Tom Neff wrote:
> That is all fine and well, but from a List-Managers standpoint, the
> governing principle seems to me to be that list software should allow
> these choices to be made on a per-list basis, not interfere with them
> or attempt to mandate a "one size fits all" answer.
I agree. Reconfirmation should be a per-list option. (I know of no MLM
that implements reconfirmation where it is not -- are there any?)
> With specific reference to the double-confirm issue, it is appropriate
> for some lists, some clienteles, and some situations, and
> inappropriate for others. List administrators should be able to
> choose whether they want it or not.
Any time addresses come from an unverified source, no matter the
computer-literacy, social, etc. characteristics of the subscribers,
verification should be used. I don't care if you verify by email,
telephone, or home visit. A verified source in which consent has
already been given -- a club membership roster where the members have
already been notified that they'd be added to a list based on their
membership, a paper signup sheet at a street fair, etc. -- is a
different matter altogether.
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
