Send an email to the White House.......

That's good news. Without such a system it meant most of what you send is not going to be read.

By placing a system like this in place they can better respond.

Asking questions in email forms is a basic step and a smart one. Knowing things like whether you are complaining or congradulating helps the responsive ability of those who read the email.

It also prevents spam and many other junk emails from making the system unuseable.

But of course the unreasonable will try to make political hay out if it. Such is politics.

You can still send email the old way:

mamaj, This president does not listen to polls, the people, or his advisors. He's an independent kind of guy that loves to tell the world he's the boss, and he has all the answers. He just doesn't realize he's wrong 99 percent of the time, but he's still boss. c.i.

I don't know, craven. I see this somewhat differently. It's like those press conferences where only certain repoters were allowed to ask speified questions; there was a quick, pre-written answer; after 2 or 3 questions, the conference was closed. I've looked through these pages, and find them intrusive. Writing an opinion or question by email should not require a full dossier. And the start-off question about whether you are for them or against them certainly sets the tone for some unpleasant thinking. Why should this be important as to whether you get answered or not?

No Christmas tree viewings; very limited tours. This admin is beginnng to look like one of those fearful banana republics. At least, I think we've been spared so far the paintings on velvet.

I agree with Craven. I can't see how staffers could possibly wade thru 15,000 E Mails a day. Hey the system may not be perfect, but at least they are attempting to streamline it.

I think that it is unreasonable to read any more into it.

mamajuana,

I do not believe any politicians had much of a say in this decision. It most likely originated from the IT department and to be honest doing this makes the quality of the communication much better.

I do not get 15,000 emails a day but I would still not ever use the White House's old system. It was perceived by many as a big spam box whose only purpose is to make the email sender think they've done something.

By instituting systems to cut down on spam and other bulk email sent to them they actually have a chance to read the emails if they want to.

Phoenix, I don't think the word "streamline" fits. If one has to go through seven links to finally reach a form that can be sent to the president, streamline sounds a bit oxymorish. c.i.

c.i.

Until you design a system to handle 15.000 emails a day I posit that you have no idea what streamlining an email system entails. The changes are deliberately made to reduce the amount of frivlous email sent to the White house. That is "streamlining" it.

Then again, you can still use the old way, and if you do so you won't have your email read or answered, just like the good ole way.

I wish people would apply their political bias more reasonably.

Craven, I disagree. It has nothing to do with political bias. I'd say the same thing if a democratic president used this same "streamlining." c.i.

I gotta know if Bush is fer it 'er agin it before I can know if I'm fer it or agin it - eb

ROFLMAO!

BTW, I'm impressed with the exchange taken place in this discussion.

Guys, this is oen of the most simple concepts on the web. Post your email address on a website without making the users fill out forms and about 60% of the email you get will be spam. Spammers use robots to troll the web and collect the emails and then sell them to other spammers. Some will filter out .gov emails but many won't.

Email forms mean your email address is hidden, it also allows more targeted response. When you are getting 15,000 emails a day you need to be able to filter the emails for spam and other idiotic garbage that is sent to you.

Are any of you aware that people spoof the president's email all the time? It's a simple trick that anyone can do. And people do it all the time. I personally ahve received a few emails this year that purported to be from the president. Idiots would spoof the president's email address in the reply header.

This happens all the time, and guess what happens. People respond to these pranks and since the return address is the president's email he gets all the nonsensical replies.

Other people spoof the president's email in mass mailings. Last year I handled an attack on a company;s server in which 7 million emails were sent to random AOL accounts. The spammer used the president's email as the return address (he had a clever way of tying it into the spam, the "president" was recommending a product). All the email complaints, of course, were sent to the whitehouse.

Even people who hate spam cause spam to that address. Some people think that by having the president receive more spam he will make laws to curb it. So what do they do? They sign the president up for all the spam they can hoping to frustrate him into changing spam laws.

Another factor is the mass mailings for political reasons.

On a server I administer there is a political group that supported the war in Iraq and created an "email the president campaign". They wanted to pad their numbers so they were using a script that would dulicate every valid email sent a couple hundred times with random addresses. This means that for every person that clicked their button a couple hundred fake emails were sent to the president's email address.

The system the white house is implementing is not only the most logical way to streamline the email reception it is also the only way. Sure some will like it and others won't but the old way was just a waste. Most emails were just being deleted because they were junk mail.

And even the average end user knows that when there is junk mail the methods used to combat it will occasionally filter out wanted mail.

The system the Whitehouse is implementing is sound and sane. 7 pages before it's sent? I'd have made it more restricted. If you have a message for the president and you can't go through 7 web pages to send it you might consider the possibility that you have an inordinate belief in your importance to the president.

So sure, say it's not political bias, that it's just an honest critique of the methods used to streamline a very busy email response team. Fair enough, but then I get to say you don't have any idea of what you are talking about and are opining from a position of utter ignorance. If you knew what this kind of system involves you would not be making such knee-jerk criticisms of it.

YOu can buy spam killers for $49.95. c.i.

"If you have a message for the president and you can't go through 7 web pages to send it you might consider the possibility that you have an inordinate belief in your importance to the president."

I'd like to say that if you are setting up a e-mail website for the president, and you have to make it necessary to go through all that to get a message through, it might also be true that the president has an inordinate belief in his own importance. But I won't say that, because the term "public servant" really seems to have no meaning in today's world.

<deleted duplicate post>

snood, do you really think evry bit of spam and junk mail should be read by the president? Do you even think that's possible?

Probably not and if so do you think the people who are reading the emails are not deleting in batches?

I have sent emails to the whitehouse and included a spacer image to track whether it was read or not and none of my emails were ever opened.

This is before the streamlining being criticized here and I wonder if people really expect to be allowed to be a time sink for the president of a country.

It's absurd. People have a vote, they have representatives. Nowhere is it stipulated that anyone can take as much of the president's time and attention as they like.

snood, Good point! c.i.

When you get through hyperventilating Craven, maybe you'll consider that my post was more of a sentimental longing for a world where public servants were accessible, moreso than a commentary about how things really can be in the modern world.

Hyperventilating?

I was once, as a green private, on a cross country flight back home on leave. I became aware that there was a Senator from California in the first class section, flying to NC. When we stopped to change planes in Atlanta, I made it a point to "accidentally on purpose" bump the distiguished gentleman from California as I passed, and I got a rush of evil glee as he regained his balance. I guess I've always had a little bitterness at the pampered, reserved parking, expense accounted, designer haircut, special interest wooed, bastards who are our "representative" voices. I'm not proud of that, but I thought it might lend some perspective to my previous comment.