81–90 of 137 posts
Companies like LinkedIn are training users (at least me) to report as spam instead of unsubscribing because it's an exercise in futility to try to opt-out of their spam.
I've been doing this for years and don't feel the least bit bad about it, and I think everyone should adopt this practice. If marking as spam or unsubscribing are approximately equal effort, I will unsubscribe; if unsubscribing is even slightly more difficult than marking as spam, I mark as spam with no regrets. Even if you don't force me to login but make me do some monkey trick like type "CANCEL" into a box => spam…
Edit: I missed the transactional part here. Transactional emails are excluded from CAN-SPAM. There's a test to figure out which is which: http://www.the-dma.org/press/PrimaryPurposeFactSheet.pdf It's shitty UX regardless of whether it's a violation of law, IMO. Original: It's a violation of CAN-SPAM law to put unsubscribe behind a login process. Asking for a password violates the requirement that no additional PII ex…
What I don't understand is that many big companies have been forcing you to login to unsubscribe for years, without penalty. Ex: American Airlines. Also FBO.GOV forces you to login, which is mildly amusing because it's the government itself.
I was recently bitten by the Freelancer/vWorker acquisition in this regard! I became "vw9916640" and had–to my knowledge–no password. This did not stop their unsubscribe form from prompting for the aforementioned unknown/nonexistent password. I'm still getting e-mails from them to this day.
Oh, easy, I just mark all emails as spam.
Same here. If I remember well, LinkedIn is one of the worst offenders. I hate how much unnecessary mail they send!
Oh, thought so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What constitutional right is being violated here?
No right is being violated. It is a breach of duty: "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press". Even ignoring the first amendment, there is no enabling clause that grants the general power to regulate communication.
Edit: I missed the transactional part here. Transactional emails are excluded from CAN-SPAM. There's a test to figure out which is which: http://www.the-dma.org/press/PrimaryPurposeFactSheet.pdf It's shitty UX regardless of whether it's a violation of law, IMO. Original: It's a violation of CAN-SPAM law to put unsubscribe behind a login process. Asking for a password violates the requirement that no additional PII ex…
What I don't understand is that many big companies have been forcing you to login to unsubscribe for years, without penalty. Ex: American Airlines. Also FBO.GOV forces you to login, which is mildly amusing because it's the government itself.
This is really annoying. What I find more annoying is response like "We will process your request within 30 business days." (and after that period receive another spam). What could possibly take 30 business days to unsubscribe email? This is evil. I would also like to see some sort of standard - like email header with link, that would unsubscribe you. Outlook/thunderbird/etc could just show button (probably next to "…
The typical reason is that there's a whole host of systems that might be sending e-mail on behalf of the company, so there might be some delay (generally far less than 30 days) for it to flow through whatever integrations are set up, and hey - since there's going to be a delay anyway, why potentially shoot yourself in the foot by giving yourself less than what you're entitled to by law?