| As with all things, this is a context where the important information was on-platform and the emails were opt-in subscriptions. YMMV. > It seems like a low cost to maintain people who subscribed but never loaded a tracker image. On the contrary. Each send costs. This adds up. It also adds cost to the overall processes involved due to unbounded growth in possible recipients. Reputation with service providers is another concern. Google, for instance, will punish a sender's deliverability if enough recipients never open emails. Failing to clean your list impacts the ability to deliver to active users. > What percentage of your addresses never phone home? These were an extreme outlier. Such that it's simpler to send an email communicating the pending removal unless they opt-in. > So pruning them from your list would remove potentially lucrative customers. These decisions aren't made in a vacuum. Links themselves are also tracked. Those users also weren't actively clicking emails either. On the system I was cleaning up, something like 20% of outbound emails had _zero_ engagement. |