Email Verification Tool

[NickFitz]

What we have found with previous mailings is that some email addresses have bounced where the recipient has left the company, or the email address is just plain incorrect (e.g. invalid characters).

As this should have given you a list of addresses that currently fail, remove those from the list.

Run your next spam^H^H^H^H marketing email run. If some of them bounce, remove those from the list. However, some of the failures may be due to temporary problems with mail servers, so you may not want to remove them immediately...

Long and short: there is no quick fix. It's a complicated business and will require a well-thought out solution. Asking CUK may not be your best bet

[Sysman]

We're not spamming them. We are inviting exisiting customers to take part in market research in order to improve the the client's offering. They are not 'marketing', only inviting them to take part in a survey.

Be careful what you are claiming there. A lot of market research campaigns and surveys do in fact turn out to be marketing.

Don't put yourself in the position where you could be stitched up if someone complains.

[Flubster]

Does it query the mail server for the individual address or just for the existance of the server? Large number of queries like the one you describe are just as likely to get you flagged as a spammer, if not more so. Large numbers of queries to a mail server without actually delivering mail would certainly look suspicious to any sys admin monitoring the traffic logs.

It looks like it queries the mail server for the existance of a specific mailbox, almost like a 'ping'.

[DaveB]

Only check if it exists? Don't you have to check to see if they are on a preference service? Dunno about mail shots but we have to for snail mail shots to schools.

PS Hmm, no there are Telephone, Fax, and Mail (ie snail) Preference Services but no email preference service. Should be.

Agreed, but so far the marketing industry has resisted this, claiming it would be too hard to administer and that they already give people the option to opt out of having the email address distributed when they fill in forms on web sites etc.

The regulators want an explicit opt in, rather than opt out, but for obvious reasons the marketers don't.

[Flubster]

How about telling the market research company to get stuffed for wanting to spam 80K email addresses ?

We're not spamming them. We are inviting exisiting customers to take part in market research in order to improve the the client's offering. They are not 'marketing', only inviting them to take part in a survey.

Only check if it exists? Don't you have to check to see if they are on a preference service? Dunno about mail shots but we have to for snail mail shots to schools.

PS Hmm, no there are Telephone, Fax, and Mail (ie snail) Preference Services but no email preference service. Should be.

You're right. There is no 'EPS' option like there is with MPS/TPS/cTPS. When a customer creates an account with the client, they do select email contact preferences, so we are already excluding customers who do not wish to be contacted. What we have found with previous mailings is that some email addresses have bounced where the recipient has left the company, or the email address is just plain incorrect (e.g. invalid characters).

[DaveB]

Thanks DB. The aim is to be as proactive as possible on avoiding emails to invalid addresses. The tools I've tried this morning seem to query the mail server and returns a success/fail code. The idea is to collate all the failed addresses to suppress any further mailings without having to go through the validation process again. Sending the emails out now without the vaidation could result in quite a large volume of bouncebacks which will result in some manual collection.

Thanks for the feedback though...it may end up the way to go...

Does it query the mail server for the individual address or just for the existance of the server? Large number of queries like the one you describe are just as likely to get you flagged as a spammer, if not more so. Large numbers of queries to a mail server without actually delivering mail would certainly look suspicious to any sys admin monitoring the traffic logs.

[xoggoth]

Only check if it exists? Don't you have to check to see if they are on a preference service? Dunno about mail shots but we have to for snail mail shots to schools.

PS Hmm, no there are Telephone, Fax, and Mail (ie snail) Preference Services but no email preference service. Should be.

[Board Game Geek]

How about telling the market research company to get stuffed for wanting to spam 80K email addresses ?

[Flubster]

Other than weeding out any malformed addresses there is no easy way to verify the validity of an email address without sending an email. It would be like taking a page from the phone book and then visiting every address on the page to make sure it actually exists before you dial the number.

Bounce backs wont nessecerily get you flagged as a spammer, but they could well cripple your own mail server if the lists was particularly ropey.

Best thing you can do is divide the list up into more reasonable chunks ( say 5 or 10k at a time ) and send them out spread over a period of time. Less chance of getting flooded with failed delivery notices and less chance of being flagged as a spammer due to the volume of traffic you are sending out at one time.

Thanks DB. The aim is to be as proactive as possible on avoiding emails to invalid addresses. The tools I've tried this morning seem to query the mail server and returns a success/fail code. The idea is to collate all the failed addresses to suppress any further mailings without having to go through the validation process again. Sending the emails out now without the vaidation could result in quite a large volume of bouncebacks which will result in some manual collection.

Thanks for the feedback though...it may end up the way to go...

[DaveB]

Chaps,

I've been passed a list of 80k email addresses that need to be validated before a market research email is sent out. The client wants to avoid loads of bounce backs (and then get blacklisted as a spammer) so I've trawled through Google for 'email verification software' and got the usual several hundred results back.

I've downloaded a few and got mixed results, so I'm hoping that someone here has some experience of doing this and point me in the direction of a tool.

All I want to do is load up the list of email addresses, run a verification process (to check the mailbox exists) and remove email addresses that return an error of some description.

Any help gratefully appreciated...

Flubby

Other than weeding out any malformed addresses there is no easy way to verify the validity of an email address without sending an email. It would be like taking a page from the phone book and then visiting every address on the page to make sure it actually exists before you dial the number.

Bounce backs wont nessecerily get you flagged as a spammer, but they could well cripple your own mail server if the lists was particularly ropey.

Best thing you can do is divide the list up into more reasonable chunks ( say 5 or 10k at a time ) and send them out spread over a period of time. Less chance of getting flooded with failed delivery notices and less chance of being flagged as a spammer due to the volume of traffic you are sending out at one time.

[Flubster]

Chaps,

I've been passed a list of 80k email addresses that need to be validated before a market research email is sent out. The client wants to avoid loads of bounce backs (and then get blacklisted as a spammer) so I've trawled through Google for 'email verification software' and got the usual several hundred results back.

I've downloaded a few and got mixed results, so I'm hoping that someone here has some experience of doing this and point me in the direction of a tool.

All I want to do is load up the list of email addresses, run a verification process (to check the mailbox exists) and remove email addresses that return an error of some description.

Any help gratefully appreciated...

Flubby