On 4/7/24 20:40, Jerry Malcolm wrote:
I send the validation email from donotre...@xyz.com.
I absolutely hate the do not reply type email addresses as you're trying to use them. Not because I get annoyed at people replying -- and people will reply -- but because I think that doing such is a wasted opportunity.
I think you should send with an SMTP envelope that uses some form of VERP to be able to correlate inbound messages with the original outbound recipient address.
I think that you should send using a friendly From: header address.I think that you should embrace user+detail in the From: header so that you can do similar correlation of inbound messages with the original outbound recipient address.
I think that you should leverage the Reply-To: header to try to steer replies somewhere useful, like the ticketing system.
I think the ticketing system should be aware of the U+D data and use that to prime the association of the inbound message with a client ID / account number / etc.
We have a ticket reporting system and seriously want to discourage users from sending in problem reports by email.
Does your ticketing system have a way to generate tickets from email? I assume that it does. I strongly suggest that you leverage it and cause the emails that people will send to be routed to the ticketing system.
DoNotReply is actually a legit inbox, and I monitor it to catch users that haven't yet mastered the art of reading.
The universe is winning. The universe will always win. No matter how smart we make the mouse trap, there will always be mice that avoid it / get out of it / break it / etc.
I want to keep that DoNotReply email address to tell the user.... "don't send an email to this address"
That's a never ending battle. Stop fighting a battle that you can not win.Pull a Kobayashi Maru and make what people naturally want to do work for you.
But I have a co-worker that is convinced that "donotre...@xyz.com" is a trigger for gmail's spam filters and all spam filters will score the email higher as spam due simply to that word in the email address. I'm not convinced.
I don't know about Google, but I perceive do not reply types of email addresses as a broadcast only sender and I have poor opinions of them.
On the flip side, I have high opinions of senders that can take my input any way that is convenient for me, even if that's replying or sending a new email to an address I just received a message from.
I do not want to change it to something else that will encourage users to start inundating us with questions/problems by email instead of using our established ticket system..
Why can't the email address be a gateway into the ticketing system?Let users do what they want to do and comes naturally to them while it also does what you want by routing messages to the ticketing system.
But I also don't want to be shooting myself in the foot with spam filters by using that name if it's indeed a trigger word.
I have no first hand experience there because I always try to use system generated emails as a way to steer inbound messages like I've described here. I'd suggest sending from an address that accurately describes what the messages are; password-reset@, automated-bill-reminder@, what have you. Don't hide. Be clear about what you are doing and why you are doing it.
As for the HTML email, please make sure that you are sending a comparable text/plain MIME part and not just text/html.
Don't encode / obfuscate anything that doesn't have a specific need to do so. If there is a need, seriously consider if you can change that need. This goes for being both transparent and clear on what you are doing and why you are doing it.
-- Grant. . . .
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
