Thursday, October 8, 2009

Changing "Opt-Out" status on your Contacts in Salesforce using Vertical Response

If you use Vertical Response with Salesforce.com, you have no doubt run into a variety of quirks, especially when it comes to building and maintaining lists (If you haven't, I should be reading your blog).

Let's say you have a contact that continues to get excluded from your lists, despite showing up in Salesforce, and in every Vertical Response query you run. But when it comes time to generate a list from those queries, that person continues to not show up.

Let me stop here to say that you should never opt someone back in without their consent. Vertical Response has an uncomfortably comprehensive policy about sending email. I recommend abiding by their policies to the "T." In fact, let me be so bold as to provide a real-world example of how you might want to opt a contact back in at their request. When our firm initially adopted Vertical Response, we immediately wanted to test the accuracy of their "opt-out" feature so I had a member of the Sales Team use the email link to opt himself out. Well, ever since then, he was banned from all our email campaigns and I wanted to get him back. So here's how I did it:

Step 1: Be sure the contact's "Opt-Out" field is unchecked in Salesforce.



Step 2: Go to the VR Email tab and choose "View Lists" and click on your list.



Step 3: From the list of contacts, choose "Details" on the contact you want to Edit.

Step 4: Change Record Status to "Manually Uploaded."



Barring any other problems, your contact should now show up in your email list when queried. But watch out! Vertical Response has a variety of things that will prevent your contact from making it to the final mailing list, including: 1) being opted out or 2) having ever been bounced. And the evident disconnect between Vertical Response and Salesforce exposes the fact that, while tight integration allows a user's "Opt-Out" status to flow from VR to Salesforce, Opting back in does not flow from Salesforce to Vertical Response.
Please post any other questions about integrating Vertical Response with Salesforce.com. There's a good chance I have been up against it before and might be able to help.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Friday, September 18, 2009

Confessions of a Conservative

This was a post by UniversalGuy on Digg in Response to the article titled, Bill O'Reilly Backs Public Option, (where he actually does) I thought worth a repost.

I am a conservative.

This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the U.S. Department of Energy.

I then took a shower in the clean water provided by a municipal water utility.

After that, I turned on the TV to one of the FCC-regulated channels to see what the National Weather Service of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration determined the weather was going to be like, using satellites designed, built, and launched by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

I watched this while eating my breakfast of U.S. Department of Agriculture-inspected food and taking the drugs which have been determined as safe by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

At the appropriate time, as regulated by the U.S. Congress and kept accurate by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the U.S. Naval Observatory, I get into my National Highway Traffic Safety Administration-approved automobile and set out to work on the roads build by the local, state, and federal Departments of Transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality level
determined by the Environmental Protection Agency, using legal tender issued by the Federal Reserve Bank.

On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to be sent out via the U.S. Postal Service and drop the kids off at the public school.

After spending another day not being maimed or killed at work thanks to the workplace regulations imposed by the Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health administration, enjoying another two meals which again do not kill me because of the USDA, I drive my NHTSA car back home on the DOT roads, to my house which has not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building codes and Fire Marshal's inspection, and which has not been plundered of all its
valuables thanks to the local police department.

And then I log on to the internet -- which was developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Administration -- and post on Freerepublic.com and Fox News forums about how SOCIALISM in medicine is BAD because the government can't do anything right.

###

P.S. the article continues:

Indeed, supporters of the public option do so for the very reasons O'Reilly notes. A study by the nonpartisan Commonwealth Fund found that "a public coverage program similar to Medicare would reduce projected health care costs by about $2 trillion over 11 years, and reduce premiums by about 20% on average. Within about a decade, 105 million people would be enrolled in the public plan, and about 107 million would have private insurance, according to the Commonwealth Fund."

Friday, August 28, 2009

Which Apps will work/not work in Snow Leopard?

Apple's Snow Leopard OS was released today, but before buying, I thought I'd check the list of compatible software just to make sure I don't shoot myself in the foot just to be an early adopter. (Maybe I'll just be a "bargain shopper" and wait for the tablet later this month to get Snow Leopard free?)

Anyway, I noticed Carbonite for Mac was still being tested, while Mozy was already working. Further indication about the direction I might go for data backup (see my past article reviewing personal data backup applications).

The only other one that really caught my eye was GoToMeeting. That thing is a bit of a mess for Macs (and PCs if you want to do anything with the recorded sessions) as it is, so I guess I'm not sure what I'm really hoping for here anyway.

Anyway, I'd love to hear results, comments or reviews from fellow early adopters of Snow Leopard right back here. Happy 64 bit computing!

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Finding healthy food in an unhealthy economy

Author's note: probably the most interesting part of this post is the excerpt and link from TIME Magazine towards the bottom. The rest is just my own unedited rambling on the subject of finding healthy foods in an unhealthy economy.

A morning news story today showing people boycotting Whole Foods for its CEO's stance on health care reform gave me an equal dose of disappointment and encouragement. Disappointing of course, because any time I see a corporation that seems to share the values of a consumer who just wants to find healthy, reliable products for his/her family, it's only a matter of time WHEN that company will be exposed for lying, cheating, stealing and generally contributing to the slow, yet constant poisoning of our food supply.

But, encouraging because each revelation about how unhealthy a "grilled chicken salad" at the awning-striped place of your choice really is -- is a reflection of the growing transparency of the debate. And ironically, that's a good thing.

It is nice to finally hear other people join what used to be the wing-nut fringe of folks who wanted healthy food. Truly healthy food. In our country, we are told what's good for corporations is best for the economy. So, any request that they consider their impact on the environment, our health, or even condoned discrimination of their own employees is an absurd cost they can't bear.

Those of you who know me know I am not trying to paint a negative picture of factory farms or rights-violating retail giants, but simply trying to provide an entry point for many friends and family into this debate. While questioning that great deal you are getting on pickles at Wal*Mart shakes the foundation of your reality (if not simply your budget), I believe it is utterly necessary for our children, and our civilization.

Unfortunately, the answer is not taking what these corporations give us, to try and make the "best decision available." When we shop in Target's organic farmer's market section, it's out of hope, not fact. I can only hope that food is a little less bad, used a few less pesticides, was grown in soil that was a little less lead-contaminated and the trucks it came in on drove a few less miles to get here (and hopefully, crates didn't get switched by the minimum-wager responsible for stocking them on the shelves before his smoke break).

Here's an excerpt from TIME Magazine (8/21/2009):

"So what's wrong with cheap food and cheap meat — especially in a world in which more than 1 billion people go hungry? A lot. For one thing, not all food is equally inexpensive; fruits and vegetables don't receive the same price supports as grains. A study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that a dollar could buy 1,200 calories of potato chips or 875 calories of soda but just 250 calories of vegetables or 170 calories of fresh fruit. With the backing of the government, farmers are producing more calories — some 500 more per person per day since the 1970s — but too many are unhealthy calories. Given that, it's no surprise we're so fat; it simply costs too much to be thin."

Read more in TIME Magazine's Getting Real about the High Prices of Cheap Food.

We live in a time when even the alternatives are not always good ones. I was told about a neighbor a few years ago who devoted a large area of his yard to gardening. He produced at least half of his family's fruits and vegetables on his own. Truly remarkable, and something I'd like to work towards, but it seems he forgot to check one last thing before planting his first seeds. A simple soil test would have revealed that his soil had a high contamination of lead, and he wouldn't be left wondering if he was responsible for his own child's mental illness.

What that should warn us is that even the alternatives, like urban farming, we are given might be no better than the injustices we are trying to avoid. But joining the conversation and trying to put pressure on the companies we buy from is our right, and our responsibility. Corporations will not do the right thing on their own, it would not be "fair" to their shareholders in the short-term, which is all we typically ask them to consider.

What are your thoughts?