« Barack Obama Says Lives of US Troops killed in Iraq were Wasted | Main | Harry Potter and the Former Vice President »

Truthout: out of truth, out of clues

Some of you may recall truthout.com's moment of glory of last year. They had highly confidential sources who revealed that Karl Rove had been secretly indicted in the Valerie Plame leak scandal, and was due to be "frog-marched" out of the White House any day now.

Of course, "any day" turned out to be the 12th of Never, and they ended up with egg all over their faces.

That's not really fair. To eggs.

Truthout ended up stepping a big, wet, stinking, sticky dog turd in both their bare feet.

But somehow, they managed to survive, and even maintain their presence. I don't think it really hurt their credibility, though. Those who gave them credibility didn't let this hurt their faith in the least, and those who actually had a clue didn't give them any credibility in the first place.

Well, it appears that their cluelessness doesn't just revolve around politics.

They also run a daily newsletter. Subscribers get the latest breathless "news" and "analysis" straight from the horse's mouth asses that run truthout.org.

Well, a few weeks ago, some kind soul decided that I was just the kind of person who needed to have their fresh, steaming turds dumped in my e-mail box every day, so they signed me up.

(I'm no stranger to list-bombing attacks, and have learned a few things.)

Naturally, truthout did what any responsible e-mail list maintainer would do: they sent me a confirmation e-mail, making sure I really wanted their news.

Whoops, my bad. That's what people with CLUES do. These morons just started crapping in my inbox on a daily basis.

So I wrote to them a fairly polite note informing of their broken subscription model. This was their response:

We have received your request for removal from the Truthout mailing list.

Every Truthout newsletter you receive by email contains a convenient remove link. Simply open that newsletter email, scroll to the bottom and hit the link. This will open a personalized email. Hit "Send" and you will be automatically removed from the list.

Thank you,
Truthout List Administration

Translation: we don't give a rat's ass that our system is broken. If you don't want us to continue crapping in your box, click on OUR link in OUR spam and do it OUR way, or suck it up. Sending us direct complaints won't achieve squat.

My response:

Dear idiot:

I did not ask to be removed, I asked how I was subscribed in the first place. But considering how clueless you were in the first place in not bothering to verify signups, I should not be surprised that you're equally idiotic about dealing with victims of list-bombing.

J.

Their answer to that? Not a damned thing, but more spamming.

I've always believed that when life hand you lemons, you make lemonade. So here's the bright side of things:

Truthout, being flagrantly stupid, hysterically wrong, and just plain annoying, is also quite willing to be a part of list-bombing attacks. So I think I've found the win-win scenario here:

Anyone who feels like annoying someone else, sign them up for the truthout.org daily spam newsletter here. You win, because you annoy someone safely (truthout doesn't log IPs, apparently). Truthout wins, because they have another "subscriber." And the victim wins, because who couldn't love Truthout's little breathless exclamations? "True believers" will rejoice in the affirmation, while those with even the slimmest grasp of reality will get a laugh at their expense.

And if they don't like it, they can just click on the link and unsubscribe. After all, it's THEIR damned fault for letting themselves be signed up in the first place, so they should have no problem jumping through Truthout's hoops and begging "pretty please, with sugar on top, stop bothering me."

Of course, this requires them to disobey every sensible ISP's advice to "never ask to be taken off any list that you didn't ask to be put on in the first place," but if you can't trust clueless, shameless, fraud-peddling moron leftists to do the right thing, then who can you trust?


Comments (55)

stepping a big, we... (Below threshold)
Heralder:
stepping a big, wet, stinking, sticky dog turd in both their bare feet.

I've actually done that. What made it worse was that I was running and I was on grass...so I essentially ended up making a poop slip-n-slide down the lawn.

annnyyway...perhaps there's some way to sign them up for other list bombings?

Too funny. A blog called t... (Below threshold)
Jo:

Too funny. A blog called truthout that doesn't give out the truth. I doubt even the libs see the irony.

