Of course, with sports comes the sport’s fans need to complain about officiating.  We heard it throughout the NBA and NHL playoffs.  The World Cup has been a heyday for officiating complaints, most recently with the last USA goal being disallowed, but let’s not forget the umpire who missed the call that broke up a perfect game and I’m sure hundreds of other examples.

Complaining about officiating in sports is considered a part of the game.  As an official, I have had more losses blamed on me than I care to count.  The final score may have been 8-0 and the shots on goal were 45-6, but somehow it was my fault they lost.  I’d like to explain that logic to you, but I have yet to figure it out myself.

Email marketing, on the other hand, is different.  Everything done with marketing efforts is, essentially, under the marketer’s own control.  Time is taken to prepare messages that will engage readers, getting them to open the email, click the links, buy the product, download the information, or whatever the objective is of our message.  Special care is given to segment out the perfect list so that efforts are not diminished by recipients who will not be interested.  An Email Service Provider may also be used so that the resources of many working to achieve maximum deliverability can be harnessed.

The only third party involved is the ESP.  Even using a third-party to send messages, the ultimate control over deliverability is in the hands of the marketer.  Despite the efforts of a team of deliverability experts working tirelessly to maximize the likelihood of our message reaching the inbox of recipients, the marketer still controls the key influences.  The easiest way to get into a junk folder or bounced from the server is to not take care with each mailing that is sent.  All those things above, if done incorrectly (or not at all), have the potential to ruin a sender’s reputation.  A marketer’s reputation is their lifeblood. Control your message and your list, and you will likely end up in the inbox.

There are senders out there, however, who don’t do this.  They continually send to bad email addresses or create messages that will be picked up by spam filters.  They may use an ESP, but they still find their messages bouncing or ending up in the junk folder.  They call the ESP and see what they can do to fix their deliverability.  But, there is likely nothing that can be done.  The ESP may be able to fix it for a short while, but, unless sending practices are changed, they quickly find themselves back where they started.  They may even try changing ESPs.  This again, will work for a short time, but they end up in the same situation.  It isn’t until they change their sending practices, message creation, list maintenance, delivery schedule, etc., that they will start to see improved results.

If only officiating were more like email marketing.  If only teams could do so the game was more in their control.  I could suggest things like practice or playing a complete game (rather than going down 2-0 in the first half), but this will fall on deaf ears.  I’m not suggesting that the blame is never on the officials.  The umpire who made the wrong call to break up the perfect game made a mistake.  He apologized to the pitcher, the team, the fans and anyone else who asked for an apology.  He got an ovation the next game at that stadium.  I am suggesting that typically, the official’s judgment is not what wins or loses a game.  Like email marketing, it is the efforts of the players in the game that ultimately decide the fate of the game.

After upgrading to the latest version, I had the joy of testing to make sure that everything was working. Normally, testing is not something people look forward to. When that testing involves creating a message that is the definition of spam, however, testing takes on a game-like quality. So, I set out to create the message no spam filter would let through. Below are some of the lessons I learned as well as a copy of the message that I created. This message is not G-rated, so feel free to stop reading before you get there. I will also break down the score I received on the message to give you an idea of how the message was evaluated.

The biggest thing I noticed is that the older versions scored things like having HTML in your message would score you about 0.6 points. This is now worth 0.001 point which we round to 0.0. Bold characters were also looked down upon. Additionally, the types of filters have changed. In the older version, there was less checking for drug references and more checking for DVD and Toner sales. The focus of spammers has come a long way since then. It is very possible that the same message that scored points in the old version will no longer score any points with the latest version.

For more information about Spam Assassin, you can visit their website at http://spamassassin.apache.org/  All the tests that they perform can be found there.

