5 ms·

The vast majority of the time it's a one or two click process. A few sites require you to log in to change your email preferences, but they're few and far betwe

The vast majority of the time it's a one or two click process. A few sites require you to log in to change your email preferences, but they're few and far between. The one exception I can think of off the top of my head is MTV Networks, who got a hold of my email somehow and won't stop spamming me, even after I've unsubscribed at least a dozen times.

kolinko 16y ago
That's what I'm talking about. We are hackers. Why should we settle for a mediocre solution (like fighting with MTV from time to time) when there is a better around the corner?
- mcav 16y ago
  A better solution isn't to just block all unwanted messages... a better solution would attempt to unsubscribe, and only if that doesn't work, block the sender.
  - yummyfajitas 16y ago
    A better solution is one button which both attempts to automatically unsubscribe, and blocks further emails if the list does not respect the user's choice. Why should I have to do extra work just because MTV is hostile to users? Or because Hallmark's database takes 10 days to update, gamespot's unsubscribe servers are permanently broken, or because some crappy website demands your login info? http://imgur.com/mzqKk http://imgur.com/mzqKk http://imgur.com/Yn5eD http://imgur.com/Yn5eD http://i.imgur.com/yoky5.jpg http://i.imgur.com/yoky5.jpg
    - idive 16y ago
      Google's Report Spam button is actually pretty close to that. If the message has a List-Unsubscribe header, it offers to use that after hitting the Spam button. And usually they don't really take 10 days, but that's the limit the law permits so they give themselves as much wiggle room as possible.
  - Bud 16y ago
    I agree with yummyfajitas' take. My rebuttals to some of the other comments in this thread so far: 1. It's not "harsh" to mark anything as spam in your email; the only person it affects is you. The sender will not, of course, even know whether you've classified their stuff as spam. 2. Some commenters are claiming that it's not that much extra effort to visit the sender's site and unsubscribe yourself. This is manifestly not always the case, and more to the point, the user does not KNOW in advance whether it will be the case, when starting the process. However, hitting a plonk button in your mail client will always have a known time-suck-factor in advance. 3. Hitting a plonk button is also, of course, guaranteed to be at least one page-load and one click easier than any possible solution involving visiting a sender's website. Even if there's an unsub link in the spammy email itself, a plonk button is still one page-load less, and easier to find from a UI standpoint. So in sum, plonk is guaranteed to win from on ease of use. Not even a debatable question. 4. Some argue that taking time to unsubscribe yourself via the sender's website is just "the right thing to do", given that you subscribed to their emails in the first place. It seems to me that it should be incumbent on the marketer, not the customer, to make unsubscribing as easy as possible, and to "do the right thing". This should be the default.
    - xtho 16y ago
      ad 1. I'm not sure if this is the case for gmail but when you use a spam filter that is fed by many people there is a chance that you're classification of that mail as spam affects other people. If you use some sort of self-adapting, learning spam filter, you will be affected too because you mark mail as spam that looks like normal mail. To put it simple: the spam button is for spam = unwanted mass mails, mostly ads. For unwanted mail from specific users, you should create a filter. My personal take on this though is: People who found out how to subscribe to a mailing list, should also be able to unsubscribe.
      - pbhjpbhj 16y ago
        >To put it simple: the spam button is for spam = unwanted mass mails Spam is unsolicited. If you've signed up for a newsletter, or similar, then you've requested the messages.
idive 16y ago
For what it's worth, it is actually illegal for US-based companies to require a login or any other nonsense to unsubscribe. CAN-SPAM (for all its many faults) is actually pretty specific about making unsubscribing from a newsletter very easy.

kolinko 16y ago

That's what I'm talking about. We are hackers. Why should we settle for a mediocre solution (like fighting with MTV from time to time) when there is a better around the corner?

mcav 16y ago
A better solution isn't to just block all unwanted messages... a better solution would attempt to unsubscribe, and only if that doesn't work, block the sender.
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  A better solution is one button which both attempts to automatically unsubscribe, and blocks further emails if the list does not respect the user's choice. Why should I have to do extra work just because MTV is hostile to users? Or because Hallmark's database takes 10 days to update, gamespot's unsubscribe servers are permanently broken, or because some crappy website demands your login info? http://imgur.com/mzqKk http://imgur.com/mzqKk http://imgur.com/Yn5eD http://imgur.com/Yn5eD http://i.imgur.com/yoky5.jpg http://i.imgur.com/yoky5.jpg
  - idive 16y ago
    Google's Report Spam button is actually pretty close to that. If the message has a List-Unsubscribe header, it offers to use that after hitting the Spam button. And usually they don't really take 10 days, but that's the limit the law permits so they give themselves as much wiggle room as possible.
- Bud 16y ago
  I agree with yummyfajitas' take. My rebuttals to some of the other comments in this thread so far: 1. It's not "harsh" to mark anything as spam in your email; the only person it affects is you. The sender will not, of course, even know whether you've classified their stuff as spam. 2. Some commenters are claiming that it's not that much extra effort to visit the sender's site and unsubscribe yourself. This is manifestly not always the case, and more to the point, the user does not KNOW in advance whether it will be the case, when starting the process. However, hitting a plonk button in your mail client will always have a known time-suck-factor in advance. 3. Hitting a plonk button is also, of course, guaranteed to be at least one page-load and one click easier than any possible solution involving visiting a sender's website. Even if there's an unsub link in the spammy email itself, a plonk button is still one page-load less, and easier to find from a UI standpoint. So in sum, plonk is guaranteed to win from on ease of use. Not even a debatable question. 4. Some argue that taking time to unsubscribe yourself via the sender's website is just "the right thing to do", given that you subscribed to their emails in the first place. It seems to me that it should be incumbent on the marketer, not the customer, to make unsubscribing as easy as possible, and to "do the right thing". This should be the default.
  - xtho 16y ago
    ad 1. I'm not sure if this is the case for gmail but when you use a spam filter that is fed by many people there is a chance that you're classification of that mail as spam affects other people. If you use some sort of self-adapting, learning spam filter, you will be affected too because you mark mail as spam that looks like normal mail. To put it simple: the spam button is for spam = unwanted mass mails, mostly ads. For unwanted mail from specific users, you should create a filter. My personal take on this though is: People who found out how to subscribe to a mailing list, should also be able to unsubscribe.
    - pbhjpbhj 16y ago
      >To put it simple: the spam button is for spam = unwanted mass mails Spam is unsolicited. If you've signed up for a newsletter, or similar, then you've requested the messages.

idive 16y ago

For what it's worth, it is actually illegal for US-based companies to require a login or any other nonsense to unsubscribe. CAN-SPAM (for all its many faults) is actually pretty specific about making unsubscribing from a newsletter very easy.