The libs wouldn't know the truth about anything if it licked them in the face. One day they're going to all feel like fools. Hopefully the sooner the better, so they can lead productive, normal lives, contributing something good to America. Since all they do now is contribute hate. Oh yeah, and lies.

Driscilla the ugly SS & Jay... (Below threshold)
aRepukelican:

Driscilla the ugly SS & Jay

You may dislike the editorials from TO, but they provide links to many legitimate press stories from around the world.

Apart from any subscribe/unsubscribe issues that you may have, Jay, I always manage to successfully unsubscribe when I travel and then resubscribe when I return.

As far as the content from TO and apart from the editorials, it is clear from the know-it-all commenters here at Wizbang that many of the commenters could readily benefit from reading the outside TO source links, since there are many here who are otherwise living in a parallel universe.

In regard to Driscilla's obsequious yipping at your feet, Jay, or begging to be your monkey w/ a cup...
Bwahahahahahah

puke, to continue to defend... (Below threshold)
Jo:

puke, to continue to defend things that have already been exposed is just sad.

But you keep holding on for dear life to things you think you know and can trust. But don't blame us if we laugh at you. Some things are just funny.

Oh, so when truthout isn't ... (Below threshold)
Jo:

Oh, so when truthout isn't suffering from "lies out" they give links to legitimate news sources? Like who? WaPo? NYT? You gotta be kidding me.

I think we should have a new name contest for TO.

Sometimesthetruth.com? Occasionallythetruth.com

What do you think?

bwhahahahahahahahahahahaha......

"pukeface" -got Jo's foot o... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

"pukeface" -got Jo's foot out of your rear yet. LOL

aRepuklican apparently fail... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

aRepuklican apparently failed to read my post, which actually said nothing about the factual dependability of Truthout.

Jo - I just wanted to point... (Below threshold)

Jo - I just wanted to point out that when you wrote: "One day they're going to all feel like fools" you were mistaken.

In order for them to ever realize they were wrong they would have to remember the past and their position on the issue at the time. They're not real good at that. Also, remembering the past smells suspiciously like 'history' and any liberal who reads and understands history is no longer a liberal.

So no - they are never going to feel like fools. They just are.

The Dems really like to cha... (Below threshold)
Zsa Zsa:

The Dems really like to change history. Look at Carter and Sandy Burgular and the Clinton's and well I am sure there are more...!

jhow66It's time yo... (Below threshold)
aRepukelican:

jhow66

It's time you stopped wearing ypur used Depends for a hat when you go out.

I prefer the expression, "W... (Below threshold)

I prefer the expression, "When life gives you lemons, kick it in the balls."

More like "When Life gives ... (Below threshold)
John:

More like "When Life gives you lemons, hello, my name is Ed, and I like to collect baseball cards."

Makes no sense?

Neither does arguing with automation.

They gave you two mouse clicks to get off the mailing list. You expect somebody to do the research to find out that your email address was added to their mailing list? I think we already know that...

It's like arguing with ScrapIron or Jhowl... Might as well go argue with the ATM machine, or try to reason with my fax machine.

It's not a vast liberal conspiracy. Just click the buttons...

These two statements made m... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

These two statements made my day:

"When life gives you lemons, kick it in the balls."

"When Life gives you lemons, hello, my name is Ed, and I like to collect baseball cards."

Here's a better idea. File ... (Below threshold)
anonymousecoward:

Here's a better idea. File a complaint under the CAN-SPAM act:

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/canspam.htm

Use this handy link to file your complaint ONLINE!:

https://rn.ftc.gov/pls/dod/wsolcq$.startup?Z_ORG_CODE=PU01


$11,000 fine per violation - and I can guarantee you they are violating at least one provision of this act.

Heralder,One more ... (Below threshold)
John:

Heralder,

One more for you.

"When life gives you lemons, go find somebody to whom life gave vodka"

Oh, please, Jay. You were j... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Oh, please, Jay. You were just fishing for this. You know that you could have clicked on the link to unsubscribe, but you wanted to send a personal message to a lowly mailing list administrator to see what they would do. And you got an automated response in return. Well boo-f'ing-hoo.

Translation: we don't give a rat's ass that our system is broken. If you don't want us to continue crapping in your box, click on OUR link in OUR spam and do it OUR way, or suck it up. Sending us direct complaints won't achieve squat.

Here's a more accurate translation:

"Like almost all list listserv software in use across the Internet, ours is fully automated, and provides clear instructions for unsubscribing. However, like almost all mailing lists across the Internet, we have our share of idiots who either aren't sophisticated enough Internet users to understand how mailing lists work, they don't bother reading the clear instructions contained in each email, or they simply have rage in them that they want to vent on somebody. For these people, for whom providing individual attention would be a full-time job on its own, we politely remind them of the automated options in use not only by our software, but by mailing lists all across the Internet."

In otherwords, Brian, Its O... (Below threshold)
epador:

In otherwords, Brian, Its OK if they crap in your mailbox and its your job, not theirs, to scrape the crap out.

How about: Our automated system is designed to minimize our work and maximize subscriptions. We don't feel its necessary to follow legal requirements regarding verification, notification or customer service. So just kiss our ass, OK?

Neither does arguing wit... (Below threshold)
astigafa:

Neither does arguing with automation.

I don't think he gets it.

In otherwords, Brian, Its OK if they crap in your mailbox and its your job, not theirs, to scrape the crap out.

I know he doesn't.

Hey, Brian, how about shari... (Below threshold)
ConservaGeek:

Hey, Brian, how about sharing YOUR email so we can subscribe you to this list, and then you can demonstrate just how easy it is to get off.

In otherwords, Brian, It... (Below threshold)
Brian:

In otherwords, Brian, Its OK if they crap in your mailbox and its your job, not theirs, to scrape the crap out.

It's an opt-in list. They don't crap in anyone's mailbox. I get as much spam as you do. At least in this case it's a legitimate organization that provides a legitimate unsubscribe option. Sorry that someone played a prank on Jay, but he chose not to use the option provided for him.

Our automated system is designed to minimize our work and maximize subscriptions.

Yes, exactly my point.

We don't feel its necessary to follow legal requirements regarding verification, notification or customer service.

They provide a way to opt out, and they provide instructions for doing so in every email. Thanks to the watered-down CAN-SPAM act, that's all they're legally required to do.

Hey, Brian, how about s... (Below threshold)
Jo:

Hey, Brian, how about sharing YOUR email so we can subscribe you to this list, and then you can demonstrate just how easy it is to get off.

I'd rather Brian NOT show us how easy it is for him to "get off."

yuk yuk

Hey, Brian, how about sh... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Hey, Brian, how about sharing YOUR email so we can subscribe you to this list, and then you can demonstrate just how easy it is to get off.

I've gotten off many an email list by clicking the obvious provided link. If you find that too difficult yourself, list your address, and I'll write up some "Unsubscribing for Dummies" instructions for you.

I see I'm going to have to ... (Below threshold)

I see I'm going to have to give a bit more detail in hopes of getting Brian, astigafa, and the rest of the knee-jerk contrarians to grasp it.

I NEVER SUBSCRIBED. These assholes, like so many other idiots, pat themselves on the back for following the precise letter of the shitty "CAN-SPAM" act and don't even for an instant consider acting responsibly and decently and honorably. They do NOT confirm subscriptions before starting them, making them extremely vulnerable for use in "list-bombing" attacks.

This is not solely the domain of the left. I've been similarly signed up for mailing lists on the right, including members of Congress, without asking my permission first. And those I have been as equally scorching in private -- and, occasionally, in public. The reason that "truthout.org" got such a public scorching was two-fold: first, the arrogant tone of their response: "do it our way, or live with it" in response for pointing out THEIR flawed system; second, their own history of horribly botching the Karl Rove story always irritated me. Maybe I was a bit more forceful than I would have been with another organization, but... nah. Looking back at that dustup with the Ayn Rand Institute, I'd have to say that it was fairly balanced.