Lesson 1: The subject is the key

When I set out to score high, I started with the message. I just started with every phrase I have ever had sent to me that either ended up in my Junk Folder or should have. Even doing that, my score was not as high as I would have liked. It wasn’t until I started tweaking my subject line that I got some real spam points. Some phrases you may not think would be bad, like “Your Family”, “As seen”, or starting with the word “Buy” will make your message appear to be spam. Also, avoid using ALL CAPITAL LETTERS. First, this is just bad internet etiquette, but doing so will also make you more likely to be picked up by spam filters. A perfectly good subject like, “Buy your family a vacation”, would likely end up in the junk folder. That subject alone would score 4.5 points from Spam Assassin.

Lesson 2: Pick a good From Address

This may seem like common sense, but use a real address when you send your message. This is the first thing that spam checkers will look at with the address. It should actually contain an email address. Also, avoid words in the email address like “Get” and “Offers”. This means a from address such as “GetOffers@mycompany.com” would likely get you sent to the junk folder. This address alone would score 5.4 points from Spam Assassin.

Lesson 3: Message Body

Believe it or not, the message itself is not likely to get you sent to the Junk Bin, unless, of course, you really are sending spam. There are a few simple phrases that you may want to avoid using. Phrases like “this advertiser”, “to stop further distribution”, and a header of “Dear Friend” are all considered to be typical of spam and should avoided. Personalizing the name, rather than “Friend”, is enough to do the trick to avoid that trap. A message which contained the line “Dear Friend, to stop further distribution from this advertiser, click here” would score you 9.6 from Spam Assassin alone.

Conclusion

What can we learn from all this? First, don’t send spam. Second, when you are going to test your message, make sure to test it as it will be sent. This includes the from address as well as the subject that you will use when sending. Third, you should choose your words carefully. The system is looking for words and phrases that are typical of spam. Avoid these and you will be more likely to get to the Inbox.

The message I created scored 110.2 on the Spam Check. There are no images in the message and no fancy fonts. Adding some big images may have brought that up a little, but probably not significant enough to make it worth adding them. I just created a simple message full of one-liners that the spam checker does not like. I included the subject and from address I used in the message. Spam Assassin strongly recommends that I revise my message before distributing it.

Spam Assassin Results and Message

Here’s a preview of the message:

Dear Friend,

Subject = BUY YOUR FAMILY APPROVE YOU AS SEEN YOUR BILLS CHE@P A BIGGER AT NO COST L E VIT RA NUDE 120% SEX

From = @OFFERS’_GIVEAWAY_FDSJDLKSJFJFDKLFJ.GET

Generic Viagra p1ll

No prescription needed

Replica Rolex Watch

Quality Replica

P0rn V!@GR@

LEVITRA® (vardenafil HCl) Sildenafil Tadalifil citrate

Fast Viagra delivery – Male enhancement.

Grow your body parts. Get larger body parts.

Cure your impotence.

Online Pharmacy

100% Guaranteed

Ciales C1al1s Softabs

F R E E

Link to this advertiser

to stop further distribution if you’d like

$10,250,000.00

Money back guarantee.

Lowest Price

Eliminate bad credit.

No medical exams

Become financially free. Free financially.

Join millions of Americans

Banking Laws changing.

People just leave money laying around. Unclaimed Money. Unclaimed Funds.

ACT NOW!!!

AMB!3N CR3D1T M1LL10N PH4RM4CY XP1LL

Increase your energy Independent Reward

Eastern Conference

(1) Washington Capitals vs. (8) Montreal Canadiens

I think the Capitals are just too strong in this series.  The Canadiens only hope is to get an amazing performance from Halak in net and for the big D-men to shut down the Caps scoring.  Unfortunately, I think there is just too much speed on the Capitals and they will overcome their own shaky D to win this.

Capitals in 5

(2) New Jersey Devils vs. (7) Philadelphia Flyers

The Flyers were able to barely hold on to make the playoffs with a big save by Boucher in the shootout versus the Rangers in the final game of the regular season.  The Devils have found their scoring touch this season while allowing the fewest goals in the NHL.

Devils in 4

(3) Buffalo Sabres vs. (6) Boston Bruins

Buffalo reminds me of Happy Gilmore when he is on the green at the final tournament playing with Shooter McGavin and he says, “Someone learned how to putt.”  Well, Buffalo finally learned how to score.  They are on a roll right now and Boston is just happy to have made the playoffs.  It will be an interesting goaltender match-up with Miller and Rask, two of the best this season going at it.

