Monday, March 21, 2005
How the spam blockers became the real problem
I think we've officially reached the point where spam blockers are now a bigger problem than spam. It used to be that if you sent someone an email and it didn't bounce back to you, then you knew with near certainty that they received it. But these days? Overachieving spam filters are now eating so much legitimate email that not only can you not be sure that someone recieved something you sent them, but people now have a built-in excuse of "sorry, it must have gotten eaten by a spam filter" and you have no way of knowing whether they're telling the truth. We've been reduced to the point where any time you send someone a vital, time-sensitive email, you have to include the words "please write back and let me know that you received it," which is just a lousy way to have to do business.
Far worse are the folks who think they have the right to force me to jump through hoops, click on links, and type in stuff, just to be "allowed" to send them an email. I can't believe anyone thinks they're so important that they get to waste that much of my time on something so unneccesary. Needless to say, such folks won't ever be receiving email from me.
Yeah, spam's a problem. But you know what? Deal with it. If you're going to use a spam filter, take the time to go through and train it properly, or to set the filtering levels appropriately. Setting your spam filter to "hyper-active" and then never keeping an eye on it is a lousy way to make friends.
Your inability to receive from me is officially not my problem.
I think we've officially reached the point where spam blockers are now a bigger problem than spam. It used to be that if you sent someone an email and it didn't bounce back to you, then you knew with near certainty that they received it. But these days? Overachieving spam filters are now eating so much legitimate email that not only can you not be sure that someone recieved something you sent them, but people now have a built-in excuse of "sorry, it must have gotten eaten by a spam filter" and you have no way of knowing whether they're telling the truth. We've been reduced to the point where any time you send someone a vital, time-sensitive email, you have to include the words "please write back and let me know that you received it," which is just a lousy way to have to do business.
Far worse are the folks who think they have the right to force me to jump through hoops, click on links, and type in stuff, just to be "allowed" to send them an email. I can't believe anyone thinks they're so important that they get to waste that much of my time on something so unneccesary. Needless to say, such folks won't ever be receiving email from me.
Yeah, spam's a problem. But you know what? Deal with it. If you're going to use a spam filter, take the time to go through and train it properly, or to set the filtering levels appropriately. Setting your spam filter to "hyper-active" and then never keeping an eye on it is a lousy way to make friends.
Your inability to receive from me is officially not my problem.
Comments:
Post a Comment
