14 ms·

If you're running a mail newsletter, this tracking is pretty important. You're supposed to stop sending emails to someone who's not interacting with them, or yo

• fraudsyndrome 6y ago
  > Since people are already weary of clicking the unsubscribe link Can you please elaborate on this? Do you mean people intentionally avoid this because it leads to the advertisers marking that as "read" and therefore a live user? Asking because I recently purged my old emails which had thousands of emails, they obviously never stopped sending even with zero interaction. But my method was to click the unsubscribe link which I was afraid might give them more information about them and doing the opposite of what I wanted. I know some didn't even respect the unsubscribe, I took note of which ones I explicitly clicked and they're still sending spam to me.
  • relix 6y ago
    I don't think anyone should be scared of pressing the unsubscribe button in 2021. This was a common belief back in 1999, but I don't believe that should be anymore: spammers (legit spammers) don't care that there's an actual person on the other side. If the email address did not exist, the legit ISP's would have sent a notification on the feedback loop to the newsletter already, saying that this address does not exist. I think there's nowadays very little gain if any for bad actors to be had by letting them know you exist by clicking a link. My belief about people being weary of the unsubscribe button are elaborated on here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26164450 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26164450
    • kube-system 6y ago
      If I know who the email is coming from, then yes, I use the unsubscribe button. But I definitely don't click on unsubscribe buttons in unsolicited mail when I don't really know who it's from. It could be an attempt to identify a valid mailbox (and spam me more), or it could link to malware.
  • woko 6y ago
    I will tell you about my scam anecdote. I had been receiving an email once every few months for several years about the possibility to create an account on the website of my electricity provider. All of these emails were suspicious because of the very diverse and weird emails used by the sender, usually a slightly different one for each email. After a few years, I thought that these might be legit and clicked on the link provided in the email. I did not put in any personal information, and did not end up creating an account on their website. The week after, I received phone-text messages about some debt payment for electricity bills. I even received phone calls about it. Unless it is a coincidence, the people on the other side of this well-elaborate scam had to know my email and my phone number, and started the phone scam after they noticed I fell through the email scam. They tried to get me to pay their fake debt, which had always the same ID number, but a different amount of money to pay each time (sometimes lower than before). And they did not know my name: I know this for a fact thanks to the brief amount of time I spent on the phone with one of them. They thought I was someone else. They kept spamming my phone with text messages and phone calls around 8 a.m. or noon, once or twice per week. After ~9 months of them being blocked by me (I could only block the phone calls, the text message still went through, because they went through some kind of public advertising proxy with 5-6 digits), they completely stopped. So yeah, rule number 1 of email protection should be: do not tell the scammer/spammer that you actually use this email address. In case of a doubt, click the "spam" button, block the address, but do not click "unsubscribe." Only click "unsubscribe" if you trust the sender, because once you have done it, your email address is suddenly worth a lot more, especially to bad actors.
• iamacyborg 6y ago
  > You're supposed to stop sending emails to someone who's not interacting with them, or you get an extra point towards being flagged as spam. It's a bit more complicated than that. There are many reasons why a pixel may not fire but the email is still read, and there are many ways pixels can record false positives. Relying on email opens is really not a good measure of engagement. Sadly, inbox placement is almost impossible to measure without email open tracking as feedback loops from gmail/hotmail/etc are just not good enough.
  • petercooper 6y ago
    Relying on email opens is really not a good measure of engagement. It's not, but it's what we have. It's a bit like how counting podcast listeners based off of downloads is a terrible system too but it's all they have to go on (I'm subbed to hundreds and don't listen to 99% of episodes).
• panic 6y ago
  Does this mean I’ll be automatically unsubscribed from a mailing list if my mail client doesn’t load the tracking pixel? How long does this take to happen?
  • relix 6y ago
    Yes, if that newsletter is using best practices. The recommended period is 90 days I believe, but you can get send an email asking if you're still interested (and in that email, there will be a link you should click if you want to stay subscribed). You may have had this happen before and probably thought that was just a scammy way to get you to click a link, but in fact it's completely legit.
    • jjav 6y ago
      > Yes, if that newsletter is using best practices. Clearly that would be worst possible practices.
      • deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      • puszczyk 6y ago
        Don’t understand the downvotes. I block all the images by default so I assume I’ve been a victim of such a “best practice”. Also with hey.com auto blocking spy pixels I just don’t see how this is still a best practice
    • Tepix 6y ago
      I don't load tracking pixels and I've never had it happen to me that I got unsubscribed because of that. I would be quite upset and would not consider it "best practise" - quite the contrary!
    • mcv 6y ago
      I would not consider it "best practices" to automatically unsubscribe someone who legitimately subscribed. Have a double opt-in, and then assume they're interested until they explicitly unsubscribe. I'm subscribed to some mailinglist that I don't actually read but would be upset if they auto-unsubscribed me, because if I'm ever interested, I want it to be there.
• phreack 6y ago
  One of the reasons I get weary of going through the unsubscribe route is that it's always a gray-on-white link incredibly hidden at the bottom of the email, like every single time. It's a miracle it's there at all. It'd be much simpler to have it at the top and actually visible by eyes instead, if you just want to keep engaged users on your list.
  • thepete2 6y ago
    There should be an unsubscribe email header for newsletters. Then it could even be a feature for mail clients.
    • Nextgrid 6y ago
      There is and some e-mail clients use it when it's present.
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    • corty 6y ago
      There is, just many email marketing people leave it out to cut down on the unsubscribe rate. Subscribing has to be easy and in-the-face (like those 'helpful' popups on websites), unsubscribing has to be almost impossible. Not totally impossible, mind you, because otherwise courts get angry. Better email clients know to use the header, and e.g. gmail even asks about properly unsubscribing when marking a newsletter with that header as spam iirc.
      • eli 6y ago
        IMHO if you don't use the header that makes it easy for people to unsubscribe then you don't get to complain about people Marking Spam instead.
    • jeroenhd 6y ago
      Gmail has this, it's in one of the dropdown menus. If you mark something with the right email header as spam, it even ask if you wish to unsubscribe instead. Spam companies often use this to check if the email address they've targeted is real because they get callbacks from legitimate users. I've only seen one or two legitimate uses of the header as far as I can remember.
• Nextgrid 6y ago
  I'm not sure why people would be wary of clicking the unsubscribe link on something they explicitly subscribed to in the first place. I mean, they trusted you enough to give you their email address to subscribe in the first place, right? The only scenario I can think of is when people didn't intentionally subscribe or were coerced into subscribing and those newsletters can go to hell and fully deserve to be marked as spam.
  • tomtheelder 6y ago
    I think the original commenter really did mean weary and not wary. It's just a pain to be constantly unsubscribing from things, most of which you probably didn't intentionally subscribe to in the first place.
    • relix 6y ago
      I did indeed mean weary.
  • nickff 6y ago
    People often forget what they signed up for, especially if the newsletter is relatively infrequent. This is to be expected, given the large volume of newsletters and spam.
    • Nextgrid 6y ago
      Is it really a big problem then? People who care about reading the content would counteract the problem even if it does get flagged as spam. Ultimately if your content is of any value then people will find a way to read it and the spam filters will learn from that.
  • andreareina 6y ago
    > The only scenario I can think of is when people didn't intentionally subscribe or were coerced into subscribing and those newsletters can go to hell and fully deserve to be marked as spam. Yeah that's the better part of 95% of them for me.
• achairapart 6y ago
  And also because of this, if you're blocking tracking pixels in a privacy conscious way you often get removed from the mailing list without any notice, which is very frustrating. Or you get one of those mail saying "We are removing you from the list because you don't read our newsletter", often without offering any other confirmation signal. Basically they says "Let us track you or you are out of this list". And this is also the result of marketing people who look at ways to increase the "good numbers", more likely to show to their bosses. They don't actually care if you read or enjoy their content, you are either one of the users who increase their opening and click rates, or you're a useless burden to them.
  • Nextgrid 6y ago
    > you often get removed from the mailing list without any notice Seems like nothing of value would be lost? > They don't actually care if you read or enjoy their content, you are either one of the users who increase their opening and click rates, or you're a useless burden to them. Confirms that indeed nothing of value would be lost. It seems like a win-win situation, spam-letters you wouldn't want to read anyway eventually remove you off their spam list because they can't stalk you.
    • TheNorthman 6y ago
      I, and I imagine many more people, block all external resources by default, which has gotten me removed from a mailing list I was interested in. Although I will give you that the vast majority of auto-removals have been beneficial for me.
