4 ms·

The amount of false negatives (users received the invoice but disabled tracking pixels) must be large enough soon to cause issues for you on its own. Paying th

The amount of false negatives (users received the invoice but disabled tracking pixels) must be large enough soon to cause issues for you on its own. Paying the post office is very much different, for obvious reasons.

dqv 6y ago
I think the kind of people that block tracking pixels and also claim that they don't receive invoices is small enough that this wouldn't be an issue. Most people just pay their invoices.
- oblib 6y ago
  It wasn't a huge problem for the app's users, but it came up enough to make it worth implementing the feature.
ocdtrekkie 6y ago
Presumably, a successful tracking attempt provides good potential evidence that an invoice was viewed. For everyone else, whether they haven't viewed it, or blocked tracking that they did, doesn't necessarily detract from the value they get from the evidence in the case of successes. That being said, I'm happy to block any tracking, and the fact that it might mean I'm leaving less potentially-incriminating evidence for a court of law is a nice perk. Which is to say, I can see the reason the parent poster has to implement this as a feature, and can also say everyone in their right mind should ensure they're blocking it. ;)
- oblib 6y ago
  I struggled a bit with the ethics of this. My own experience with a client denying he received an invoice I mailed with the USPS certainly swayed my decision to implement it. It wasn't until I mailed the invoice with their "Certified Mail" option and disabled their web app just days before their big "debut" that they paid me. Had I not done that I have no doubt they would not have paid me. It's probably been around 8-10 years (at least) since I implemented that feature in my app and I've not had a user contact me about a client of theirs denying they've received an invoice since. That's only anecdotal evidence of effectiveness but it's worth noting. That said, I do think using pixel tracking in a marketing email is a slimy practice. I don't block it by default though. I still flag junk and delete spam once or twice a day.

dqv 6y ago

I think the kind of people that block tracking pixels and also claim that they don't receive invoices is small enough that this wouldn't be an issue. Most people just pay their invoices.

oblib 6y ago
It wasn't a huge problem for the app's users, but it came up enough to make it worth implementing the feature.

ocdtrekkie 6y ago

Presumably, a successful tracking attempt provides good potential evidence that an invoice was viewed. For everyone else, whether they haven't viewed it, or blocked tracking that they did, doesn't necessarily detract from the value they get from the evidence in the case of successes. That being said, I'm happy to block any tracking, and the fact that it might mean I'm leaving less potentially-incriminating evidence for a court of law is a nice perk. Which is to say, I can see the reason the parent poster has to implement this as a feature, and can also say everyone in their right mind should ensure they're blocking it. ;)

oblib 6y ago
I struggled a bit with the ethics of this. My own experience with a client denying he received an invoice I mailed with the USPS certainly swayed my decision to implement it. It wasn't until I mailed the invoice with their "Certified Mail" option and disabled their web app just days before their big "debut" that they paid me. Had I not done that I have no doubt they would not have paid me. It's probably been around 8-10 years (at least) since I implemented that feature in my app and I've not had a user contact me about a client of theirs denying they've received an invoice since. That's only anecdotal evidence of effectiveness but it's worth noting. That said, I do think using pixel tracking in a marketing email is a slimy practice. I don't block it by default though. I still flag junk and delete spam once or twice a day.