A quick sidetrack about e-mail blasters

[ccarter84]

They're good and yet they may be self-defeating on some level.

Think about all the spam you get, then think about how annoyed you would be if you were to in say...two weeks... get a few thousand more pieces of e-mail (no matter how little or much work was put into crafting them). I know i'd probably just turn my computer off and take a long weekend.

Blasters are viewed as a way to try and show our strength and passion for this topic...and yes I agree they are effective to a degree; but also I think we would be wise to consider the alternative effects of our actions.

A partial alternative should be trying to develop individual relationships with people in a position to raise awareness of others, reporters are the primary place to start.

my 2 cents
-cc

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

1. Newspapers hate blasters.

When they are detected(and they are detected), similar emails are discarded. They want the real voices of real people, not canned, formulaic, cut and paste, cookie cutter opinion.

[Ian David]

2. You could also write scripts that semi-randomize our messages...

so they don't all look like they're identical.

Damn, I'm lazy

[AtLiberty]

3. I always write an original subject heading and message...

...for a media blast, even if it's just a few sentences. Also, I send them via bcc, so the media doesn't see that I've mailed them out bulk. All this takes just a few extra minutes, but it's worth it.

[electropop]

4. This could be somewhat enforced

by leaving the message and subject blank on the blaster, with some sample text nearby, but a suggestion to write your own. Also, the message should be kept very short (a couple of sentences) so it's easier for the masses to write, and more likely to be read.