4 ms·

I once got enrolled into a newsletter from here, I'm fairly sure and... it's pretty good. I read it from time to time. I don't like spam but the atomized ethos

by blfr 4y ago

I once got enrolled into a newsletter from here, I'm fairly sure and... it's pretty good. I read it from time to time. I don't like spam but the atomized ethos of no-one-talk-to-me isn't great. Someone chatting you up or sending something you might like is fine.

TonyTrapp 4y ago
> I don't like spam but the atomized ethos of no-one-talk-to-me isn't great. Someone chatting you up or sending something you might like is fine. I'm sure most people that put their email address in their profile are fine if a human person wants to talk to them. Companies scraping profiles and sending automated bulk mail on the other hand, not so much. Pretty sure that in the EU this is also a violation of GDPR.
danielbarla 4y ago
I don't mind it if someone writes me an email - it costs them time, and I am happy to spend my time to read it. But I do mind if someone uses a script to scrape my address and opts me into a recurring distraction without my consent. It's all about having an overly low barrier to entry, yet demanding attention and manual opt-out from thousands / millions of people. It's just greedy and arrogant.
xeromal 4y ago
If someone pulls my email from my profile and messages me personally. No harm no foul. A mass distribution list is not that.
wpietri 4y ago
That is the excuse I heard back when spam was novel. What's the harm? The recipient might want it. That sounded almost reasonable 25 years ago. Now estimates vary widely, saying that 50% to 85% of mail is spam. Extensive spam filtering is a must. Actually relevant mail regularly gets lost because those filters aren't perfect. And deliverability is, at least for me, a constant worry. A person with no pecuniary motive chatting me up where the behavior costs us the same amount of time? That's fine. Somebody paid to chat people up in high volume because they hope to get more money out of me? Not fine. Somebody using automated tools to do that such that recipients spend far more time than the sender? Not fucking fine at all. For example, consider the gaping assholes, perhaps as few as 3 people, who were behind the literal billions of robocalls for extended car warranties. Did some people like that, grateful to have their worries about their car solved for them? Maybe, but I don't care. I would like to be left alone until I reach out, thanks. And if you don't like that ethos, please go talk to the people behind the thousands of robocalls and literal millions of spam emails I've had to deal with over the years. Because you're wasting your day telling me I should be nicer to people who value their money more than my time.
maxk42 4y ago
You're the reason spam works.

by blfr 4y ago

TonyTrapp 4y ago

> I don't like spam but the atomized ethos of no-one-talk-to-me isn't great. Someone chatting you up or sending something you might like is fine. I'm sure most people that put their email address in their profile are fine if a human person wants to talk to them. Companies scraping profiles and sending automated bulk mail on the other hand, not so much. Pretty sure that in the EU this is also a violation of GDPR.

danielbarla 4y ago

I don't mind it if someone writes me an email - it costs them time, and I am happy to spend my time to read it. But I do mind if someone uses a script to scrape my address and opts me into a recurring distraction without my consent. It's all about having an overly low barrier to entry, yet demanding attention and manual opt-out from thousands / millions of people. It's just greedy and arrogant.

xeromal 4y ago

If someone pulls my email from my profile and messages me personally. No harm no foul. A mass distribution list is not that.

wpietri 4y ago

That is the excuse I heard back when spam was novel. What's the harm? The recipient might want it. That sounded almost reasonable 25 years ago. Now estimates vary widely, saying that 50% to 85% of mail is spam. Extensive spam filtering is a must. Actually relevant mail regularly gets lost because those filters aren't perfect. And deliverability is, at least for me, a constant worry. A person with no pecuniary motive chatting me up where the behavior costs us the same amount of time? That's fine. Somebody paid to chat people up in high volume because they hope to get more money out of me? Not fine. Somebody using automated tools to do that such that recipients spend far more time than the sender? Not fucking fine at all. For example, consider the gaping assholes, perhaps as few as 3 people, who were behind the literal billions of robocalls for extended car warranties. Did some people like that, grateful to have their worries about their car solved for them? Maybe, but I don't care. I would like to be left alone until I reach out, thanks. And if you don't like that ethos, please go talk to the people behind the thousands of robocalls and literal millions of spam emails I've had to deal with over the years. Because you're wasting your day telling me I should be nicer to people who value their money more than my time.

maxk42 4y ago

You're the reason spam works.