News and Spam References
you buy anything from"F7jspxy3@undisclosed-recipients.com"?
Seeks Ban on Email Harvesting
State Upholds Constitutionality of Anti-Spam Law
Spam Debates in the House Judiciary Committee
Marketing Biz Spam Report
comments on the use of their trademarked name
Can SPAM it's no UCE!
Internetweek recently ran a survey asking companies if they ever
use Unsolicited Commercial Email to market their business. The results
were astounding assuming the respondents represent real, legitimate
businesses! (How many spammers read Internetweek?)
"In fact, one in 25 of our survey's respondents said their companies'
marketing efforts include the distribution of unsolicited e-mail."
And that is just those who ADMIT spamming! That is a very ugly percentage
and something needs to be done. I am in contact with the Chief Privacy
Officer of one of the largest email marketing companies on the web
asking to be removed from the marketing database by domain.
That seems to be difficult. Why? I want my subscriptions to remain
intact, I want my hosted applications to continue undisturbed, I
want to request information from online companies and I want all
of that while also wanting to stay out of marketing databases.
This seems like a relatively simple thing to do technologically.
Internetweek recently published an article titled "Privacy tools
What makes the process of privacy protection so hugely complex?
WebSite101 recently added a privacy protection tool to our domain
which protects our database from outside access and seems like a
perfect solution to keeping our subscribers and site members information
private on a shared server. We highly recommend it for those who
value the privacy of their web site members.
Take a look at the possibilities for both privacy protection and
website community building on your own domain:
trust of your visitors is far more important than any other feature
you could offer. Immediately following the posting of our new privacy
policy, we experienced an upsurge in new memberships unprecedented
since the inception of our site!
Isn't it clear we all want a solution?
There are raging anti-spamming fanatics getting legitimate companies
shut out of their ISP's by falsely accusing people of distributing
UCE (when their domain is mentioned in an article published by *anyone*)
by running entire newsletter through a service called SpamCop. This
tool is abusive and should be shut down or discredited since it
extracts every domain name mentioned in the newsletter and sends
email to the host of those domains and endangers the owners of those
domains with knee-jerk reactions by their ISP's. It is not uncommon
that victims of these complaints are shut down by their web host
"Guilty until proven innocent" is the attitude of many service providers
since they are under constant pressure from everyone from their
customers to their own providers to do something to prevent further
complaining and end email abuses. This has caused a new backlash
by innocents who have been threatened with the closure of their
online business stemming from those spurious complaints.
If this anti-spam article were published in an anti-spam newsletter
and the newsletter were submitted to SpamCop every domain mentioned
within this text would be turned in to their ISP for spamming. How
effective a tool is one that indiscriminately shoots at everyone?
That is essentially the effect of anti-spam software used badly.
It would shoot to kill all, including the anti-spam sites mentioned
Everybody is hot under the collar about spam but nobody is doing
anything real to stop it legitimately. The government is debating
the issue and threatening to pass stringent laws, but haven't figured
out how to legislate the issue. Reference laws:
Now there are fanatics on both sides of the issue and it is going
nowhere but occassionally to the Realtime Blackhole List. This is
one attempt to address the issue that creates more heat than light.
Marketing companies want the Black Hole List shut down. Why? 24/7
media have recently won a court injunction to have their domain
removed from the Black Hole list.
For info about the Blackhole List at the Mail Abuse Prevention System
or MAPS visit:
Is Spam destined to join religion as one of those things we avoid
discussing in polite company out of fear of brawls breaking out?
I recently attended a marketing conference where the topic of spam
turned a roomful of reasonable folks into sharply divided camps
raging loudly at each other across the conference table.
I've just joined a spam discussion list where many of the same emotions
are raised in what seem to be otherwise reasonable folks. Everyone
seems to agree there is a problem, but each have very distinct ideas
about what should be done to address the problem. Comparisons are
constantly made to core issues of freedom of speech, gun control,
product liability, totalitarianism, and all the while, nobody agrees
on a solution.
Marketers should take the lead and help develop technological solutions
to unwanted email before they are hit with a massive public backlash
and the complete loss of this valuable marketing medium due to public
hysteria and government over-reaction.
I vote that DoubleClick, WhiteHat, 24/7 Media and their cohorts
commit a bit of their thinning profits to helping solve the problem
of spam before they get wiped out by the building tsunami of public
We've recently added a Spam Tutorial to WebSite 101:
You can read it or adopt the following SPAM guideline:
DON'T DO IT! End of lesson.
tutorial | Email
Tutorial | Spam
Tutorial | Cookies
Tutorial | Privacy
Tutorial | Windows
Tutorial | DreamWeaver
Tutorial | Domain
Name Tutorial | Business
Plan Tutorial | Search
Position Tutorial | Online
Advertising Tutorial | Ecommerce