, that email address is no
longer a viable addres for communication), as well as (2) follow
standard abuse policies (AOL and other large ISPs expect that if an
address bounces from your mailing list, that you will automatically
unsubscribe; failure to do so can result in the ISP blacklisting your
site's SMTP service).

*You* may not have heard of such practices before, but they *are*
standard in the industry.


--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney | WEBSITES:
Webmaster and IT Specialist | http://www.garden.org
National Gardening Association | http://www.kidsgardening.com
802-863-5251 x156 | http://nationalgardenmonth.org
mailto:matthew@garden.org | http://vermontbotanical.org

[Back to original message]