[SC-Help] Re: Getting balcklisted

[Mike Easter]

Iain wrote:
> Well the 'item being promoted' is electronic reminders from a
> Government department that tax payments are due,

I would still make that confirmatory message 'plain Jane' - purely for
the purpose of confirming the address entry and what the signup was
'about' - people seem to be notorious for forgetting when they signup
for something.

That's why I think it is very useful to have the confirmation include
the IP and the timestamp - it is additional information to help to
remind the person when it was they signed up and for the ones who are
familiar with their own IP that it was 'them' and when it was - and that
same infomation when provided to the bogus signup is so helpful that it
would tend to dissuade someone from reporting it as spam.

Whereas the 'welcome to our wonderful service' type of message which
looks 'promotional' even tho' we're talking about something as
disappealing as a tax being due might possibly be confused with
something;  or confused with something 'bogus'.  Remember that people
get all kinds of crazy unsolicited items.  You don't want your
confirmation confused with something crazy and unsolicited.  Especially
if it were a bogus subscribe.

> No there is no list in pre-existance, this all about how to properly
> allow users to ask to receive tax information

Good.  The way to make a really healthy list is to have in mind the
requirements for a good list before the first address goes onto it.

> If someone asks to be reminded that their tax is due
> and due to a sloppy list they don't get the reminder, then we don't
> want to get into a legal situation where the person claims their
> non-compliance is because they never got the reminder.

IMO [IANAL] there is no liability because someone didn't get their email
reminder somehow.

> but it's the nearest equivalent to a letter in the mailbox so we have
> to use it.

It is no where near the equivalent of snailmail.  I've seen major
lawsuits initiated with notification by snail mail, unregistered,
uncertified, sent in 'duplicate' - that is two different snails mailed -
and an employee of the legal firm simply signed a sworn statement that
she put the items into the USPS mail system.

smtp has many different things that can go wrong with it;  and while
digital transmissions which are signed and signed as received can be as
powerful as anything if the court will recognize the digital signature
functionality, saying smtp is 'equivalent' doesn't really work.  Under
the right structure, a digital transmission verified is much better/
more secure/ than a courier delivered with handwritten signed receipt of
something which could have been spoofed.

> So excuse me, I need to be very thorough...

You might consider the usage of receipts if you really think it would be
of value.  Personally I have my receipt gizmo turned off, or rather I
have it turned on to tell me if something wanted a receipt, but then I
refuse to give one.

> avoid a major Government department becoming a spammer
> either due to inadvertent or malicous supply of Email addresses

I completely concur with that plan.  Our major gov't departments do more
than their share of screwing up.  We see DoD .mil IP addresses being
abused for spam because they are insecure.

> other means yet ensure the 'best' means of ensuring reliable delivery
> of important information over an unreliable carrier :-)

Yes, I agree that normal email has unreliability features.  They can be
overcome or mitigated if so structured on both ends.

-- 
Mike Easter
kibitzer, not SC admin