Size isn’t the only metric

Laura Atkins beat me to it, writing about this new MarketingSherpa case study wherein a company decimated their list and actually grew revenue. Go read her taken on it over at the Word to the Wise blog.

Holomaxx suing Microsoft, Others

From TechEye.net: [Email sender Holomaxx is alleging that] “Microsoft knowingly relies on faulty automated filters and equally faulty third party information to identify purported spam emails,” said the suit. “Even after Holomaxx informed Microsoft that it was not sending spam – and then took the initiative to review all of of Microsoft’s technical standards and suggested ‘best practices’, and then changed its mailing practices to address the only potential issue that it found there, Microsoft informed Holomaxx that due to its ‘negative reputation’, Microsoft is not able to override its own automatic spam filters.”

Javascript in emails: Bad idea? (Updated)

I asked on Twitter on October 26th if people thought it was a bad idea to include Javascript in email. The response was universally that it was a "really bad idea." As Unica's Len Shneyder put it, "Terrible idea! [It's a] potential security hole and like a .44 magnum to your toe." He goes on to point out that lots of places will block your mail based on javascript content. I've run into this myself; spam filterers find javascript in email to be a security risk.

Top 4 CAN-SPAM Myths

Here are quick links to all four posts in my past three part series (uh, what?) on CAN-SPAM Myths.
If you're looking for more guidance on CAN-SPAM, consider that CAN-SPAM non-compliance can have a negative impact on your deliverability. Looking for a helpful checklist to confirm CAN-SPAM compliance? Mickey Chandler has that for you.

If you're an average joe user trying to deal with a sender who's not respecting the CAN-SPAM law, here are my tips on what to do about that.

And finally, here's a link to my older CAN-SPAM information roundup.

Rendering & CAN-SPAM Compliance

Chad White, Research Director for Smith-Harmon, published a great post yesterday on why image rendering is important for CAN-SPAM compliance. In it, he highlights an example email, where some sort of rendering issue results in the unsubscribe links and sender information to be white text on a white background. This makes the unsubscribe link totally unreadable, not legally compliant, and will probably cause an increase in spam complaints. YUCK.

I'm sure it wasn't intentional, but the company mentioned in the example email is doing something that bad guys have been doing for a long time: Obfuscating unsubscribe links and sender info. Hiding it in difficult to read colors or using images to try to encode it in a way to bypass certain kinds of spam filters. This is yet another example of, "if you don't want to be perceived as a bad guy, you need to stop doing what bad guys do."

Changes to DNSWL.org

I just posted information on changes to DNSWL.org over on DNSBL Resource. Looks like they're moving to a for-pay model, for at least large volume queries. Can't say that I blame them; if it is costing them money to keep their project alive, at some point it seems inevitable to turn to users to help provide financial support. Do any of you use DNSWL.org? I'm not overly familiar with them.