RE: EHelp's Deceptive Email Practice

Subject: RE: EHelp's Deceptive Email Practice
From: "Stevenson, Rebecca" <Rebecca -dot- Stevenson -at- workscape -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 13:54:10 -0400

OTOH, I think he was being fairly nice to write back and explain how they could rectify their, um, marketing error. Any mail in my box with that kind of cue in it gets deleted unread.


-----Original Message-----
From: jenny_berger -at- fairfieldresidential -dot- com
[mailto:jenny_berger -at- fairfieldresidential -dot- com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: EHelp's Deceptive Email Practice

Since you asked, yes. Instead of charging them with a spammer's crime, you
could have said that they may want to rethink their addressing, since it
resembles a spammer trick and therefore may be filtered out without being
read. Big difference between saying "You're dishonest" and "Your email
looks like it was sent in a way used by dishonest spammers."

But that's just me....

Jenny Berger
Technical Writer
Information Systems
Fairfield Residential

Purchase RoboHelp X3 in April and receive a $100 mail-in
rebate, plus FREE RoboScreenCapture and WebHelp Merge Module.
Order here:

Help celebrate TECHWR-L's 10th Anniversary starting this month!
Check out the contests at
Happy birthday to you, happy birthday to you, happy birthday TECHWR-L....

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Previous by Author: RE: Draft then Tag, or Tag while Drafting?
Next by Author: RE: Who cares about ethics?
Previous by Thread: Re: EHelp's Deceptive Email Practice
Next by Thread: Re: EHelp's Deceptive Email Practice

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads