TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
"Dick Margulis" <margulis -at- fiam -dot- net> wrote in message news:212875 -at- techwr-l -dot- -dot- -dot-
> Short answer: because I like getting a regular paycheck.
I do too. I just wish I'd been able to get one the past year.
>
> Longer answer: Chuck, you are twisting the situation beyond all
> recognition. We have a mailing list of about 4,500 valid names. We get
> roughly five or six unsubscribes after each mailing. The topic I was
> trying to inquire about when I started this thread was how to get past
> mail admins who prevent people from receiving messages they apparently
> WANT to get, not how to best accommodate people who do NOT want to hear
> from us.
You're right, I did take this discussion off on a tangent, and for that I'll
go sit in the corner. I can be quick to hop on a soapbox.
The answer to the original question would be to (somehow) contact the mail
admin's boss and report them for incompetence, overzealousness, or whatever
you believe fits the situation.
>
> We're satisfied that we are not annoying recipients particularly.
> Defaulting the checkbox on as opposed to defaulting it off may strike
> you as morally reprehensible, but it's a compromise I can live with. The
> subscriber wants something for nothing from us--otherwise they would not
> be filling in the registration form--and we want something for nothing
> in return--the opportunity to put a message in front of them half a
> dozen times a year, which we will forego if they ask us to. I think it's
> a fair swap.
>
I wouldn't go so far to say I think it's "morally reprehensible," I just
know that many Web forms put similar options selected by default, forcing
users to both notice and act if they don't want more email. Rarely do I see
opt-in, rather than opt-out, and I just think companies sometimes design
this way specifically to take advantage of either users' inexperience or
their nature.
Wanting something for nothing, or as little as is reasonable, is as natural
and normal as a company wanting to offer something for as much as it can get
for it. It's an ongoing tug o' war.