Buffalo in 6

(4) Pittsburgh Penguins vs. (5) Ottawa Senators

This is a better series than it looks on paper.  Ottawa knows how to put together a big streak and has the tools to shut down Pittsburgh.  The Penguins are a deep team though and have been there and done that.  I don’t think Ottawa can pull it out, but I think they can make it interesting.

Pittsburgh in 6

Western Conference

(1) San Jose Sharks vs. (8) Colorado Avalanche

San Jose is best known for their recent early exists in the playoffs.  Colorado is a team that everyone predicted to finish at or near the bottom of the NHL this season.  Anderson has been brilliant in net but they seem to be fading at the wrong time.  San Jose finished strong and may just be too tough for Colorado.

San Jose in 5

(2) Chicago Blackhawks vs. (7) Nashville Predators

This will be a series of defense.  Duncan Keith, Brent Seabrook, Shea Weber, Ryan Suter and more are names that will dominate the broadcast.  Chicago’s offense is much better than Nashville’s, but the Predators goaltending is more experienced than Chicago’s. I expect some overtime in this series.

Chicago in 5

(3) Vancouver Canucks vs. (6) Los Angeles Kings

In their most recent meeting, LA dominated winning 8-3.  Luongo has not looked very strong since the Olympic break.  Unfortunately for the Kings, neither has Quick.  This will be a battle of the Sedin twins vs Doughty and Johnson.  If the Kings can shut them down, they win.  If not, they get to enjoy the golf course.

Los Angeles in 7

(4) Phoenix Coyotes vs. (5) Detroit Red Wings

Phoenix is another team no one expected to see in the playoffs, let alone hosting them.  Detroit spent most of the season in unfamiliar territory fighting their way into the playoffs.  These are two of the hottest teams in the second half and should be an amazing series.  Phoenix has nothing to lose and Detroit was written off at the mid-point of the season.

Detroit in 6

With the release of their CertifiedDomain™ service, Goodmail now has two offerings for certifying senders and their e-mail.  They have long had the CertifiedEmail™ service which will continue to exist.  The purpose here is to compare the two services and look at why you might choose one service over the other to help improve deliverability.

CertifiedDomain™

CertifiedDomain™ is a domain-based whitelist of email senders that have been approved by Goodmail.  The approval process consists of a short survey where they take a look at how the sender collects and maintains their recipient list as well as checking across several other databases to ensure the sending has a good reputation.  It appears as though the certification process is not as extensive as the process for CertifiedEmail™, however, given the reputation of Goodmail, it is probably safe to assume that removal from the list will be swift for those that violate the terms of the program.

The CertifiedDomain™ service works like a white list, except it is at the domain level rather than at the IP level.  Email servers, whether corporate (e.g. yourcompany.com) or personal (e.g. gmail.com, yahoo.com) would be able to point to this list of senders and use the list as a criteria in judging whether to allow or block the email from the sender.  The decision may combine this service with other reputation based services, including blacklists, other whitelist services, or other internal metrics.  These other metrics, include factors such as open rates and links clicked that measure engagement are becoming more common when the email service is deciding whether to allow or block the message or whether it will end up in the inbox or junk mail folder.

CertifiedEmail™

CertifiedEmail™, on the other hand, is a service that will certify the sender and guarantee delivery of emails to the inbox with images and links available to certain domains.  The certification process for this is more extensive; if you can pass this certification, you should be able to pass the one for CertifiedDomain™.

This service has established relationships with several of the larger email services out there, including AOL, Yahoo!, Comcast, Cox and others.  Messages being sent to these domains will be delivered to the inbox with links and images available.  Messages sent to other domains, however, do not receive any additional benefit from the service.

Summary

Each service has its positive side.  The CertifiedDomain™ service will potentially assist with delivery across a large range of domains, both B2B and B2C.  The CertifiedEmail™ service will guarantee delivery at the partner domains.  If most of your email is B2C, sent to individuals at their personal email accounts, you will probably receive a large benefit from CertifiedEmail™.  If you are sending a large volume of B2B emails or most of your accounts are not at the domains supported by CertifiedEmail™, then CertifiedDomain™ would be a better choice.  It does not look like the two have to be mutually exclusive either.

Fees for the two services are also different.  CertifiedDomain™ has a one-time application fee.  No other fees are listed, however, there may be annual or monthly fees associated with the program.  CertifiedEmail™, on the other hand, is charged for each email sent through the program.  The cost per email is small, but depending on volume, this can be a larger fee.  Essentially, with CertifiedEmail™, the more you send, the more you pay.  However, you know those emails are being delivered and are getting to the inbox.  With CertifiedDomain™, the fees are fixed, but there are no guarantees.

In the past, corporate email was used to disseminate information.  If you needed to get a message to a group of people, an email was generated and sent to the list of recipients.  The email would contain the full text of the message and that would be the end of the communication.  In the cases of promotional emails, there might be a link to click that would take you to an ordering website.  If the email were a newsletter, the full text of the message would be in the email.  Alternatively, an attachment might be included with a more styled version of the message.

Over time, there has been a shift in the content of messages being sent.  The purpose hasn’t changed; disseminating information or promoting a product are still the message.  The way that message is delivered to the recipient has changed though.  Information is now sent in smaller bits with links to full stories.  Large attachments are now mostly a thing of the past. Content is personalized based on the recipient to whom it is being sent.  More thought is being put into the message.  What interests a person?  What content will they care about?  These are questions that are now being asked that were not asked in the past.

Today, however, another shift is taking place.  The messages are not just going to the recipients.  If you send someone content they find interesting, they will share that content with their network.  You will find that content scattered about through Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and other social networks.  A message sent to a list of 1,000 recipients, assuming the content is relevant, will likely end up in front of far more than those original 1,000 individuals.  According to Facebook, the average user has 130 friends.  If even 1% of the original list posts to their Facebook page, that’s an additional 1,300 people receiving the message.  That’s 30% more than the total it was sent to originally!  If you put the content people want in front of them, social networks are an amazing complement.  There are downsides to this as well though.  Those same social networks that will increase your reach can also create bad press.  It is more important than ever to make the content relevant and ensure that the list it is being sent to contains the appropriate people.

So, to answer the question of whether email is dead from a corporate marketing perspective, the answer is definitely no.  Its use, however has changed.  It is still a channel for getting information to the people who are interested.  The reach of that email has been extended by the social networks.  Social networks have the ability to exponentially increase the reach of the email.  It all starts with getting the information in front of people though and email is still the leader at that.

There were a lot of very interesting topics covered.  First and foremost, he provides a clear definition of cloud computing.  Gartner’s definition is “a style of computing where scalable and elastic IT-related capabilities are provided ‘as a service’ to external customers using Internet Technologies”.

I like this definition for its flexibility as well as its rigidity.  Breaking down the definition, there are several key words that I’ll point out.  First, it is “scalable and elastic”.  As is pointed out in the webinar, this is one of the key differentiators between the cloud and the data center.  This has been the source of much confusion in the past.

Secondly, it is “provided ‘as a service’”.  A cloud is not something that is tangible, nor is it something the purchaser has to worry about.  From the customer’s point of view, it just exists.  One thing mentioned in the webinar is that the term cloud should be used as a singular term.  There is one cloud, there are just different ways to access the cloud (AWS, Azure, etc).  These access methods are the services.

The webinar does break down other phrases in the definition, but I think these are the two key phrases.

The cloud is then distinguished from Software as a service (SaaS).  SaaS applications can be located in the cloud.  However, just because they are SaaS does not mean they are in the cloud.  The distinctions are in the definition above.  Whether in the cloud or not, SaaS does have many benefits and many concerns.  The concerns are things that are becoming less and less significant over time.

One interesting point made in the webinar is a shift in the relationship from Vendor -> User to a Provider -> Consumer relationship.  With the SaaS and Cloud models, no longer is technology being sold to users who take and manage that technology.  Now, services are being sold to consumers who access and use the services.  This is similar to utility services where we don’t worry about how they get to us, we just want to be able to use them and pay for only what we use.

There is a lot of other excellent information provided in the webinar.  I suggest you take a look at it.  A replay of the webinar is available at http://my.gartner.com/portal/server.pt?open=512&objID=202&mode=2&PageID=5553&ref=Webinar-Calendar&resId=1046014

Jeter attempts a steal of third base in the first inning.  The throw was good and beat Jeter to the bag.  On the slide, however, Jeter got his hand around the tag and should have been called safe.  Now, I (and the entire viewing public) have the advantage of slow-motion and replays.  The umpire does not have this luxury.  Life would be much simpler if we could watch the game on the field in slow-motion and multiple times.

I have no issue with him being called Out at third.  It was a close play, and in real time from the umpire’s angle, I could definitely see where he would make that call.  If what Jeter is saying is true, however, I do have a problem with.  Unfortunately, only one side of the story is available.  The umpire was not made available for comment after the game.  What Jeter claims was said was that he “didn’t have to be tagged to be out” as long as the ball beats the player to the base.  What he should have said was something along the lines of, “from my angle it appeared as though he tagged your right/left hand before it got to the base”.  Players understand that the officials don’t always have the best angle and try their best to make the right call.  Alternatively, he could have talked it over with the other umpires and overturned the call.  Sure, this would have made him look bad, but it would have resulted in the correct call being made.  This, of course, assumes that the umpire knew he blew the call.

The rules are there for a reason.  What the umpire basically told Jeter was that the rule that you have to be tagged out, which is clearly indicated in Rule 7.08 c & e, is not actually the rule.  The actual rule, which I could find nowhere in the rule book, was that if the ball is there first and close to the runner, the runner shall be declared out.

Baseball has several unwritten rules, including this one.  The problem with these rules is that they are called very inconsistently.  Some umpires, on some days, choose to “enforce” the unwritten rules.  In reality, the umpire should just enforce the actual rule.  It is simpler to enforce a rule when you can point to it in a book.  Sure, in this case, had he called Jeter safe, he may have had an argument with the Blue Jays’ manager.  The difference is that in this argument he would have been able to use the rule book in his defense.  That’s what it’s there for.

The other most notable unwritten rule in baseball is, of course, the double play rule.  I think, if it were to be written, it would read something along the lines of  ”in a play where there is a force at second base, the defensive player covering the base will only need to be in the vicinity of the base prior to making a throw to first base.  Actually making contact with the base after having caught the ball shall be optional”.

I was recently at a conference and sat in on a presentation on a SharePoint application which combined the many social marketing tools. All the groups in the session could probably enhance their customer satisfaction and possibly increase their customer base through social marketing.

The session failed to address two key points, and no one at the conference knew to ask the most important questions.

• Are these the right tools for my organization?
• Who is going to create the content?

Until you have asked and answered these two questions, the answer to the correct form of social marketing is probably: None.

Social marketing is about finding the tools that will deliver the content to the users to keep them coming back. It is estimated that fewer than 10% of the users will contribute content to the site. Given this, it is important to identify these people and determine the types of content they will create. With something like blog posts, the contributors will most likely be internal. With discussion forums, the contributors will more likely be both internal and external.

I’m not going to claim to have a secret formula for what is the right type of social marketing. This is a question that requires a more intimate knowledge of the customers. The biggest key to success is to determine the best course of action and then follow that plan.

The next thing to consider is that the Hawks have some big signings coming up in the next few years. Next year, Patrick Kane, Jonathon Toews, Duncan Keith, and a few others become Restricted Free Agents. They are now eligible to sign an extension and all three should be wrapped up for long term contracts. All three will probably looking for big money and based on their performances, should get it. The Hawks have $16 million in payroll coming off the books next season (including those three). They are about $9 million under the salary cap based on the 2009-10 cap numbers and still have players that need to sign including the young and very talented Kris Versteeg. In order to sign all three, they are going to need to find some cap room somewhere. There are some trade rumors circling that would send either Versteeg or Byfuglien away. This does not seem like a great move, but that would depend on who was coming back to the Hawks. A better move would be to find someone to take the contract of Brian Campbell. He is currently making over $7 million to play on the second defensive line. That is money poorly spent as he has definitely not lived up to all the hype surrounding his signing last season.

So, unless the third time is the charm and the Hawks can lead Hossa back to the Stanley Cup Finals and bring home the cup, in the short term this does not seem like a good move. In the middle term, this move seems to handicap the Hawks for the next several years and will make free agency next year very interesting. The Hawks will have to hope that they can convince their young star players to stay with them long term at a nice discount.

If you Google (or Bing!) and try to find the difference, you will get real frustrated trying to find a quick, easy answer.  The main issue is a lack of a single definition for what is cloud computing.  The Berkley Report attempts to define cloud computing as “both the applications delivered as services over the Internet and the hardware and systems software in the datacenters that provide those services”, but they also explicitly exclude what they term “private clouds” which include data centers.

What sets apart Cloud Computing from Data Centers is three key elements of the cloud.  Again, from The Berkley Report.

1. The illusion of infinite computing resources available on demand, thereby eliminating the need for Cloud Computing users to plan far ahead for provisioning.
2. The elimination of an up-front commitment by Cloud users, thereby allowing companies to start small and increase hardware resources only when there is an increase in their needs.
3. The ability to pay for use of computing resources on a short-term basis as needed (e.g., processors by the hour and storage by the day) and release them as needed, thereby rewarding conservation by letting machines and storage go when they are no longer useful.

Most data centers have been created by, or in support of, companies offering a SaaS based product in order to allow customers to use their product.  The customer typically, though not always, enters into a term-based contract for the use of the service (#2).  The hardware is provided, in many cases for the use of the product being sold by the company functioning as the data center and getting other software or full access can be troublesome (#1).  As you are paying for the service, in most cases, the fee is set regardless of how much you actually use the service (#3).  Logging on once a month costs the same as logging in every day.

One other difference, not mentioned above is the ability for the resources to be quickly altered based on usage.  From the reading and training I have had on the cloud, this was probably the most useful feature to me.  In a typical data center, you have your machines.  They may be physical or virtual, but your space and resources are allocated when you sign up for the service.  Expanding or contracting the amount of resources is a process that requires someone to set up a new machine or alter the configuration of a virtual machine.  

In a cloud environment, they can be easily configured to add additional resources based on the load at a given time.  This does not have to be predetermined or even contracted for.  As you are only paying for what you use, you are only paying for those extra resources when they are needed.  Once they are no longer needed, they shut themselves down and you are back to your normal environment.  In fact, during a training on the Amazon Web Services EC2 Cloud Environment, the hardest part was turning off the load balancing so we could shut down our servers.

Obviously, there are other benefits and features that set clouds apart from data centers.  These range from virtually unlimited storage, to the flexibility of only paying while you are using the servers to the ease of rolling out new environments.

There are, of course, benefits that data centers have over clouds.  Unless this has changed recently, Microsoft currently does not allow its licenses to be used in a cloud environment.  I expect this will change as this was announced prior to them launching the Azure Cloud.  Also, there is the lack of physical access to the servers in a cloud.  You will probably never have access to the server room for Azure or EC2 or any of the other cloud servers out there.  In fact, with Amazon’s EC2, they will not even tell you where your servers are physically located.  You are pretty much limited to knowing the continent of your server.

Hopefully this helps clear up some things about the differences.  We really do need a clear definition of what is Cloud Computing.  Until we have that, Larry Ellison, CEO of Oracle, will be able to make comments like his statement that, “I can’t think of anything that isn’t cloud computing with all of these announcements”.  This may be a little extreme, but, based on many companies claims, it’s not that far off.