3 ms·

> Here are a few tips if you want to avoid getting microtargetted like this They sent a mistargeted email. Wow. A fair number of people who meet the known cha

> Here are a few tips if you want to avoid getting microtargetted like this They sent a mistargeted email. Wow. A fair number of people who meet the known characteristics of your wife have children, thus it seems reasonable to send them a PSA pertaining to kids. It looks like a sensible email and it’s not a judgment or anything. I think the email could have been better qualified. But this whole things just smacks of hypersensitivity to perceived micro aggressions.

EForEndeavour 5y ago
The blog author seems rightfully fed up with years' worth of people obliviously asking them about children when they've chosen to live childfree. It's no surprise that this mistargeted email is received so poorly. That said, I think it's really imprecise to infer whether someone has a child from their age, sex, and marital status. Regardless of how many 30-year-old married women in SE Railways' database show strong signs of having children (e.g., they regularly book child's fares), the consequence of incorrectly believing a woman has a child when they really don't is potentially really bad. How many infertile couples, recovering stillbirth mothers, or childfree advocates who complain eloquently enough to get to the front page of HN do you want to risk upsetting with this tone-deaf campaign email?
- shockeychap 5y ago
  To do anything in most situations risks some degree of offense. I wholly sympathize with parents who are dealing with loss in any of its forms. I wish there was a way they could be shielded from the world for a time. But SE Railways’ email was quite sensible. If privacy is the concern, there’s plenty to discuss about FB or Google who actually do target people based on personal and private insights. I think that ranting about this email is misplaced at best.
pwinnski 5y ago
I think it's sad that anybody spends effort justifying targeting rather than lamenting that companies feel free and justified in sending marketing drivel regularly. The ratio of useful mail to garbage in my mailbox is approaches 1:100, and email without regularly efforts to prune and filter is even worse. This should not be okay.

EForEndeavour 5y ago

The blog author seems rightfully fed up with years' worth of people obliviously asking them about children when they've chosen to live childfree. It's no surprise that this mistargeted email is received so poorly. That said, I think it's really imprecise to infer whether someone has a child from their age, sex, and marital status. Regardless of how many 30-year-old married women in SE Railways' database show strong signs of having children (e.g., they regularly book child's fares), the consequence of incorrectly believing a woman has a child when they really don't is potentially really bad. How many infertile couples, recovering stillbirth mothers, or childfree advocates who complain eloquently enough to get to the front page of HN do you want to risk upsetting with this tone-deaf campaign email?

shockeychap 5y ago
To do anything in most situations risks some degree of offense. I wholly sympathize with parents who are dealing with loss in any of its forms. I wish there was a way they could be shielded from the world for a time. But SE Railways’ email was quite sensible. If privacy is the concern, there’s plenty to discuss about FB or Google who actually do target people based on personal and private insights. I think that ranting about this email is misplaced at best.

pwinnski 5y ago

I think it's sad that anybody spends effort justifying targeting rather than lamenting that companies feel free and justified in sending marketing drivel regularly. The ratio of useful mail to garbage in my mailbox is approaches 1:100, and email without regularly efforts to prune and filter is even worse. This should not be okay.