Newsletters and Avoiding Spam Filters

[geoapa]

I'm getting a very low open rate on my newsletters and I'm curious to know if my emails are even getting through. I have a suspicion that most of them are getting blocked by spam filters.

Is there some sort of list of words to avoid, or even an email spam compiler of some sort to aid in the creation of non-spammy emails?

[jatar_k]

we often run our emails through spamassassin and then see what it thinks of them, there is a list of tests that it runs here
[spamassassin.apache.org...]

reading through that should help you understand what anti spam programs look for

[Mardi_Gras]

>> I'm getting a very low open rate

What do you consider to be a low rate?

[onlineleben]

geoapa

I just sent you a mail.

[MatthewHSE]

I do okay with most of the things listed here [spamassassin.apache.org], but I'm concerned with the lines like the following:

Gives a lame excuse about why spam was sent
Claims you can be removed from the list
"if you do not wish to receive any more"
Nobody's perfect
Claims you opted-in or registered
Claims you have provided permission
Claims you wanted this ad
Talks about how to be removed from mailings

All these are labelled as "excuses," and therefore (apparently) contribute to a higher spam score.

But, I thought all legitimate newsletters were supposed to at least give unsubscribe instructions, and I certainly wouldn't have thought it was spammy to explain when they signed up to receive the newsletter. Even SourceForge does that much!

I normally start my newsletters with a short bit of text explaining that they are receiving the message because they, or someone using that address, signed up to receive it, but they can be removed any time. My unsubscribe instructions work; it's not one of those scummy "deliverability verification" systems.

Why should it be wrong just to give a quick explanation? People get a lot of e-mail and it would be natural if they forgot signing up for a few newsletters (especially if they sign up for a lot). I always thought a little reminder was a nice service.

But in view of these spam guidelines, I may have to re-think this policy. Does anyone else have thoughts on this?

[jatar_k]

it is a very tricky little thing to get legitimate email to users. The sheer volume of unsolicited email that is sent means we have to jump through hoops to pass the filters.

We test all of our emails and make sure they have a X-Spam-Status of 0

we still don't get them all through, we have to look at things such as making sure reverse lookups are correct for our mail servers, setting up SPF among many other things. These also help to get legitimate email through.

What do I think about those specific lines, well, it is a necessary evil as those are all used by spam. You need to reword things to say the same things with out using those specific terms.

Even then you will still have the problem of people who forget they signed up and report you anyway. How nice of them. ;)

[phantombookman]

Even if you get passed the filters it may well get deleted unread anyway.
I delete every email, unread, unless it appears directly relevant to my business, as do many others I know.
A sad fact, but the spammers have caused this.

[2by4]

Some of my clients do newsletters, and I never see them unless I look in my junk email folder, especially when a commercial mass marketing firm has sent them out. Triggers? Too much HTML, key words like 'subscribe/unsubscribe'.

However, a clean, very low HTML newsletter has much better odds of getting through, and of course a text only version has even better chances of arriving, but it's not pretty enough to satisfy most marketers.

All image emails have a low chance of coming through.

[hound_dog]

we often run our emails through spamassassin and then see what it thinks of them

How do you do this? Is there an easy way to test a newsletter? Do you have to download Spam Assassin and use that or is some online service? Thanks.