As someone with strong libertarian leanings, I have to say that I believe most strongly in the fundamental right to be left alone. To be told by anyone -- especially asshats of the magnitude that truthout.org are -- that "here's our daily newsletter you never asked for. You can expect to get one every day without fail unless you follow our precise rules -- and get it right, or a part of your inbox will be OURS every day."

Oh, and Brian, it is absolutely NOT an opt-in list. I know that for a fact, because I never opted in to it. It is clearly an opt-OUT list, meaning that I'm on it through no action of my own and only by taking an affirmative action can I get off it. To use my favorite analogy, may I sign you up for the Punch In The Nose Club? Once a day, we will have someone come up to you and punch you in the nose. If you would like to opt out of this club, just send us an e-mail saying so. Within 10 days, we'll be glad to take you off the list.

Then again, there is another temptation. I could sign up ALL the contact addresses listed on truthout.org's contact page, along with the supplied e-mails of those who have said above that they have no problem with what truthout.org is doing, for their copies of truthout.org's daily newsletter. That would be Brian, astigafa, and Pukeboy.

Gee, I wonder if any or all of them use their real e-mail addresses when they comment here at Wizbang...

J.

Jay, that's like Mariah Car... (Below threshold)
John:

Jay, that's like Mariah Carrey drama there, sir.

Look, if they sent you a confirmation, you'd still have to click something if only to delete it.

If you have a problem with their point of view, just say it rather than write a "scorching" dissertation.

Pretty much every legitimate marketer that mails you periodicaly follows the same model you see here.

Then you call them assholes... And start off your customer service letter with "Dear idiot"... You're lucky you got a form letter back. Who's looking like the bigger idiot?

Let's face it... eiether somebody pranked you, or some other business that you have a relationship has in their fine print that they can share customer information with their partners for marketing purposes.

Regardless, it's hardly the customer service rep's fault. Just press the button. Geeze.

And no, you don't have a right to be left alone. Corporations are persons, which means they have rights, including free speach. Your consumer protections are watered down, and you no longer have the right to your privacy for you and your personal effects.

But it would be nice if you and I had those things.

I see I'm going to have ... (Below threshold)
astigafa:

I see I'm going to have to give a bit more detail in hopes of getting Brian, astigafa, and the rest of the knee-jerk contrarians to grasp it.

You don't even grasp "contrarian." Contrarians are people who do the opposite of what most other people are doing; that ain't me. I'm a moderate.

You, on the other hand, represent an extreme minority, in every sense of the word. You are on the fringe; you are a curmudgeonly contrarian oddball neoconservative zany.

You even think the Iraq war is a good idea. Clearly, you're out there, sugar booger.

Hey, John, there's another ... (Below threshold)
ConservaGeek:

Hey, John, there's another issue at work here.

Many shady lists use their "unsubscribe" system as a way of confirming that the email address works, and is being read by someone with the intelligence to click a link.

In other words, sure, they unsubscribe you from THEIR list (maybe, but not always)... then sell your email address to 3 dozen other shady lists, thus producing even more spam.

The Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email (CAUCE) has a great site on spam and why solutions like "just remove yourself" DO NOT WORK. I recommend viewing http://www.cauce.org/problem/nonsolutions/optout and the rest of their website for more info.

Many shady lists use the... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Many shady lists use their "unsubscribe" system as a way of confirming that the email address works, and is being read by someone with the intelligence to click a link.
...
The Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email (CAUCE) has a great site on spam and why solutions like "just remove yourself" DO NOT WORK.

That is true for general spam, and I would never suggest someone click the "remove me" link for normal unsolicited spam. But it's rare for that to be the case for a legitimate organization (regardless of political leanings).

