0

Let's suppose a website that sends (useful) mails from a "noreply address". Nobody read messages from this mailbox because it is just to notify (useful) information.

At this time, if someone, sends an email to noreply the silence is the answer.

But, here, they are a person with a great idea: set an autoanswer on noreply mailbox to reply people with a message "this is a noreply address, no body read this message, thanks".

In my opinion this is a kind of oxymoron, an autoreply on a non-reply mailbox. But, may be, this is a bad pattern in other effects that I can't see at this moment or may be this is a good solution to let know people don't wait for a reply.

Question:

In terms of user experience, is a good idea to configure an autoreply on a non-reply mailbox to say people nobody is reading their mails?

Notice: ( Edited due Pectoralis Major's answer )

Body eMail contains a link to https webapp. User can be in touch with service through the webApp easily. eMail is not a secure channel and messages can contain sensitive data.

3

In terms of user experience, is a good idea to configure an autoreply on a non-reply mailbox to say people nobody is reading their mails?

In terms of user experience, just don't use no-reply e-mails. Its simply frustrating for people if they have to waste their time by searching for the address they can reply to.

There are absolutely no arguments why someone should use no-reply e-mails, its bad for user experience and bad for e-mail marketing as well.

Telling people "we don't read your mails" sounds arrogant, are you to "busy" for your customers?

The least you could do if you insist on using no-reply e-mail addresses is to provide the users a way to get in touch after they reply to your no-reply e-mail.

  • Same rude category as Pepe, the unsubscribe donkey. – Uwe Keim Jul 10 '18 at 11:41
  • LOL, we don't use Pepe :) ( Into non-reply emails they are a link to web app, there the user can be in touch with service in a secure channel. eMail is not secure and content may be sensitive in most cases ) – danihp Jul 10 '18 at 14:50
  • There are absolutely no arguments why someone should use no-reply e-mails <- avoid to receive sensitive data through not secure channel. – danihp Jul 10 '18 at 14:54
3

You could let your users know all of this.

Topic-related From email address. Instead of sending from a no-reply address, you could send notification emails via automatic-notifications@domain.com, so users will know that they are receiving an automatic notification from your service.

Contextual auto reply. If users reply to somebody called "automatic notification", instead of bouncing their message with "You cannot send emails to this address", you could be proactive and answer with a useful list of contacts the user can write to, or some FAQ strictly related to the topic of the notification.

For example, let's say you are sending a notification about an order:

  • notification email can be sent from automatic-order-notifications@domain.com
  • if a user replies to that particular address, he receives back a message that says
    We are sorry, but we cannot handle your message for security reasons. 
    For any question about orders please write to sales@domain.com or 
    check these useful links:
    • How to edit an order • How to cancel an order • ...

In my applications I avoid using no-reply addresses so users can always reply to automated emails and be helped straight way, but I understand that this can lead to some problems when you are dealing with sensitive info.

  • 1
    I like this approach. We can keep question as 'not accepted answer' for some days to let people the chance to post other clever approach like this one. – danihp Jul 11 '18 at 12:10

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.