    • arkitaip 6y ago
      Obviously true and it's sad that newsletter spammers would down vote you. Who else would even find your comment controversial.
    • that_guy_iain 6y ago
      > Seems like nothing of value would be lost? That would depend on the newsletter. Some newsletter provide lots of value for those wanting to keep up to date with minimum effort. It could also be a newsletter you need to monitor for work purposes. > They don't actually care if you read or enjoy their content, you are either one of the users who increase their opening and click rates, or you're a useless burden to them. No they care more that you don't reduce their deliverability rate and that is affected by email service providers deciding if you're not opening the email you're not interested, not reading and enjoying the content and therefore and don't want the content.
• unionpivo 6y ago
  That explains few thing, but I guess it means no more newsletters for me. It's not just tracking. I generally feel email is more useful with html on and pictures off. You automatically skip most colorful signatures , headers, legal whatever's ..., while still getting nice formatting
  • kuschku 6y ago
    Thunderbird’s "Simple HTML" view is really nice for this. It’s basically Firefox Reader Mode.
• guerrilla 6y ago
  This wouldn't work at all for me although I'm probably a minority. I never load any images unless I need to see them for some reason, which is extremely rare. I'd get unsubscribed from your digest but bad actors don't do this and would just keep sending me crap. (Edit: I just read both Thunderbird and Protonmail do this by default, so maybe I'm not too much of a minority?)
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
• wodenokoto 6y ago
  It’s super annoying that other people’s spam habits hit you. For a while I couldn’t receive email notifications from Facebook because so many other gmail users marked them as spam, so no matter how many I unmarked, I was screaming in the wind. Fair enough that other people don’t wanna deal with that crap, but it should still be my prerogative to receive them. I first gave up, and later decided I didn’t care. But for a while I thought it was clever to have an immutable archive of Facebook interactions (those notifications used to include full text of posts you were tagged in or that was written on your wall as well as new messages)
  • benhurmarcel 6y ago
    You can create a filter to ensure that address is never marked as spam.
    • amanaplanacanal 6y ago
      Depends on where you get your e-mail. I use outlook.com for one of my email accounts and there are things that it has decided are spam no matter how many times I mark as not spam and “add to safe senders.”
• that_guy_iain 6y ago
  Honestly, if people get what they want and a lot of tracking is stopped they'll probably find the quality of their internet experience reduced. There are lot of things companies do that privacy people dislike but is only there to improve user experience.
  • stubish 6y ago
    Tracking is already stopped for lots of people through plugins, containers etc., and we like it. It doesn't actually change the user experience, except maybe to stop some of the creepier features working, and speed things up in general.
    • that_guy_iain 6y ago
      But you haven't actually felt the effects because they're able to do enough of it to improve UX. And this thread is full of people complaining that once they stopped tracking in emails they were getting unsubscribed from newsletters they were reading. So, not everyone is enjoying it.
      • stubish 6y ago
        And this is an example of worsening the user experience, where the previous comment is claiming that tracking improves it. There is absolutely no benefit to the user experience with the tracking here, only downsides; it is a punishment for disabling tracking. The only actual reason to track mail opens is pay-per-view advertising, everything to do with monetization and nothing to do with improving the UX.
        • that_guy_iain 6y ago
          No, I said things that people consider privacy breaching actually improved UX. And this is an example of stopping tracking worsening the user experience because the tracking improved user experience by removing people who aren't interested in the list. > And this is an example of worsening the user experience, where the previous comment is claiming that tracking improves it. There is absolutely no benefit to the user experience with the tracking here, only downsides; it is a punishment for disabling tracking. The only actual reason to track mail opens is pay-per-view advertising, everything to do with monetization and nothing to do with improving the UX. No it's not it's all about deliverability. Literally, they get penalties in their deliverability if they keep emailing you stuff you're not interested in. It's not a penalty if you choose to go againist the grain and suffer the negative effects. Stop blaming others for the negative effects of your choices.
• lloydatkinson 6y ago
  Redirecting through your own domain sounds like a good solution - not sure how I would do that with my Netlify/Nuxt based site though.
  • 867-5309 6y ago
    you'd have to control the domain DNS MX records. most registrars allow this unless you have an email package attached. i doubt these template sites allow for such control if your site is just a subdomain of theirs
    • lloydatkinson 6y ago
      Yeah, I use GSuite so have email too. Netlify is a host not really a template.
• teraku 6y ago
  > Since people are already weary of clicking the unsubscribe link and instead casually mark everything as spam, every little bit towards keeping your reputation counts. I'm always looking for the super hidden unsubscribe button. I don't move to spam. But sometimes I get mails without even subscribing, and that is far worse.
  • relix 6y ago
    I totally agree! I completely understand why one would start pressing spam instead of unsubscribe, for this reason.
• kureikain 6y ago
  I can confirm this. I was frustrated at some points when I was on my early day with my news letter and AWS SES. I don't know why people spend time to register for my news letter, after reading through the archive. Yet, they chooese to mark email as spam even though we explicitly have an unsubscribe link and require double opt-in. For AWS SES, you have to maintain spam rate at <0.1%. And AWS has their own way to pick sample set of emails. So yeah, it's really important to manually unsubscribe people that won't read email. Don't even attempt to make a final email to ask them if they want to be remove because you risks another "mark as spam" click.
• mcv 6y ago
  Wait, does this mean that if I legitimately subscribe to a mailinglist I want, but I use a mailreader that doesn't load these tracker pixels, I will get kicked off the mailinglist? That is terrible. I'm surprised that people still press spam for a double opt-in mailinglist. Double opt-in is the right way to subscribe, click unsubscribe is the right way to unsubscribe. People reporting that as spam should probably have their spam reports ranked as illegitimate. However, plenty of mailinglists are spam. Sometimes I get newsletters in a language I don't even know. Maybe someone entered a wrong email somewhere and the list never verified that it's correct. Sometimes you subscribe to a bunch of spam if you forget to uncheck a checkbox somewhere. That stuff is not something the user explicitly asked for, and the user may have a hard time distinguishing it from spam or phishing, so I can understand reporting that as spam.
• logifail 6y ago
  > You're supposed to stop sending emails to someone who's not interacting with them, or you get an extra point towards being flagged as spam Can you give a source/reference for this? I'd like to understand it more. I don't allow any remote content when I read emails, and I get quite a lot of regular newsletters. Why am I not being unsubscribed?
  • relix 6y ago
    Here for example is Gmail's explanation: https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126?hl=en https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126?hl=en CTRL-F "Send email to engaged users" Some choice quotes: - "Consider unsubscribing users who don’t read your messages." - "Periodically send a confirmation message to users to make sure they still want to get your messages."
    • diggernet 6y ago
      I would note here that "consider" is not "supposed to". It's a suggestion that might help clean your lists, not a requirement. Also, as someone whose mail client doesn't load external resources for privacy reasons, I'd be annoyed if you unsubscribed me because you weren't tracking my reading. However, an occasional confirmation (say, once or twice a year) as they suggest would be just fine. You could even restrict those to just those subscribers who do not trigger the tracker.
      • relix 6y ago
        Avoiding being marked as spam, even if you're legitimate, is much a "dark art". At any one point your reputation could take a hit because you did something, and no one will tell you what you did wrong. An ISP can just start redirecting your mails to /dev/null and you'd never find out about it until a user asks you why they haven't received a mail from you in 2 weeks. Malicious actors can also try and get you flagged as spam by artificially generating spam reports on you. There is no rule set you can follow that guarantees you're safe from ever being blackholed, it's all very fuzzy. Once you're hit with a ban, it's very hard if not impossible to recover. If you've been at HN for a while, you must have noticed that every now and then there are stories from Google users being mistakenly banned from their account for violating some rule that they don't even explain to them. These events happen to mailing lists as well, but there's even less of a recourse for mailers when this happens. Considering all this, I'd rather err on the side of caution and implement most of recommendations by Google, than increase my risk of being marked a spammer, and risk losing the whole project. > However, an occasional confirmation (say, once or twice a year) as they suggest would be just fine. You could even restrict those to just those subscribers who do not trigger the tracker. What is fine to you, is annoying to others. Just read the other comments on this story, where people commonly complain about receiving an email asking to reconfirm their subscription.
• intricatedetail 6y ago
  Something doesn't feel right here. Why would you send anything to someone with a potential to be marked as spam? That sounds like obtaining a user consent with unclear scope and then spamming them?