Brian, they've already esta... (Below threshold)

Brian, they've already established their incompetence/bad intent by allowing unconfirmed third-party subscriptions. Why should I trust that their unsubscribe feature (which directly decreases their "subscriber" base) is run any better?

J.

ConservaGeek, You ... (Below threshold)
John:

ConservaGeek,

You are correct, and that's a good point about the shady spammers. I follow this policy, myself.

Brian summed it up very well, which is to say the "remove" option works as designed for the legitimate advertisers. I think this site is probabably on the up and up, and "remove" does just that.

Oh, and Brian, it is abs... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Oh, and Brian, it is absolutely NOT an opt-in list. I know that for a fact, because I never opted in to it. It is clearly an opt-OUT list, meaning that I'm on it through no action of my own and only by taking an affirmative action can I get off it.

It's an opt-in list. In an apparently tragic turn of events, a third-party opted you in. You have my sympathies, and my hopes for a full recovery. Opt-out is when the organization proactively adds you to the list. Blame your prankster, not the organization. But don't go all Luddite on us about it.

These assholes, like so many other idiots, pat themselves on the back for following the precise letter of the shitty "CAN-SPAM" act and don't even for an instant consider acting responsibly and decently and honorably.

This has nothing to do with CAN-SPAM. (I only brought that up earlier because the other poster was claiming what they were doing is illegal.)

The reason that "truthout.org" got such a public scorching was two-fold: first, the arrogant tone of their response: "do it our way, or live with it" in response for pointing out THEIR flawed system;

Their tone was more like "do it the same way everyone else does it, or stop using email, you unsophisticated noob."

And this is not THEIR flawed system. They are following the same mailing list model as everybody else. Some listservers do have an option for sending a confirmation email. Some don't. So they don't use the kind of software you'd like them to use. Again, boo-f'ing-hoo. They didn't write the software. Mailing lists are maintained by commercial packages. They use the features that are available.

They do NOT confirm subscriptions before starting them, making them extremely vulnerable for use in "list-bombing" attacks.

Hmmm, right here under this box on Wizbang is a little area that says: "Subscribe To This Thread Without Commenting (Enter E-Mail Address)". Tell us, Jay... if I enter someone's email address in there, will Wizbang request email confirmation? Will YOUR system be "flawed"? Is it smart enough to know when the rightful owner is opting in? Does it act responsibly and decently and honorably? Hmmm?

Uh, John... the fact that t... (Below threshold)
ConservaGeek:

Uh, John... the fact that they subscribed Jay Tea without his consent doesn't exactly indicate a site "on the up and up," now does it?

If they will subscribe someone without consent, what makes you think that they will ever unsubscribe someone?

Basically, they've proven their bad faith in regards to their mailing list already. There is absolutely no evidence that they'll do the right thing at any time in the future.

Well, well, apparently Wizb... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Well, well, apparently Wizbang does require subscription confirmation. Well done. You can thank Movable Type for providing that feature. Not all blog software does, just as not all listserve software does.

Well, well, apparently W... (Below threshold)
ConservaGeek:

Well, well, apparently Wizbang does require subscription confirmation.

How's that egg on your face feel, Brian?

the fact that they subs... (Below threshold)
Brian:

the fact that they subscribed Jay Tea without his consent doesn't exactly indicate a site "on the up and up," now does it?
If they will subscribe someone without consent, what makes you think that they will ever unsubscribe someone?

C'mon, you people. Don't be such crybabies about this. Right now I can subscribe you to Newsweek and tell them to "Bill me later". You won't get a confirmation, but you may get a copy of Newsweek. Does that indicate that it's a site not "on the up and up?"

How's that egg on your f... (Below threshold)
Brian:

How's that egg on your face feel, Brian?

It's egg on my face to heed reality and acknowledge the truth? It feels quite mature and rational, thank you.

ConservaGeek writes:<... (Below threshold)
John:

ConservaGeek writes:

Uh, John... the fact that they subscribed Jay Tea without his consent doesn't exactly indicate a site "on the up and up," now does it?

