When Did Spam Get Redefined?
I just got an email from someone complaining about an email they got from me. Well, actually, they got it from this site on my behalf. At their request.
It was an updated comment from a post. The only way you get one of those emails from this site is if you post a comment AND check the box that says to send you an email when someone else comments.
Now, it happens that people forget that they clicked that check box (unchecked by default, by the way) or clicked it accidentally. And, people don't always see the link at the bottom, indicating how to unsubscribe.
As a result, I have no problem with people asking how to unsubscribe. However, this morning's email highlighted something I've noticed over the last few years: the definition of spam has shifted.
This person's email complained, in decidedly unfriendly terms, about their intent to report the "spam" if I didn't unsubscribe them immediately.
Originally, "spam" referred to:
- Unsolicited. The recipient didn't ask for the email.
- Commercial. Though not part of every definition, the commercial nature of the message was a large part of what made a message spam.
However, I've gotten this "stop sending me spam" complaint about individual, personal emails, about mailing lists (with double opt-in subscriptions), and even product receipts.
Over the last few years, though, I've watched as nearly every non-techie out there has apparently decided that "spam" actually means:
Any email I wasn't expecting and am not happy about receiving.
How exactly did that happen?
August 11th, 2007 at 11:30 am
Many spam complaints are fairly automatic. Not sure about your complainant, from your description it sounds like they composed an email to you, but I think a large number of email users click on the spam button rather than simply deleting mail.
I am checking the "Notify me of followup comments via e-mail" box and won't forget
August 11th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
Those automated spam reponses are a whole other issue. Especially since they respond to forged "From" headers, resulting in, literally, up to 25,000 bounces from a single source in a single day for me before.
However, I think you hit on something. When mail tools (Thunderbird, GMail, etc) labeled the functionality of "don't show me emails like this one" as "Mark this as Spam", they pretty much pushed this shift into people's heads.
Unfortunately, many ISP's and even some governments have made it so you can end up with your account killed because you get *accused* of sending spam.
With the old definition, you would be in the clear on most of those accusations, but the new definition is entirely subjective. Subjective determination is scary when falling into the category has serious repercussions.
August 11th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
I agree completely that this is ridiculous. In one of my online business, I have a double-opt-in email list with over 100,000 subscribers. A couple years ago I started getting complaints, primarily from AOL, that I was spamming their users. These were people that indicated they wanted to receive the newsletter, then clicked on a link in an email to confirm that they really wanted to receive it. When they got tired of receiving, instead of following the opt-out procedures, they would simply flag it as spam, which AOL apparently takes pretty seriously. Now I no longer send anything to those 100,000+ subscribers. The few ruined it for the many. I think you may have hit on something in that the tools made it too easy.
August 12th, 2007 at 8:41 am
Most ISPs put a lot of importance on complaint rates, but I don't think the reputation score works both ways. In other words, does any ISP weigh the reliability of the complainant? Don't think so.
August 12th, 2007 at 9:40 am
It's making Gmail less useful, too. I'm just going through my Spam folder, and having to pick out all sorts of real mails that it's flagged as spam - probably because of the bad training it's getting from users.
I'm even trying to make a point of un-spamming the newsletters I really *don't* want (but have been too lazy to unsubscribe from), just to try to add some balance so they don't get all their newsletters flagged as spam.
I subscribe to my own RSS feed by mail, done by FeedBurner. It's double opt-in, and it's owned by Google, but even that isn't enough to stop it getting chucked straight in the spam folder.
Arg.
August 16th, 2007 at 10:24 am
I have to say that I can understand the original comment, since although I was following a thread a while ago, stupid comments started to appear so I clicked on the unsubscribe link, only to find a blank page.
The unsubscribe page is not there to enable you to unsubscribe, so wouldn't that constitute spam? very close to it, don't you think.
Please check this out and see if I'm wrong. Try to unsubscribe yourself from a thread and you'll find out!
August 16th, 2007 at 11:30 am
Yeah. After writing this up, the person mentioned that problem and I'm looking into when and why exactly it broke.
Unfortunately, complaints like this tend not to include that little bit of information and are pretty much:
"Quit sending me messages or I'll report them as junk"
That kind of message doesn't tell me that you tried to unsubscribe and had problems.
Without that reported attempt at making a gesture to change your intent, the standing intent is the previous request for updates.
The unfortunate situation is that people who send out email like those updates are left being supposed to read people's minds that they quit wanting the emails they asked for originally.
August 20th, 2007 at 7:44 am
Let's hope you can get the problem sorted out soon and avoid more of these complaints!
August 21st, 2007 at 6:38 am
I believe I've fixed the problem.
August 23rd, 2007 at 2:23 am
You have sir, Thank you very much.