Hacker News Reader

Comment by eikenberry | Hacker News Reader

Did those people who hit the spam button subscribe to the newsletter or were they subscribed without their consent? Seems odd that people would go to the trouble of subscribing to a newsletter only to send it to the spam folder. On the other hand if they didn't (go through the trouble of subscribing), then it is spam.

View on HN

Generally yeah some people will just hit spam as unsubscribe even to something they signed up for. A lot of people have email overwhelm. You gotta figure that a fraction of people on any service behave oddly.

I’ve even done it myself on occasion when I’m pretty sure I HAVE unsubscribed but I keep getting mail (from things I likely signed up for)

> Seems odd that people would go to the trouble of subscribing to a newsletter only to send it to the spam folder.

It happens. You have people in this thread explaining they hit the spam button when unsubscribe has a confirm step, even if they know they signed up.

There has also been long-standing advice not to hit unsubscribe on spam because all it does is confirm you’re there. A surprising number of people think that means never hit unsubscribe links at all, even in things you signed up for.

> It happens. You have people in this thread explaining they hit the spam button when unsubscribe has a confirm step, even if they know they signed up.

This is also not a user problem.

I admit I haven't managed a newsletter, but if I would either sign up people that don't want to either through lying or dark patters, or make it hard for them to unsubscribe, meaning any step other than link click (and maybe a yes/no confirmation), then I don't expect not to be treated as spam.

I explain why a legit email program might have an unsubscribe confirm step here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27470090

It’s to solve a particular user problem.

I accounted for this in my comment. There's confirm steps and then there's confirm steps. When I want to unsubscribe from your newsletter you already know my address, I shouldn't have to enter it, I shouldn't have to list a reason (though by all means keep it as an optional), I shouldn't have to do more than one extra click.

If you indeed meant a simple "Yes I'm sure" confirmation button, then I agree.

You’re not paying attention to what you’re reading. The parent comment is saying some users will do this on all newsletters, even ones they signed ip for.

We’re talking about newsletters that only add people who sign up after a double opt in. We still have to manage this user behaviour.

Proactive pruning is the best tool that exists now. So we’ll have to figure out something new. One likely result is more paid newsletters and more moves to centralized platforms like substack which can deal with this.

> You’re not paying attention to what you’re reading. The parent comment is saying some users will do this on all newsletters, even ones they signed ip for.

I was paying attention, I was commenting on specifically:

> they hit the spam button when unsubscribe has a confirm step

Even if I've signed up for a newsletter, if I have to jump through (varying degrees) of hoops to unsubscribe, you are spam.

How would he know? How would anyone know??

I've seen people enter their email into those intrusive "sign up for our newsletter" popovers because they think that's the only way to bypass them. Which is probably one reason why sites keep using them. Not everyone is as web savvy as we like to think.

I report every newsletter and similar as spam because I have never knowingly or wittingly signed up for one. If I receive one, I was tricked into signing up for it (or never did), thus: spam.

workflow may be something like 1. Free music 2. required signup for band newsletter 3. Why am I receiving this newsletter? 4. Mark as spam

> 1. Free music 2. required signup for band newsletter

Where "required signup" may simply mean missing the tiny checked-by-default "don't not subscribe me" checkbox.

I have zero sympathy for complaints about marking "legitimate" newsletters as spam, when many of their ideas of "signed up" involve not unchecking a checkbox during a transaction. If you can't get someone to knowingly and enthusiastically agree to receive your newsletter, without any kind of subterfuge or dark pattern, it deserves to get marked as spam and end up in people's spam folders.

It’s not a checkbox, it’s a trade. Sign up for our newsletter and we’ll send you a free song.

That’s the deal you made. Don’t get pissed if they keep their end of the bargain.

I'm not talking about "sign up to get this for free", I'm talking about the very common case of a transaction to purchase or otherwise obtain something (potentially even a paid transaction) where there's a buried fine-print "spam me" checkbox.

This is the comment you were replying to:

> workflow may be something like 1. Free music 2. required signup for band newsletter 3. Why am I receiving this newsletter? 4. Mark as spam

So as I said, the deal is clear: Free music in return for signing up for the band’s email list. Don’t get pissed at the band for holding up their end of the deal and putting you on their email list.

The comment I wrote in response was 'may simply mean missing the tiny checked-by-default "don't not subscribe me" checkbox'. That doesn't describe all cases, just many common cases, hence the "may". If the deal is "free music if you subscribe" or "sign up to our newsletter and get free music", and that's presented in an obvious and non-deceptive way, and people sign up anyway, then sure, that's a legitimate subscription. (And people will still mark it as spam if they don't actually want it, and that's something to take into account when thinking of designing a system like that.)

And if the deal is "free music! Also, check this clearly identified box that's currently not checked if you want to subscribe to our newsletter", that's also a legitimate subscription; some people will still mark that as spam, and that's just something newsletters have to deal with, but I have marginally more sympathy for that case because spammers have somewhat ruined the concept of expecting reasonable unsubscribe links in unexpected mail.

But if the deal is "free music! (well-hidden fine print: leave this box checked to subscribe to our newsletter)", and someone misses unchecking the box, that's spam, and it should get marked as spam, and that newsletter should have serious deliverability problems; that's spam filtering working exactly as it should work.

From my experience, the straightforward trade where a subscription to the band’s newsletter (or reactivation if you’ve previously unsubscribed) is the price for the free song is the scenario. Right or wrong, people mark those newsletters as spam or delete them without opening them to check for an unsubscribe link.

People will mark spam as spam, but they also have no hesitation about marking legitimate bulk e-mail they willingly signed up for but are no longer interested in as spam as well.

To me this sounds like spam. If they want the music, give them the music. Don't make them sign up for your spam to get it.

It is spam unless they signup because they want the actual newsletter.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com