SPAM vs. UCE: Unsolicited Commercial Email

[Nexus]

I wanted to start a thread to discuss this issue with this community. I think it is vitally important to understand, and conduct business in a manner that is acceptable, yet not ruling out options that competitors might use to gain substantial advantage and name recognition.

As the owner of a design company I mostly get new client contacts through companies like eLance or CreativeMoonlighter, as well as networking and referrals. Lately, many design firms, web hosting companies, and other entities seem to solicit business by sending out bulk e-mails to lists they gleaned from who knows where. I know because I've gotten them. Over and over. My clients have even gotten them, and have had to ask me whether or not they should look into some of these offers further, especially if some look good. Until now, I've considered all of these companies sending out these messages as illegitimate. I have subscribed to numerous newsletters, and mailing lists, and always sign-up particular e-mail addresses that I use to track such things. Despite these efforts, innumerable companies grab addresses that were meant for other purposes, and use them for solicitation.

Has time come, where this is simply an excepted standard?

Distinctions have been made by many that "forging" e-mail headers and writing from hotmail addresses, are the Halmarks of the "bad" companies, while it is perfectly acceptable for those who properly identify themselves to assume an "opt-out" policy for any address that they have successfully acquired.

Years ago, I acquired a business plan from another design firm, and studied it for techniques I might like to use in establishing my business. I'd noticed that one of their start-up fees included $400 for a contact list, for direct mail advertising. This is different from "e-mail lists", but looking at their website, I was impressed to see the depth to which people drill for address leads. InfoUsa lists its compilation methods in a linked page off of its homepage ( click here ). These include sources like: Yellow/White Pages, Business Magazines, 10Ks and SEC filings, new business incorporations and registrations, annuals reports, as well as millions of phone calls, etc.

Despite what I've always heard about the legality of doing so, many "e-mail marketers" have used select website harvesting and/or Whois records to compile large lists of business e-mail addresses for sale. I see these advertisments sent to me every day. 500,000... 1 million... 4 million addresses. The numbers just keep increasing, but aside from the usage issues, most hosting companies explicitly state that bulk e-mails originating from their networks will have the senders accounts cancelled, without warning.

A friend of mine who has used co-location to host his websites (and those of his clients), has always had a very liberal attitude regarding this. He's prided himself on the latest harvesting software he's purchased, and he's gotten very good results. In fact, one of his clients has done tens of thousands of dollars of business PURELY from harvesting e-mail addresses from related websites, and e-mailing those people with their service. He has been very diligent about REMOVING people, but every so often, he'd get a threatening phone call with some irate person who'd fallen through the cracks. Before finding out where their "filtered" lists had come from, I was looking forward to using those lists for my business, as part of a partnership arrangement. After learning that these addresses had not be gleaned from voluntary sign-ups, I'd thought better of it, and decided not to pursue it.

Lately, I'm left wondering if the integrity of your business is the only thing that matters, and if using lists, while providing valid "opt-out" options, is one way to legitimately grow and promote you business. Should people who "mind" simply "opt-out" or "block" me? Is that they way things should be?

Years ago, I tried to respond to UCE if they had a link for removal, but after a while, it became too difficult. Too difficult to determine who's a scam, and who's not... who's what they appear and who is far from it. "Remove me" became a bad joke, and the Internet is a minefield of people looking to block your address if you are accused of being a company that is, or is associated with, sending out "spam".

Now... that's the first time I've said "spam", because this term has become very controversial and damning to anyone accused of it.

In the end... I guess what I'm asking... is whether UCE/SPAM/whatever... is ever justifiable, and what categories do you use to classify it?

Thanks,
~ Nexus

 

[Jack Gordon]

There are two types of online businesspeople. Legit and spammers. Don't cross the line - your integrity does matter, and sooner or later the law will catch up with spammers.

You can trade your integrity for short term financial reward, or you can stand firm and succeed long term. I don't think many people will pull off both.

 

[Nexus]

You can trade your integrity for short term financial reward, or you can stand firm and succeed long term. I don't think many people will pull off both.

But, MD, would you classify any Unsolicited Commercial Email as "spam"? If you clearly identified your company, perhaps providing a phone number, and gave a clear link for unsubscribing, does that matter at all? Is the line that hard, or is there room for "good businesses" that do unsolicited out-out mailings?

~ Nexus

 

[Mr Webname]

I think some people have become 'hung up' on the "I didn't ask for it so I don't want it" syndrome - I believe we all know what sort of mail really constitutes the nuisance factor in our mailbox. Genuinely identified mail that is traceable, specific, occasional and has an opt-out, I don't believe falls into the latter category.

 

[Nexus]

Good point, Mr.WebName. Looking at the rules of this forum, it makes me ask another question though:
6. Spammers will receive a swift kick in the ass, as well as a lengthy ban.

How is a "spammer" defined here? If for instance, I used a script to grab all of the names from the dnForum auction list, and then ran "whois" on all of them, and stripped out the e-mail addresses... Would mailing to these members cause me to be banned, even if I provided full information and opt-out details? What if I only used the names from other forums, or a site like Afternic, and regularly e-mailed them with opt-out provisions?

Would I be considered a "spammer" or is this acceptable UCE for you? I realize you may have two different answers, as moderator and as an individual, so I'm curious.

I just received an e-mail that falls brings up a dynamic that people have also mentioned before. I recieved an e-mail seemingly from no-where, but using custom e-mail aliases as I do... I can see where they got my e-mail address. If I hadn't "ear-marked" it... I'd have thought it was "spam". I had signed up for a trial-service, and after cancelling, apparently the company forwarded my e-mail address or re-purposed it.

Given that I provided my e-mail address to them, I'm sure they believe completely in the right to re-use that address for any other solicitations (or their partners.) One Tucows reseller, I'm almost positive had a deal with Verio... such that Verio would ALWAYS call me up after I'd registered a few domain names, and offer me web hosting and web design. The domain name they used to start the conversation seemed to tell me what the deal was.

Leaves my head spinning after a while. At least in these cases, there is a ticker-tape that lets me then decide if I ever want to do business with these companies again, if they're so quick to provide my contact details to other companies.

With UCE, it seems like I lose even that amount of consumer control.

~ Nexus

 

[Mr Webname]

Good point, Mr.WebName. Looking at the rules of this forum, it makes me ask another question though:
6. Spammers will receive a swift kick in the ass, as well as a lengthy ban.

How is a "spammer" defined here? If for instance, I used a script to grab all of the names from the dnForum auction list, and then ran "whois" on all of them, and stripped out the e-mail addresses... Would mailing to these members cause me to be banned, even if I provided full information and opt-out details? What if I only used the names from other forums, or a site like Afternic, and regularly e-mailed them with opt-out provisions?

Would I be considered a "spammer" or is this acceptable UCE for you? I realize you may have two different answers, as moderator and as an individual, so I'm curious.

I just received an e-mail that falls brings up a dynamic that people have also mentioned before. I recieved an e-mail seemingly from no-where, but using custom e-mail aliases as I do... I can see where they got my e-mail address. If I hadn't "ear-marked" it... I'd have thought it was "spam". I had signed up for a trial-service, and after cancelling, apparently the company forwarded my e-mail address or re-purposed it.

Given that I provided my e-mail address to them, I'm sure they believe completely in the right to re-use that address for any other solicitations (or their partners.) One Tucows reseller, I'm almost positive had a deal with Verio... such that Verio would ALWAYS call me up after I'd registered a few domain names, and offer me web hosting and web design. The domain name they used to start the conversation seemed to tell me what the deal was.

Leaves my head spinning after a while. At least in these cases, there is a ticker-tape that lets me then decide if I ever want to do business with these companies again, if they're so quick to provide my contact details to other companies.

With UCE, it seems like I lose even that amount of consumer control.

~ Nexus

Firstly I cannot speak for the management of DNForum but I would suggest that use of the PM system or the "internal" email system to mass mail would be categorized as "Spam" and possibly lead to a ban. As for harvesting from the Auction etc, that would depend on proving the issue in the first place.
Personally I do not want to receive multiple mails about viagra, logo design, loans, etc, etc, however my details are found. If someone, for example mails me to offer yourname.com when I have yourname.net I do not object to having a single shot mail about it. If my printing company mails me a single shot about a special offer they are doing on leaflets etc, I do not object. If I get continuous mails all from the same source (or original source duplicated by many sellers) then I strongly object and treat the issue as mail harrassment.

 

[Nexus]

If my printing company mails me a single shot about a special offer they are doing on leaflets etc, I do not object. If I get continuous mails all from the same source (or original source duplicated by many sellers) then I strongly object and treat the issue as mail harrassment.

Interesting. What if a competing printing company sent you a deal on printing costs, like buy-one-job, get a similar job free? --And they e-mailed you once every two months about the same offer? Feels to me like it leaves you having to constantly attempt to "prune" the lines leading to your e-mail box, even if it is futile in some cases. Those "logo design" e-mails are bothersome to me, because similar to "SUPER cheap web hosting" offers, they are repetitive and seem to take the easy route to getting at my customers. As a business person, I'm left wondering the ethics of fighting with the same fire, especially if recipients seem willing to simply read the mailing, and generally don't get offended.

I read to threads here on dnforum recently about "spam".

#1. 'domain enquiry' email spam
http://www.dnforum.com/showthread.php?t=35673

I saw this thread due to VB3's new "related" thread feature, which is very nice! In it, dnforum members are distressed about receiving mail about a domain name being offered for sale. Repeatedly the person is called a "spammer". I'm left wondering if it was due to the message simply being unsolicited or the lack of clear identification and removal.

#2. 320 Million opt-in email addresses!
http://www.dnforum.com/showthread.php?p=346858

In this thread, recent, people are wondering very seriously whether the member offering "opt-in" e-mail addresses at such a low-price is "for real", and the term "spammer" has creeped in again.

A friend of mine creates his own lists from website harvesting, and works his way through them in lots of 20,000. He's also purchased lists from web companies that have gone out of business, but who had a significant amount of customers.

Methods like these seem like BIG PROBLEMS to me. The "last" method seemed probably the most legitimate, especially if the e-mail sites the source before introducing the product they have to sell ("Welcome customers, of such-and-such".) --But I don't know.

~ Nexus

 

[Mr Webname]

What if a competing printing company sent you a deal on printing costs, like buy-one-job, get a similar job free? --And they e-mailed you once every two months about the same offer?

They mail me once and I might read the substance through Mailwasher/Firetrust - they mail me every 2 months and I block them and consider it "spam". In general I think it is very difficult to arrive at a "decision" that would be acceptable to everyone as it runs from the "I want none", through "I don't mind a bit" to "Send it on" and you will never please everyone.

#1 - I comment was

I was getting those 2 or 3 times a day.

so = spam to me.

#2 - I am uneasy about this post but no further explanation has yet been offered by the poster.

 

[ummmmmmmmmmmm]

Good post Mr. Webname but im afraid im going to have to delete it.,....Becuase youve deleted all of mine.

 

[Nexus]

Interesting article:
http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cach.../show/1165912/SPAM_eng_100.pdf&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Anybody who has an e-mail address knows the problem – the steady flow of irrelevant e-mails advertising products or services which we have no interest in, e-mails which we do not want and have not asked for. These unsolicited e-mails are usually called “spam”. As defined by the EU Commission, spam is unsolicited commercial e-mail, also known as “junk mail”, “bulk mail” or “UCE”.

The market research company Jupiter Media Metrix estimates that in 2006 consumers will be buried by over 206 billion junk e-mails. This is an average of 1,400 e-mails per person. In 2002 the comparable number was probably around 700. The cost of downloading in 2003 is estimated at over EUR 12 billion worldwide.

Interesting bit about legalities involved...

To deal with the circumstances described above, the European Parliament adopted on 12.07.2002 the “Directive concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector” (DIR 2002/58/EC) Article 13 of this adopts an “opt in” approach, under which companies may send e-mail advertising to recipients only with their prior agreement. Unsolicited commercial e-mailing will only be permissible in exactly defined exceptional cases, and even then only if they got the contact data directly from their customers. Even these consumers can refuse to have advertising sent to them. The Directive is expected to enter into force at end-2003.

Does anyone know if this happened?

There is currently no uniform federal anti-spam legislation in the USA. A number of draft federal laws are still under discussion: one suggestion is for consumers to be able to demand USD 500 in damages for each piece of unsolicited e-mail.

I remember this one...

Anybody wanting to advertise by e-mail needs to comply with a number of important conditions. The Online Marketing Group of the Electronic Commerce Forum has looked at this issue and formulated an introduction available as a pdf file at http://www.eco.de/servlet/PB/menu/1015935_l1/index.html

I'm going to assume (hopefully) they don't mind these short excerpts. The www.eco.de is mostly in German. Unfortunately this article appears to be a PDF, so for some its not immediately readable.

~ Nexus

 

[Jack Gordon]

My definition of spam: unsolicited email from anybody that does not know me, or know firsthand that I may have an interest in the content of their email. Any mass email I get that does not clearly identify the sender, how to contact them, and how to easily remove myself forever from their system is also spam to me.

This definition leaves open many avenues for people and companies to email me for legit reasons, but shuts the door on all of the illegitmate spammers who buy, sell, harvest or otherwise broker my address around.

 

[tekz999]

It is real. You are too skeptical. Its alright. I understand your concern of $9.99.

 

[Anthony Ng]

It is real. You are too skeptical. Its alright. I understand your concern of $9.99.

I think the question here is NOT about $9.99 but if it is RIGHT to do business that way. Moreover, IF (and only if) problems arise (such as hosting or even ISP account being terminated), the loss in monetary terms would definitely be much higher than that.

Okay, back to the discussion. While each individual mind may have his or her own "definition" of SPAM, there are some commonly accepted or even legal criteria here, namely:

1. UNSOLICITED
2. BULK
3. COMMERCIAL

That is why we have alternative terms like UCE (Unsolicited Commercial Email) or UBE (Unsolicited Bulk Email). CAUCE actually has an inspiring FAQ on this:

http://www.cauce.org/about/faq.shtml#how

Being a "sales" person myself as a small business owner, I have a kinder heart for the "unsolicited". If we only live on referrals alone, many start-up's would be killed before they are allowed to grow. In Canada for example, each household would only get a certain number of "unaddressed ad mail" in a certain time-frame.

And unless you are still carrying your small town mentality around, marketing is basically done in "bulk", be it by snail mail or email. That is why ANY administrative assistant has to know how to do mail merge!

Personally, I don't really care if it is "commercial" or not, as long as they are sent INDISCRIMINATELY, they are SPAM! In other words, I don't mind getting a really special sales alert from even Network Solutions once or twice a year, simply because I WAS once their customer; of course, most decent corporations would include an "unsubscribe" link (you have to be VERY careful though and ONLY unsubscribe with well-established companies). HOWEVER, I do mind getting Viagra or penis enlargement rubbish (not that I don't need it LOL! but hey, I have never told anybody that, have I?) that is sent to JUST ANYBODY AND HIS DOG ... AND MOTHER-IN-LAW!

 

[Nexus]

Personally, I don't really care if it is "commercial" or not, as long as they are sent INDISCRIMINATELY, they are SPAM! In other words, I don't mind getting a really special sales alert from even Network Solutions once or twice a year, simply because I WAS once their customer; of course, most decent corporations would include an "unsubscribe" link (you have to be VERY careful though and ONLY unsubscribe with well-established companies). HOWEVER, I do mind getting Viagra or penis enlargement rubbish (not that I don't need it LOL! but hey, I have never told anybody that, have I?) that is sent to JUST ANYBODY AND HIS DOG ... AND MOTHER-IN-LAW!

As I was reading your post, I saw a couple of things get fuzzy and merge towards the end. When looking at the topic of UCE, I am *completely* NOT talking about companies you have clear previous relationships with. Often they send other business "opportunities" to you, or pass you off to a partner, but the good companies I've run into generally prize their lists, and only send you information about themselves, while providing an "unsubscribe" if you change your mind about recieving any other information from them. I think that falls outside of "unsolicted". I get occassional e-mails from many registrars, and I think that this is entirely ok.

My quandry begins and ends with ANYONE that never had a relationship with me, and seeks to solicit to me. I think comparing them to "snail-mail" is a huge point of contention, due to the clear cost factor (snail mail - present / uce - largely non-existant), and the fact that many people have multiple e-mail addresses, often earmarked for a specific purpose... one that is not respected by general UCE/spam once it is found and added to a list.

So, Namethink... is it your opinion that some types of UCE/spam are acceptable? Do you distinguish been "good spam" and "bad spam"? How do you feel about companies that practice either distinction (if there is one)?

Being a "sales" person myself as a small business owner, I have a kinder heart for the "unsolicited". If we only live on referrals alone, many start-up's would be killed before they are allowed to grow. In Canada for example, each household would only get a certain number of "unaddressed ad mail" in a certain time-frame.

So, if it is "addressed", it is ok? As a small business, and as it concerns "e-mail" only, in your opinion, do your comments mean that you personally accept UCE as a legitimate marketing avenue, worthy of consideration? I'm sure there are members here at dnforum that practice this, and many that are considering it, so these kind of disinctions can help.

For instance, I've rejected using lists that I've found were harvested, yet those same lists have produced undeniably positive results (and satisfied customers) for the company that offered it to me (tens of thousands of dollars in revenue from the expanded awareness to their website). Recently there has been some discussion about this practice, and I'm left wondering if people really care one way or another, and if I'm hurting my business by not keeping that option open.

If I were to send out UCE, and provide opt-out details, and only consider the UCE as a one-time mail-out. Perhaps quaterly or twice a year, does that make a difference, or like MovieDomains, is it your opinion that I should reap bad things were I to participate in such a practice, no matter how much integrity my business has otherwise?

Thanks,
~ Nexus

 

[Anthony Ng]

So, Namethink... is it your opinion that ...

I guess you are talking to me, eh? Sorry that I have not made myself very clear by writing too much too early in the morning.

Few people like SPAM. I have personally cautioned a number of my own clients (design/hosting) not to go that tempting route. However, there are quite a few things that I have not aligned myself to. Some people are so against "unsolicted" cold calls that they not only don't want to respond but actually go all the way to stop merchants from approaching them. Being unsolicited itself does not incur any wrong doing; by rejecting unsolicited e-mail or snail mail is like not talking to anybody except your family and friends.

The issue lies in whether these ads are TARGETED. Like I said, Network Solutions knows that I may be interested in their promotions because I have bought some related product or service before. That is fine, esp. when they provide a way for me to get out of that mailing list. What I don't like is when people send out unsolicited email in bulk, they no longer spend time targeting their audience, thinking that because it is inexpensive and therefore not worth the time and effort to do so; that is why I keep getting spam about weight loss or university degrees even though I'm kind of slim and not interested in a third degree. Frankly, I don't mind getting some useful ads once in a while (I actually still buy print copies of my local newspaper on a weekly basis JUST FOR THE ADS), but when I get them in my inbox, I expect the senders/merchants to have done some filtering work (very much like credit card companies sending out those so-called pre-approved applications/invitations to selected residential areas or home-owners).

I'd probably write more on this, but that's it for now.

 

[Nexus]

Thanks, Namethink. Your opinion still reads very "fuzzy" on the topic. I can see you freely associate cold-calls, perhaps junk-faxes, direct mail, and UCE in a similar category with varying legal and practical considerations. I'm still under the impression that UCE/spam is in a distinctly different cateogory than all the rest, and that for instance, addressing UCE as a form of "cold call" is at the heart of the matter. The Federal "Do-Not-Call" list has probably been pushed as hard as it has been, due to the increasing nature of "automated cold-calling" people have been experiencing. Calls that are left on your answering machine with a very natural sounding individual who sounds like they specifically called YOU, when in fact... they are an impersonal recording. Unlike these types of marketing that are strongly restricted by governments and companies, and incur extra fees for national and worldwide access, UCE falls into the singularly unique position of placing the burden of cost on the recipients (in resources and connection costs).

While UCE is general frowned upon by most company policies, it continues to happen, much like music file trading. Those caught breaking a policy are outraged, and move on. I've even read "job listings" by some companies that are in search of email marketing partners who can provide places from which they can send e-mail, because previous ISP's have shut them down due to complaints they strongly feel are unwarranted (given that they had simple "remove" instructions.)

I'm left staring hard at this grey area, where "until you get caught", it seems UCE is largely acceptable to many people like yourself and Mr. Webnames, as long as it is infrequent, *targetted* (something you're likely to be interested in), and whose source is clearly identifiable.

I'm almost left wondering about what can be made of this phenomena. I'm left thinking if anything, I know I can e-mail the both of you (if no one else) with any good offers my company might have, so long as I don't make a nuisance of it.

Almost a non-sequitar related story... the last time I got such conflicting determinations on a topic, it was many years ago (before 9/11), and I was asking co-workers if I needed a passport/birth cerificate to travel to Canada. One co-worker, due to his personal experience driving in and out of Canada, swore I would only need my driver's license. I kept pressing him, due to the timing of my trip, as to whether I needed to find my birth certificate or passport, and he repeatedly said "no". Trying to research further on the Internet even got him more angry at me, that I would not take his word for it. Later, time running short, I proceeded with just my license, and got caught at the border, looking very stupid. My travel companion had to vouch for me, and I was given a stern redress about it. My co-worker later still insisted that his experience was the "official" truth, but I now have to take everything he says with a grain of salt.

Similarly, on the UCE issue, I get the impression that general opinions often seem to be more accepting due to desensitisation, but that any form of estabished policy or nettiquette generally points to ruinous results from such things. My impression at this point is, no matter what any one expresses personally about UCE/spam, the bottomline is that is can ruin your business, and that I shouldn't expect even the slightest acceptance regardless of the pains I take in practicing it.

The friend I mentioned earlier, who's made thousands of dollars promoting through UCE, has been on numerous blacklists, has changed his IP block assignments a few times, and has finally decided to move from his original co-location provider, though only for cost considerations, due to increasing fees. He seems to also have an interesting perspective when it comes to UCE, and has always complained about being victimized by irate people who refused to "simply" unsubscribe.

This has been useful.

~ Nexus

 

[Nexus]

Being unsolicited itself does not incur any wrong doing; by rejecting unsolicited e-mail or snail mail is like not talking to anybody except your family and friends.

I think a large amount of people wouild disagree with this statement alone. I know I personally give my address to a number of companies with whom I do business. Often, its all the companies with whom I could care less that cause disruptions. There was one company in particular a while back that was advertising some 3-d ebook software. Having many different e-mail addresses, everytime I looked around, they'd gotten another one, and were e-mailing me about their product.

Speaking not from the business opportunity perspective, but as an individual... If my e-mail were limited to companies like: Amazon.com, eNom, Netflix, various mailing lists, friends and family... I would be extremely please personally. Unsolicited e-mail really doesn't ad much to my experience except clutter. I like choosing what e-mail I recieve, and not having to rely on auto-mated filters and multiple inboxes to understand my mail.

Others however, like some of my clients or friends... have mentioned offers to me that arrive via UCE, that they were genuinely interested in. My first reaction was to dismiss these offers, but I'm intrigued by those that seem to support (if ambiguously) the "right" for these companies to send them out in such a fashion.

The amount of "paid listing" UCE/spam I've gotten lately from apparent scam-artists pretending to be a top sites or directory site, seems unbelievable though. It's very possible there is a genuine product there, although it seems unlikely.

~ Nexus

 

[Jack Gordon]

Let me clarify something...

I am not against unsolicited e-mail. I do it for my business. BUT... when I do it, I do it one-at-a-time, directly to a prospect that I have researched and is in my industry. All addresses I send to are "harvested" by me, using contact info on their web site or industry publications. I always feel confident that my recipients would not be offended by the nature of the product I am offering, as it fits right into their business plans.

This is infinitely different from spam. Spam is a worldwide epidemic, and in my opinion, people who propogate it by selling lists or sending to them are part of the disease. The ones who do the work will win in the end.

 

[Nexus]

Let me clarify something...

I am not against unsolicited e-mail. I do it for my business. BUT... when I do it, I do it one-at-a-time, directly to a prospect that I have researched and is in my industry. All addresses I send to are "harvested" by me, using contact info on their web site or industry publications. I always feel confident that my recipients would not be offended by the nature of the product I am offering, as it fits right into their business plans.

Ok. So for you, its important that its not a "bulk" thing where its NOT "automated" or "mechanized" in some way. You would not send to more than 5, 10, 30 or more at a time? I think that's an important distinction too. It seems tough, as many could arguably "mechanize" personalization, and label it "efficiency".

Lately, I've been getting normal communications from other companies looking to create link relationships... I don't really consider these to be UCE/spam, even though I can tell I am "Website owner of [BLANK.TLD]" and not "Greetings, [MY NAME]". I think there is a real material difference in these, when they are articulate, represent a desire for a material business relationship from a particular party I may well want to work with. --But the line gets grey.

For instance, here is one email I recieved recently:
------------------------------------

Subject: Your site has been added
Date: Monday, 22 Mar 2004 18:18:37

Hello,

We have a high quality directory as part of our site which ranks highly in the search engines and attracts many thousands of visitors per day. Your site http://www.figma.com/howto/dbryan/db_color_01.htm has been added to Graphics under the main section of Help and Tutorials

The directory is here: http://www.appliedlanguage.com/directory/website/

We will be very quickly cleaning the directory up so there is no more than 40 sites listed in any one category. Priority will be given to anyone who links back to our own site, and there are a number of options for doing this which can be found here: http://www.appliedlanguage.com/link_text.shtml

You may want read a bit more about the reasons for doing this and how it will benefit both of our sites. There are many hundreds of articles on the benefits, including this one: http://www.subiainteractive.com/art-reciplink.html
------------------------------------

--And it goes on. I think this type of mailing is reasonable (although clearly they got my e-mail address from the whois record, which is a pet-peeve of mine). They found me, tried to ascribe a benefit to working with them, and ended using their name. I know programs like Web Position Gold automates a lot of this process of improving linkpop. --Then again, things like the following, represent SPAM to me:
------------------------------------

Date: {ts '2004-03-11 16:09:56'}
From: Customer Service <[email protected]>
Subject: Please update your expired drawb.com listing in the world's biggest directory by Wednesday, March 17 (Adv)

Your free drawb.com listing in the world's biggest directory has expired.

Could you please be so kind as to update it by Wednesday, if you don't mind, at: http://www--directory.net/update.htm?d=drawb.com&e=s

You are one of more than 12 million listings, in more than 450,000 categories, on more than a million pages.
The directory has regional editions in more than 230 countries, in more than 70 languages.

Thanks!
P.S. while updating your listing don't miss:
* Our translation of your website into seven languages.
* Your website popularity report.

To unsubscribe: http://www--directory.net/cancel.htm?d=drawb.com&e=s

PO Box 7334-101591A, San Francisco, CA 94120-7334 USA
------------------------------------

I'm left feeling irritated, because I've gotten this same e-mail (and varying permutations of it every month) many times, and I've NO faith in any "unsubscribe". The definition and nettiquette behind UCE seems to break down depending on how mechanized and how "bulk" the mailings are. It really feels like the discussion I was engaged in on another forum regarding the .XXX extension, and how do define ephemeral qualities of things branded "adult", and whether it could/should be *mandatory* for these sites (however defined) to be forced into a virtual "red-light" district.

Similarly, with UCE, I can see some truly GREY areas that I personally would think twice about doing myself, but I can see other companies ABUSING, and becoming a general nuisance that threatens to ruin the Internet for everyone. Everyone ends up being thrown into one bucket it seems.

On another forum, someone has even labeled "dnforum.com" a spammer, for sending out a simply mechanized e-mail saying that their website has been added to a directory. Admittedly, when I started such a directory, I didn't e-mail those being added, but I question if that's just bad marketing and due-diligence on my part.

~ Nexus

 

[mole]

Similarly, with UCE, I can see some truly GREY areas that I personally would think twice about doing myself, but I can see other companies ABUSING, and becoming a general nuisance that threatens to ruin the Internet for everyone. Everyone ends up being thrown into one bucket it seems.

On another forum, someone has even labeled "dnforum.com" a spammer, for sending out a simply mechanized e-mail saying that their website has been added to a directory. Admittedly, when I started such a directory, I didn't e-mail those being added, but I question if that's just bad marketing and due-diligence on my part.

Unfortunately, rampant SPAMMING has to a very large part, ruined the viability of email marketing - innocent or otherwise. The solutions to this are very complex, but the fact remains that the only way to control commercial email in the future is to make EACH sent increasingly more expensive - till the point where there is no incentive, but in fact a financial disaster, to send out solicitations indiscriminately.

It costs at minimum 5 cents per click to get people to visit you on Google. Or $1 per 20 clicks. I can envisage unsolicited commercial email going that way, and more, in the near future - either I get those unsolcitated mailers from a verified clearing house that I have opted-in to, or into the bin that email will automatically go to. I think that new .mail spam identification/whitelist system by spamhaus.org is a good move towards that technical advancement.

Meantime, die if you do, die if you don't. I can empathise with that predicament.