• heikkilevanto 6y ago
  So, you are saying that a blind person has to enable images that he can not see, but that can mess with his screen reader, in order to continue receiving your newsletter. There ought to be a law against such discrimination!
• m000 6y ago
  > Since people are already weary of clicking the unsubscribe link and instead casually mark everything as spam, every little bit towards keeping your reputation counts. These slackers are the worst. Not only they cause trouble to legit email newsletters, they also affect the subscribers who want to read the email. Every time I check my gmail spam folder, I'll find at least 2-3 legit newsletters classified as spam because "It is similar to messages that were identified as spam in the past." At least gmail makes it easy to tell them apart from email marked as spam because they were deemed malicious.
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  • coremoff 6y ago
    you can blame email spam from the past for this; it used to be that clicking "unsubscribe" indicated to the spammer that they had reached a valid email, and that they should sell it on to everyone else to use. Personally, I end up clicking spam on a lot of stuff - they get one chance at unsubscribe. If I get asked to log in, or it redirects to anything other than a confirmation page, then I mark it as spam and forget about it. I get too many misdirected emails to give it any more time than that (my email address is my name, many other people share that name, and a lot of them seem to think that they have that email address too).
    • User23 6y ago
      How has this changed? Clicking unsubscribe stop spamming me remains some of the strongest signal a marketer can get that it's an email that's regularly read.
• grishka 6y ago
  I open every single email I receive. How would one not? Would you have a permanent unread counter instead or would you delete them without opening or what?
  • jkaplowitz 6y ago
    In my case, permanent unread counter.
• jaywalk 6y ago
  I've got a system where a visitor to a web page can request to have product information emailed to them. That is the only way anyone would ever get an email from this system, and I don't even store the email address so I couldn't spam them if I wanted to. And yet, I still get a number of spam complaints every day. I don't get it.
  • chris_va 6y ago
    ... what if someone inputs a random email address?
    • jaywalk 6y ago
      I mean, they could. I don't see the point of that though. All of the product information is available directly on the page where they can email themselves, it's not like one of those "give us your email before you can see the info" things. It's more just to give the user something to reference.
  • meowster 6y ago
    Unintended recipients don't know it will only be a single, one-time email. To them, it looks exactly like spam. Don't look at it from your perspective, look at it from a random stranger's perspective.
• karaterobot 6y ago
  A trivial point, but I don't see that anyone's made it yet: one reason it's easier to report spam than to unsubscribe is that the UX for reporting spam is a lot better in Gmail. If I want to politely unsubscribe from a newsletter I have to: switch from the keyboard to the mouse, hunt for the link in the email and click it, switch contexts to the browser tab it opens, hunt for the primary action on the page, figure out whether that action will confirm the unsubscribe, or whether clicking the button will sneakily re-subscribe me, and then close the tab. On the other hand, if I report it as spam, I just press "!" one time and (in theory) I'll never see its ilk again. Reporting something as spam is such a clean experience that I'm trained to use it for things it wasn't meant for, like unsubscribing from a legitimate newsletter. I suspect that this is true for other users as well!
  • dugmartin 6y ago
    If the newsletter uses a List-Unsubscribe header gmail will add a little unsubscribe button at the top of the email. It shows up in maybe 25% of the newsletters I receive.
    • kergonath 6y ago
      Same for the various versions of Apple Mail. No idea whether there is a keyboard shortcut though.
    • bogidon 6y ago
      CAN-SPAM should be extended to make it required for commercial mail to add this header.
      • nulbyte 6y ago
        I'm not so sure I agree. What happens when something better comes along? I don't trust Congress to know what's happening in technology today, let alone to keep legislation up-to-date with technical innovation.
  • AMerrit 6y ago
    Yeah, the big part of this for me is how awful lots of mailers make unsubscribing. After going to conference I usually need to unsubscribe from a bunch of new mail lists, and so many just redirect me to a vague page where I can modify the type of mail I get, clicking an unsubcribe link should just unsubscribe me, not make me hunt around on their site.
• upofadown 6y ago
  Gmail has the mis-feature where other users can mess up your mail delivery by marking things as spam. Are there others? Or is this just another example of how Gmail isn't so great?