If you read the thread above I said that he was eiether pranked, or this is a third party opt-in.

Lots of companies do marketing exchanges, including Microsoft and probably your bank. Not-for-profits do this as well. If you start looking at EULAs and fine print, you'll often see stuff like "We respect your privacy, however we may share data with our partners for marketing purposes... or some such...

So how do I tell a legitimate business? Well, perhaps it's been refered to me by somebody I trust, or I've heard about them elsewhere, or they have a site I can vist, an address, a staff. Bricks and mortar. A legitimate looking address from the mailing bot. Crediable content.

Does that allways work? Nah, but it sorts some of the spam.

I have to go now. I'm trying to do a favor for the ex-president of Nigeria's attorney. He needs me to get some of my personal banking information to him so I can help him with this 18 million dollar bank transfer.

If you read the thread a... (Below threshold)
ConservaGeek:

If you read the thread above I said that he was eiether pranked, or this is a third party opt-in.

If you read Jay Tea's original post, he stated quite clearly that he was pranked.

I quote:
Well, a few weeks ago, some kind soul decided that I was just the kind of person who needed to have their fresh, steaming turds dumped in my e-mail box every day, so they signed me up.

FelchFacenot neces... (Below threshold)
aRepukelican:

FelchFace

not necessary as I already subscribe

ConservaGeek,Yeah,... (Below threshold)
John:

ConservaGeek,

Yeah, that's Jay's assumption. I tend to agree. You agree. Great, let's all join hands and sing.


Goddammit! I can't get this browser window to close without hitting the "X" button. I just want it closed. I didn't ask for a seperate window to spawn when I clicked out from my last site! Arghhhh!!! I'm going jihad on Microsoft Customer Support! They'll hear me roar, by god! Feel the wrath!

Oh, please....

Jay,Puke's comment... (Below threshold)
ConservaGeek:

Jay,

Puke's comment gave me a wonderful idea.

Instead of subscribing him, Brian, astigafa, and probably Mr. John to some good conservative lists. Perhaps even start one yourself and send them lots of links to Wizbang articles.

When they complain and moan about you sending them stuff, tell them to click on the unsubscribe link. And, do unsubscribe them. Then resubscribe them.

We'll see how they react. Should be a hoot! And we know that Brian had to use a real address cause he got the confirmation email.

Feel free to drop me a line with the results.

Well, now you're just being... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Well, now you're just being as childish as the person who signed up Jay in the first place. And I use the "unsubscribe" link all the time, in legitimate-looking emails. Works like a charm.

And we know that Brian had to use a real address cause he got the confirmation email.

LOL! You're not very sophisticated about the "Internets", are you?

LOL! You're not very sop... (Below threshold)
ConservaGeek:

LOL! You're not very sophisticated about the "Internets", are you?
Certified computer and network technician, as well as ham radio operator.

Let's see your technical qualifications.

"pukeface" (depends shareho... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

"pukeface" (depends shareholder) I see you have a "ditto" key like old "pucker puss". LOL Please come up with a better line. That one is getting old. Glad to see that I still get under your skin though. Made my day.

Jay's comment accurately de... (Below threshold)

Jay's comment accurately described on of the hazzards of blogging life - namely that every organization on earth figures that a list of blogger e-mail addresses is worthy of subscribing to their mailing list. We combat this this kind of infospam with our "tips" e-mail address that requires senders identify themselves as real humans before delivering the mail. Of course that doesn't protect our individual mailboxes, but it does help in the overall scheme of things...

I don't think you got my po... (Below threshold)
anonymouscoward:

I don't think you got my point:

By filing a CAN-SPAM act complain, you tie up their legal department and increase their costs as they defend themselves against the complaint.

Doesn't matter if they are in compliance; you can still file your complaint and it will have to be investigated.

They are guilty until they prove they are in compliance with the act. Once enough people file enough complaints, they'll change their system and eliminate their spam.

