3 ms·

> Read receipts do work in Gmail, and Google should be shamed for that. Work how? There's a responsible way to handle read receipts (where the client notifies

> Read receipts do work in Gmail, and Google should be shamed for that. Work how? There's a responsible way to handle read receipts (where the client notifies you the remote side would like a read receipt, and offers the choice to send it), and if it's done in that manner, I'm not sure why they should need to be shamed. I'm not sure what Gmail does, but I see stuff when searching about how to configure it for G Suite accounts to always/never/selectively respond, and about how to disable Gmail's nagging about it, so I'm not sure the current status.

danShumway 7y ago
> unless their policy has changed since the last time I checked, Gmail still loads images by default and it doesn't cache them, it only proxies them. That's a read receipt, in practice if not in name. I put a unique tracking pixel in the email, and when you open the email by default Google proxies it from my server. It's uncached, so unless the browser itself decides not to re-fetch it, I'll also know whenever you reopen the email. Google also allows you to request a read receipt the responsible, official way that you're thinking of, but why would I ever use that feature when I can just give you a tracking pixel instead? The responsible read receipts require consent, and tracking pixels don't. Again, I haven't checked Gmail's default settings in... probably years. So maybe this has changed, and it doesn't load images by default anymore. But any client that loads images by default has non-consensual read receipts, and they should be shamed for that.
- kbenson 7y ago
  > Google also allows you to request a read receipt the responsible, official way that you're thinking of, but why would I ever use that feature when I can just give you a tracking pixel instead? The responsible read receipts require consent, and tracking pixels don't. Read receipts (as opposed to email tracking through images, let's not overload terms here) have the benefit that they might be returned by clients that don't load images by default. That's probably a relatively small portion of clients, but it is only one setting change away on Gmail. > Again, I haven't checked Gmail's default settings in... probably years. So maybe this has changed, and it doesn't load images by default anymore. But any client that loads images by default has non-consensual read receipts, and they should be shamed for that. A client that loads images by default does what 99% of people desire. That Gmail does so in a safer way than many others is a good thing, and maybe shame is a strong word for transparently making people's default behavior slightly safer while doing what they want (showing emails as they were visually intended and looking nice).

danShumway 7y ago

> unless their policy has changed since the last time I checked, Gmail still loads images by default and it doesn't cache them, it only proxies them. That's a read receipt, in practice if not in name. I put a unique tracking pixel in the email, and when you open the email by default Google proxies it from my server. It's uncached, so unless the browser itself decides not to re-fetch it, I'll also know whenever you reopen the email. Google also allows you to request a read receipt the responsible, official way that you're thinking of, but why would I ever use that feature when I can just give you a tracking pixel instead? The responsible read receipts require consent, and tracking pixels don't. Again, I haven't checked Gmail's default settings in... probably years. So maybe this has changed, and it doesn't load images by default anymore. But any client that loads images by default has non-consensual read receipts, and they should be shamed for that.

kbenson 7y ago
> Google also allows you to request a read receipt the responsible, official way that you're thinking of, but why would I ever use that feature when I can just give you a tracking pixel instead? The responsible read receipts require consent, and tracking pixels don't. Read receipts (as opposed to email tracking through images, let's not overload terms here) have the benefit that they might be returned by clients that don't load images by default. That's probably a relatively small portion of clients, but it is only one setting change away on Gmail. > Again, I haven't checked Gmail's default settings in... probably years. So maybe this has changed, and it doesn't load images by default anymore. But any client that loads images by default has non-consensual read receipts, and they should be shamed for that. A client that loads images by default does what 99% of people desire. That Gmail does so in a safer way than many others is a good thing, and maybe shame is a strong word for transparently making people's default behavior slightly safer while doing what they want (showing emails as they were visually intended and looking nice).