Comments on: Our market won’t SPAM you. http://www.jordanlapp.com/our-market-wont-spam-you Resources for the genre writer Tue, 07 Feb 2012 13:04:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: jordan http://www.jordanlapp.com/our-market-wont-spam-you/comment-page-1#comment-1951 jordan Wed, 20 May 2009 22:20:03 +0000 http://www.jordanlapp.com/withoutreallytrying/our-market-wont-spam-you/#comment-1951 Sweet! I heart coining new terms. What about Bush's Razor? Is it still cool and topical to make fun of him? Sweet! I heart coining new terms. What about Bush’s Razor? Is it still cool and topical to make fun of him?

]]> By: Andrew LeBlanc http://www.jordanlapp.com/our-market-wont-spam-you/comment-page-1#comment-1950 Andrew LeBlanc Wed, 20 May 2009 22:18:16 +0000 http://www.jordanlapp.com/withoutreallytrying/our-market-wont-spam-you/#comment-1950 Every email program allows for sorting based on the To line, and I can't think of any that won't allow you to do a wildcard followed by string, so as to isolate the "+blabla" for sorting purposes. I'd be surprised if you found a program where this was completely impossible. On the other hand, your explanation, especially coupled with Google's own suggested usage, makes your explanation likelier. I don't think you can call your reasoning method "Occam's Razor", though... I think you need to coin a new term for it. Every email program allows for sorting based on the To line, and I can’t think of any that won’t allow you to do a wildcard followed by string, so as to isolate the “+blabla” for sorting purposes. I’d be surprised if you found a program where this was completely impossible.

On the other hand, your explanation, especially coupled with Google’s own suggested usage, makes your explanation likelier. I don’t think you can call your reasoning method “Occam’s Razor”, though… I think you need to coin a new term for it.

]]> By: jordan http://www.jordanlapp.com/our-market-wont-spam-you/comment-page-1#comment-1949 jordan Wed, 20 May 2009 20:56:59 +0000 http://www.jordanlapp.com/withoutreallytrying/our-market-wont-spam-you/#comment-1949 It's POSSIBLE that you're correct, though I know of no e-mail program that does what you suggest, and the "plus" symbol feature I described is actually recommended by Google to deal with spam. I'm a big believer in Occam's Razor. To paraphrase, when it comes to people's actions, "the stupidest explanation is usually the correct one." It’s POSSIBLE that you’re correct, though I know of no e-mail program that does what you suggest, and the “plus” symbol feature I described is actually recommended by Google to deal with spam.

I’m a big believer in Occam’s Razor. To paraphrase, when it comes to people’s actions, “the stupidest explanation is usually the correct one.”

]]> By: Andrew LeBlanc http://www.jordanlapp.com/our-market-wont-spam-you/comment-page-1#comment-1948 Andrew LeBlanc Wed, 20 May 2009 20:53:24 +0000 http://www.jordanlapp.com/withoutreallytrying/our-market-wont-spam-you/#comment-1948 Maybe that's just how the guy sorts his email? You know, hand out your email messages with the +blabla, and he knows how to place/prioritize it. This makes extra sense when you consider that he might not know exactly what email address you're sending his acceptance/rejection from, but, if reply use the provided email address exactly, he will still know exactly who the sender is from the To address. Maybe he does this so that red flags fly and alarms go off so that he can be sure to read your email as soon as possible. Part of trust means that you sometimes have to risk trusting that the other party did something for a reason other than the stupidest possible reason. Full disclosure: I've never done this. The only email messages that I sort or tag are messages that I've sent to myself, which are helpfully labelled "NOTE". Anything beyond that would only confuse me. Maybe that’s just how the guy sorts his email? You know, hand out your email messages with the +blabla, and he knows how to place/prioritize it. This makes extra sense when you consider that he might not know exactly what email address you’re sending his acceptance/rejection from, but, if reply use the provided email address exactly, he will still know exactly who the sender is from the To address.

Maybe he does this so that red flags fly and alarms go off so that he can be sure to read your email as soon as possible.

Part of trust means that you sometimes have to risk trusting that the other party did something for a reason other than the stupidest possible reason.

Full disclosure: I’ve never done this. The only email messages that I sort or tag are messages that I’ve sent to myself, which are helpfully labelled “NOTE”. Anything beyond that would only confuse me.

]]>