And, on the chance that the... (Below threshold)
anonymouscoward:

And, on the chance that they may NOT be TOTALLY in compliance with the CAN-SPAM Act, they get nailed $11,000 per violation.

Doesn't matter if they a... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Doesn't matter if they are in compliance; you can still file your complaint and it will have to be investigated.... By filing a CAN-SPAM act complain, you tie up their legal department and increase their costs as they defend themselves against the complaint.

Umm, first of all, if you'd be tying up anything at all, it would be the FTC's investigative unit. Not the organization. Secondly, you think the FTC has nothing better to do than investigate Jay's "someone punk'd me!" complaint?

They are guilty until they prove they are in compliance with the act.

Yes, because that's how it works in America. Guilty until proven compliant.

Certified computer and n... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Certified computer and network technician, as well as ham radio operator.

Obviously an uninformed one, if you think that one must use one's real email address to test an emailer.

Hey, lookie here! Look who ... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Hey, lookie here! Look who else will sign you up for their mailing list without requesting confirmation!

http://www.foxnews.com/alerts/subscribe.html

https://www.gop.com/Secure/SignUp.aspx?Email=

Jay, please tell them how "clueless" they are for using their "flawed" software!

Brian, I don't go looking f... (Below threshold)

Brian, I don't go looking for them. They came looking for me. If you wanna start a jihad against them, do so in your own name, please.

But if you're considering signing me up for them, keep in mind that the responsible ones log the IPs of the subscription request -- and list-bombing is grounds for losing your internet connection, by most ISP's Terms Of Service and Acceptable Use Policy.

Heaven forfend one of those sites should happen to log the requester's IP, and it should be compared to IPs of Wizbang commenters...

J.

No, I wouldn't do that, Jay... (Below threshold)
Brian:

No, I wouldn't do that, Jay. I just wonder if you would have reacted as strongly if you were "list-bombed" by one of those sites. Although you probably already subscribe! Heh.

But your posturing is empty, anyway. I doubt the IT admin at foxnews.com has no better things to do than go sifting through their server logs to find a single IP address for an average Joe who wants to track down who signed him up.

Brian, I have been subscrib... (Below threshold)

Brian, I have been subscribed to some of those types of sites. It's only after my first polite note is ignored/rebuffed that I get bent out of shape. In Truthout's case, I filled out the "contact us" message box and told them that their system was busted, and got back the form "click to unsubscribe" letter. Then -- and ONLY then -- did I get unpleasant.

J.

Right, because their system... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Right, because their system was not "busted". Once you're subscribed, you click the "unsubscribe me" link available in every email message. That's the way all mailing lists work. That's the way Wizbang's works. While you personally may have the time to manually respond to individual requests, most organizations with thousands-long email lists do not. Including, by the way, Fox News and GOP.com.

Brian, let me explain it to... (Below threshold)

Brian, let me explain it to you very simply:

I was a spam-fighter for a while, before I burned out. According to generally accepted principles of e-mail protocol, ANY system that is set up in such a way that someone who does NOT wish to receive e-mail has to take an affirmative action to be left alone is broken. The accepted system is like this:

1) Subscription request is received.
2) Confirmation e-mail is sent to entered address.
3) Confirmation e-mail request requires the recipient to respond or click on a link to activate subscription.
4) Once confirmation is received, e-mails commence.

If the confirmation e-mail goes unanswered, the subscription is dropped.

This is what is known as "confirmed opt-in," and is the "gold standard" for e-mail services.

As I said, that they blew off my first notice of disinterest was what heightened my irritation. That they are such asshats was simply icing on the cake.

J.

Yes, I understand. And as <... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Yes, I understand. And as I explained, many systems operate like that, and that's a good thing. And many don't (such as Fox News and GOP.com). But the ones that don't still provide a link for removing yourself. So you can either click a mouse and be done with it, or you can grumble and gripe, and misrepresent poor IT choices and a non-responsive customer service department as a political characterization of the left.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

tips@wizbangblog.com

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy