On TechRepublic: Why Linux will triumph over Windows
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 36 of 67:
Next »
« Previous
Opt In is certainly
setting you up for more email.

What I'm saying ,what we need is simply a gigantic button within the email program that shows ''do not solicit''.

For this the authorities website hww.FTC.com for example,would notify the sender of the 'non-solicitation order. Here ,legitimate addresses could be verified,...however the 'right to have a 'non-solicit is refined by the authority to enforce this law...

The other way around is just another re -dress of the same transmittal.(ot-in/opt out).

This would be just the same as 'return to sender,only the authority to do so is not questionable.

Since you have the right to have 'non-solicitation..it isn't confused with ''right to send commercial email and how to do so..


There are plenty of computers that can do 100,000 transactions a second now,so it this theme government cost would imply that,.

As well the input of the mechanism with perhaps the hardwire address from an email program (or put it into settings for example).


......Opt in certainly creates more email for you.Beware of sites that do this.You have to go looking through a lot of pinpoints to cover things that need unchecking when 'becoming a subscriber to stuff.

Most of the time,a good courteous site will only involve itself with the thing it is most professional at - (even with the amateurs) ''what you came to find and use.

So Opt in/opt out is dealing with a business relationship...however no-soliciting (my idea)is dealing with a given email for a person having it.

.......
Posted by: ParadigmOdyssey   Posted on: 11/21/03 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Those DMA dollars were well spent, weren't they?  James T. Kirk | 11/21/03
Opt out so what?  toddjones | 11/21/03
So, offer us your 'better' solution.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/21/03
Try this:  James T. Kirk | 11/21/03
No, not too draconian at all.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/21/03
I see nothing wrong with that  master of illusion | 11/21/03
My solution AX Man  the_anti_ax | 11/21/03
Cute nic, I like the flattery.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/23/03
See PDF file for the solution  jstevens85 | 11/26/03
Tauzin? Figures, he's rated the worst anti-consumer goober there  dicktaurus@... | 11/21/03
Then give us your solution.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/21/03
It's simple...  BitTwiddler | 11/21/03
Opt in from/to who then.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/21/03
BINGO!  rpmyers1 | 11/21/03
Explict Opt-In  Alias KEP | 11/21/03
Re: Explict Opt-In  Octol | 11/22/03
Re: Opt in from/to who then.  Riff Fox | 11/23/03
Well, Duh!  BitTwiddler | 11/24/03
Opt-In  Update victim | 11/24/03
Catch 22  DarbyOhara | 11/24/03
Explicit Opt-In  Alias KEP | 11/24/03
Caatch 22  Update victim | 11/24/03
Everyone will be a politician now  Pcgambit_z | 11/21/03
At Least They Are Talking  ParadigmOdyssey | 11/21/03
Re: At Least  cygnet@... | 11/25/03
In other words...  BitTwiddler | 11/21/03
Actually  ParadigmOdyssey | 11/21/03
Well, not quite...  BitTwiddler | 11/21/03
I'm with YOU  ParadigmOdyssey | 11/21/03
Do Not Solicit Is Courtesy Enough  ParadigmOdyssey | 11/21/03
Non Solicit Must Replace Unsubscribe  ParadigmOdyssey | 11/21/03
Huh?  rpmyers1 | 11/21/03
Because 'do not solicit is courtesy enough.  ParadigmOdyssey | 11/21/03
Still confused  rpmyers1 | 11/21/03
Understand  ParadigmOdyssey | 11/21/03
Opt In is certainly  ParadigmOdyssey | 11/21/03
And you were expecting...?  the_doge | 11/26/03
This is NOT the only real solution . . .  jstevens85 | 11/26/03
one thing to make outlook better  lmaxwell | 11/21/03
You can do that  master of illusion | 11/21/03
Re : you can do that  lmaxwell | 11/23/03
Call me skepticle  master of illusion | 11/21/03
sure  lmaxwell | 11/23/03
Huh?  DarbyOhara | 11/24/03
Can I unsubscribe from TV commercials? No? Why not?  Vily Clay | 11/21/03
Commercial free? Where?  Joe Blow_z | 11/22/03
(NT) Agreed. However, a solution is possible (but not under Bush & Co).  Vily Clay | 11/22/03
I'll one up ya  lmaxwell | 11/23/03
All I can say is...  BitTwiddler | 11/24/03
Opt In/Opt out?  DragonBRockin | 11/22/03
Oh Yes, it does  Franklin_z | 11/22/03
...Myer Read this..  ParadigmOdyssey | 11/22/03
Opt-in v. Opt-out  rpmyers1 | 11/22/03
Either And Or ''No Solicit Should Replace Unsubcribe"  ParadigmOdyssey | 11/22/03
Opt-in  rpmyers1 | 11/23/03
We are lookin at the same reflection  ParadigmOdyssey | 11/23/03
maybe we just need to  lmaxwell | 11/23/03
Sorry, but Double Opt-in is Required  jstevens85 | 11/26/03
the big question is what is spam  lmaxwell | 11/22/03
the big answer is, any sales pitch I didn't request  Neil Parks | 11/26/03
we delt with telemarketing  lmaxwell | 11/23/03
Punishment  numbers987654321 | 11/23/03
Good idea, but...  BitTwiddler | 11/24/03
Punishment, a better idea!  eriksen | 11/25/03
No it won't...  BitTwiddler | 11/24/03
Opt Out is a joke  mewickham | 11/26/03
I Have a Solution:  jstevens85 | 11/26/03

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
  • Smart Tech Expert advice on innovations in healthcare and the green technologies that make it happen. Find out more
  • Smart Business Discussion and advice on management issues that revolve around making your world smarter and more useful. More Smart Advice
  • Smart People The best and worst moves in the management and strategy trenches. Learn More