• mariusor 6y ago
  > You're supposed to stop sending emails to someone who's not interacting with them The only way that this justification makes sense to me is if you mail people that didn't explicitly subscribe to your newsletter in the first place. If that's the case, I think that the problem lies elsewhere. An email is meant to be read, that's it. Any other interaction a user will have with it that is still under your concern is if they follow any links - I personally object even to that. Assuming to track anything besides people visiting your website from a newsletter link is an infringement of the unspoken contract between you and your subscribers.
  • pc86 6y ago
    That may be how you want it to be, but it doesn't reflect reality. If you consistently have extremely low open rates (e.g. you send to a lot of people who aren't opening) your risk of being marked as spam increases. The only way to avoid this is to periodically cull your list of people who haven't opened in some amount of time.
    • mariusor 6y ago
      I can understand that, but I see a couple of suggestions in the thread that are more considerate than tracking pixels. Tracking external clicks, double confirmation, etc. I consume most of my email in plain text format. Like me there are others. Your solution is not working for us.
      • bberenberg 6y ago
        Spend enough money with Google or MS to convince them that your opinion as an email consumer matters, then make our lives as senders a bit easier. I promise, we will appreciate it.
    • anaerobicover 6y ago
      I'm not familiar with this area. Can you explain the mechanism for this? What thing is imposing the "risk of being marked as spam", and how does it make its determination? Specifically, how does it have any idea about whether the end user has "opened" the mail?
• eplanit 6y ago
  "If you're running a mail newsletter, this tracking is pretty important. You're supposed to stop sending emails to someone who's not interacting with them, or you get an extra point towards being flagged as spam." How about measuring interaction as the user doing something like logging into your site, buying a product, posting a comment on your site, sending you an e-mail -- those are actual interactions. By not counting simply opening the e-mail as interaction, you can satisfy your worries about bothering people without spying on them. You can use the lack of logins or e-mails from the user as an indication of disinterest. The profit incentive that's built-in via collection of user data makes any "it's for the user's best interest" argument questionable.
  • bberenberg 6y ago
    The product of parent is literally the newsletter.
  • tweetle_beetle 6y ago
    The nature of an email newsletter which aggregates third party content is that the only target goal is something opening your email and then enjoying the content enough to click to read more about it. I don't necessarily like the model, but if this is your business model, then there's nothing else that can be measured to monitor ongoing success apart from: - how many new users signed up - how many existing users unsubscribed (or marked as spam) It's a tough ask getting sponsors based on those two metrics alone.
  • kube-system 6y ago
    It is quite common to measure all of those.
• minikites 6y ago
  >If you're running a mail newsletter, this tracking is pretty important. Then it's exactly your job to figure out how to accomplish this in a less user hostile way.
  • relix 6y ago
    Calling what HNDigest does user hostile is pretty far-fetched, but if you have an alternative idea that wouldn't make the experience worse for most of the subscribers I'm all ears.
    • minikites 6y ago
      Any email tracking is user hostile. You don't need to know when or if I've opened an email for exactly the same reason nobody gets to know when or if I open traditional paper mail. It's a fundamental privacy issue and it is user hostile regardless of your noble intentions. It's not my job to make your job easier in this regard.
• grawprog 6y ago
  >If you're running a mail newsletter, this tracking is pretty important. You're supposed to stop sending emails to someone who's not interacting with them In my experience, that's not what happens. My most recent experience with this was when I had gotten about half way through filling out my info for a service, I was sent an email with a price list, I opened it, looked at the email and decided to wait and compare prices with another provider. Then the emails started. 'Oh hey we noticed you never finished your registration. I assure you our prices are the lowest anywhere' Had opened the email but never answered it. Get another email. 'Hey this is so and so, company president or whatever...if you need any more information, about blah blah blah, don't hesitate to send an email' So I did...I told them I don't appreciate being spammed because I hadn't finished filling out a web form and i'd like them to stop. Surprisingly, I got an email back from president dude or whatever apologizing and promising to remove me from the email list. Yeah...right.. A day later...another email. So I blocked them as spam. I still get spam from them.
  • rosstex 6y ago
    You made the fatal mistake of being human in a spam-filled world.
  • werds 6y ago
    your problem is that you gave them your email address, not that they have tracking pixels in their emails
    • grawprog 6y ago
      Yet i hadn't seen their prices until the email i received and i didn't receive the message assuring me their prices were the lowest until i'd actually opened the email. Like within a half hour of opening the email.
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• cpuguy83 6y ago
  Really makes you think about the real reasons RSS was killed basically overnight.