<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Blue Chip</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hrexaminer.com/blue-chip/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hrexaminer.com/blue-chip</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:25:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amitai Givertz</title>
		<link>http://www.hrexaminer.com/blue-chip/comment-page-1#comment-3171</link>
		<dc:creator>Amitai Givertz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Apr 2008 02:26:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnsumser.com/?p=39#comment-3171</guid>
		<description>To your point: &quot;Of course, my value laden precision targeted bulk email would never be spam, right?&quot;

Basically there are two types of email item. The first is the message we receive from someone we know and recognize and the second is the item we receive from an unknown sender, the Recruiting Roadshow perhaps. 

Likewise there are basically two forms of email content. The first contains information we need, want, should have or in some other way has value, currency. The other is the untimely, the irrelevant, the unwanted and the distracting.
 
The problem [and the payoff] is that unlike other forms of communication email is direct. It has the potential to please or pester.

On balance which you rather receive: Untimely, irrelevant, unwanted and the distracting stuff from someone you know, recognize and even trust or valuable and current information that you need or should have that is sent -- unsolicited -- from a perfect stranger?

The problem with bulk mail is that it is hit and miss. Some recipients will view the message as annoying others will receive it happily. The same person may respond differently on different days, who knows? 

The point is that if the mailing &quot;pays for itself&quot; the mission has been accomplished. Collateral damage comes with the territory. If the intent of the sender is decent but the message is poorly timed how is that different from a useless piece of mail from someone we know and trust, waste that we junk without thinking twice? And, if you are immediately removed from future mailings when you ask to be isn&#039;t that a transaction of trust?

Nice blog, John. &#039;Bout time we had you back.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To your point: &#8220;Of course, my value laden precision targeted bulk email would never be spam, right?&#8221;</p>
<p>Basically there are two types of email item. The first is the message we receive from someone we know and recognize and the second is the item we receive from an unknown sender, the Recruiting Roadshow perhaps. </p>
<p>Likewise there are basically two forms of email content. The first contains information we need, want, should have or in some other way has value, currency. The other is the untimely, the irrelevant, the unwanted and the distracting.</p>
<p>The problem [and the payoff] is that unlike other forms of communication email is direct. It has the potential to please or pester.</p>
<p>On balance which you rather receive: Untimely, irrelevant, unwanted and the distracting stuff from someone you know, recognize and even trust or valuable and current information that you need or should have that is sent &#8212; unsolicited &#8212; from a perfect stranger?</p>
<p>The problem with bulk mail is that it is hit and miss. Some recipients will view the message as annoying others will receive it happily. The same person may respond differently on different days, who knows? </p>
<p>The point is that if the mailing &#8220;pays for itself&#8221; the mission has been accomplished. Collateral damage comes with the territory. If the intent of the sender is decent but the message is poorly timed how is that different from a useless piece of mail from someone we know and trust, waste that we junk without thinking twice? And, if you are immediately removed from future mailings when you ask to be isn&#8217;t that a transaction of trust?</p>
<p>Nice blog, John. &#8216;Bout time we had you back.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

