Anybody else just notice that the email NA Sports sent out regarding IMWI registration was sent with the TO: list visible to everyone they sent it to?
Wow.
lol, are you serious?
Pretty serious - maybe not as serious as a fat person chasing an Ice Cream truck, but at least as serious as a I am about finding Oreos and a gallon of milk after an ironman.
Edit: I’m waiting in suspense for the first Reply To All to come back!
Wow, so anyone who owns any type of tri business now has access to over 2000 serious triathletes.
Classy move.
Crazy. I just asked them why.
Make that about 250-300…
Wow, so anyone who owns any type of tri business now has access to over 2000 serious triathletes.
Classy move.
But they’re “serious” dude.
Hence the multiplier.
Actually there were 1245 addresses in the “to:” field.
(I didn’t count. I did a “find” and “replace,” and Microsoft counted for me.)
Regards,
Cheryl
A local race promoter did that a few years back with just general info about upcoming races. I would guess that at least 500 names were on the list. I got 70-100 emails/day for at least a week. What made it worse is he did not clearly spell out and indicate how to unsubscribe to the mailing. So then someone would respond to the reply to not respond to the email, it was a circle jerk for sure.
F’n morons.
Right now I can’t log in to my email account 
Coincidence?
Yep…just got my e-mail about the link not up yet and there are ALL the names/e-mails showing up plain as day in the ‘To’ box. It’ll be interesting to see how much crap I get if I don’t change the address!
Note the bolding. Also, I’d like to revise my estimate down to about 150.
Wow, so anyone who owns any type of tri business now has access to over 2000 serious triathletes.
Classy move.
Blows my mind that a company so big, strong and professional in so many aspects can be so bush league in others. Not only is it a major privacy breach to expose your entire mailing list to all in an email, but a small message can become megabytes simply because of the size of the recipient list that must be included with the message payload. Such amateur hour to do that.
I wrote a simple program for sending out our emails for SavageMan. Took about 15 minutes. It sends emails one at a time to a recipient list, allows for both HTML and plaintext versions so any email client gets something readable, and can send parameterized, personalized emails (ie name and results of each participant are parsed into message). It’s little stuff like this that make the difference and largely aren’t appreciated until someone like NASports goes and does the opposite…
Jeesh folks - they are not IT experts. That being said - bet their mail server loved that and they may already be black listed.
No but with the size of the organization and money they take in, they could afford to hire some IT experts to make sure they don’t do dumb shit like this.
I don’t think that NA Sports is as large an organization as many think. While they have a very high gross income, I believe that a large amount of the money the bring in goes out the door pretty quickly and that in acutality the have a fairly low net income.
That said - even IT Experts screw the pooch sometimes (I should know, I screw up more than I’d like to admit at work…)
That’s nice of you to go to that level for Savageman, but they don’t even have to do that. All they have to do is blind copy (BCC:) everyone instead of sending it directly to them. This should be standard procedure for any organization these days.
Actually there were 1245 addresses in the “to:” field.
(I didn’t count. I did a “find” and “replace,” and Microsoft counted for me.)
Regards,
Cheryl
That means 3245 prospected finishline crossers in 2008 IMOO
Being BCCed on a message is a guarantee for the message to end up in a persons spam folder. So, that’s not a good solution if you want people to actually get the message you send.
NASports may not be a huge outfit, but they sure have a big enough budget to do simple IT stuff properly.
Another thing they do improperly is the allocation of Kona slots across age groups. The algorithm they use in the all-powerful spreadsheet to divy up slots proportionate to the number of participants while ensuring every AG gets a minimum of 1 slot is wrong. It does ensure every AG gets a minimum of 1 slot but does not properly divy up slots proportionate to participation numbers per AG. But, I mean, it’s just the allocation of precious Kona slots, so who really cares?
Can you say “bush league”?