4 ms·
The article is about a simple misconfiguration on their email campaign, nothing to do with their actual tests. It‘s a misleading title for sure.
by red0point 3y ago
The article is about a simple misconfiguration on their email campaign, nothing to do with their actual tests.
It‘s a misleading title for sure.
- blackbear_ 3y agoYes, I know. The point that I was trying to make is that this is bound to happen again, even if everything is set-up correctly.
- Dylan16807 3y agoIf it's "set up correctly", then they'll only do a test like that if they have a reasonable follow-up test. In which case they will probably send a good and valid email and "this" is not what will happen.
- veltas 3y agoIn a sense this comment is still relevant, because from the grand perspective this email error could be considered a random failure on the part of the test in its full practical context. And it's not impossible it will happen again (in fact I expect it to). But it's certainly not characteristic of the test itself in theory, but is nevertheless characteristic of any such test that might involve bad IT. It's almost like test false-positive background radiation.