Re: Sorting a list by frequency of items

I have a natural nervousness about helping out on problems that involve sending out 50,000 emails as I can't help wondering how many of those 50,000 recipients actually wanted to see that email.

You might get a lot more help here if you can convince us that you're not sending spam.

--
<http://www.dave.org.uk>

"Perl makes the fun jobs fun
and the boring jobs bearable" - me

Comment on Re: Sorting a list by frequency of items

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
It isn't spam by yojimbo (Monk) on Mar 22, 2001 at 15:54 UTC
I don't think that's a fair comment :-P These are subscribers to an ISP who do, indeed, ask users to sign up rather than just spam them. But how do I convince you I'm not sending spam? You'll just have to take my word on it, which is why I didn't mention it in the first place.	[reply]
Re: It isn't spam by davorg (Chancellor) on Mar 22, 2001 at 16:03 UTC
Well, many people are going to make those kinds of assumptions if you don't tell them otherwise. Sad but true! You would probably have got a different reaction if you'd have said something like "I know this sounds like spam, but it's really an opt-in mailing list". -- <http://www.dave.org.uk> "Perl makes the fun jobs fun and the boring jobs bearable" - me	[reply]
Re: Re: It isn't spam by yojimbo (Monk) on Mar 22, 2001 at 16:28 UTC
"But as well as being a spammer, I'm an habitual liar." You're right, it is sad. I could have disguised this question in some way, but that I chose not to do this should demonstrate, to some extent, that I have nothing to hide. I would be more suspicious of such a posting where the opening sentence was "this isn't spam". In fact, it didn't even occur to me that anyone would think this. I'm sorry I asked the question, really I am. The script works just fine anyway, so your mission to free the net from all that spam I'm sending out is doomed to failure ;-) I had hoped to get some further insights into a problem, and also that this might help others. I regret I've been forced to defend myself in this way.	[reply]