General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): Request to Re-send Opt-in Emails

Since most prospects, guests, and members ignore emails from server@toastmastersclubs.org as spam or require in-person guidance on clicking "agree", some clubs use a guest form to get opt-in with a Google form to "subscribe to mailing lists". Is that sufficient or can you share the opt-in terms of FreeToastHost for us to incorporate in our guest form.

Given the new GDPR requirements for Europeans and your request that our members opt-in again (instead of officers opting in on their behalf with their permission from their application, guest forms, and other means), how can we re-send opt-in emails to these groups (e.g., prospects, guests, members, affiliates) when they're already opted in previously by officers on their behalf with their consent indirectly using terms that may not include the new GDPR clauses for storing data and respecting privacy?

Virtual Parliamentarians #7850496

Sorry no, we can only process those opt-in made via our system.

We do not aim to be the end all to all. If FTH does not meet your requirements you and your club are more than welcome to create your own website and pay for the hosting and programming to build your club's custom site.

Thanks for the response, but we didn't state that FTH doesn't meet our requirements to warrant creating our own website and paying for hosting and programming to build a custom site. As advocates of FTH, we're simply sharing some gaps in the workflow for marketers with industry best practices, such as a double opt-in, that could be integrated with FTH for maximizing effective use of most stakeholders involved. Hence, we're in the midst of proposing a revision to the opt-in email for making it more readable to elicit a higher reply rate as per your colleague's open-minded response.

Based on your response, it seems we'd either have to delete all our members and their data after exporting it and the re-add them and re-enter their data after guiding each one to opt-in. To avoid this, wouldn't it be more helpful to enable officers to re-send opt-in emails to everyone periodically for ensuring their preferences haven't changed (e.g., new email address with different opt-in preferences, new marketing regulations) or compensate for mistaken opt-ins. Without resending this opt-in, some may unsubscribe inadvertently and blacklist associated email addresses, which are hard to remove or fix based on your current processes that seem to be exploited by some at the expense of others intentionally and unintentionally.

All the members, guest, prospects, former members all had to opt-in to be added to the FTH website. Not sure why you think they have to do that again?

virtual.parliamentarians wrote:

Thanks for the response, but we didn't state that FTH doesn't meet our requirements to warrant creating our own website and paying for hosting and programming to build a custom site. As advocates of FTH, we're simply sharing some gaps in the workflow for marketers with industry best practices, such as a double opt-in, that could be integrated with FTH for maximizing effective use of most stakeholders involved. Hence, we're in the midst of proposing a revision to the opt-in email for making it more readable to elicit a higher reply rate as per your colleague's open-minded response.

Based on your response, it seems we'd either have to delete all our members and their data after exporting it and the re-add them and re-enter their data after guiding each one to opt-in. To avoid this, wouldn't it be more helpful to enable officers to re-send opt-in emails to everyone periodically for ensuring their preferences haven't changed (e.g., new email address with different opt-in preferences, new marketing regulations) or compensate for mistaken opt-ins. Without resending this opt-in, some may unsubscribe inadvertently and blacklist associated email addresses, which are hard to remove or fix based on your current processes that seem to be exploited by some at the expense of others intentionally and unintentionally.

Are you stating this based on some specific instance that you actually saw happen or are you surmising some hypothetical maybe/possible future event? We base how the system works a lot based on both our combined experience in Toastmasters and what users tell us... All of us have been former District officers, for example, and Brian was a former District Director, so we have seen a good bit of how clubs work, both well, and not so well.

Setting up a scheme where officers do a lot of stuff on behalf of members (instead of those members doing it) in the website is problematic. We do not want to require people to opt-in any more than is actually necessary. We caught quite a bit of blow-back just getting the current opt-in scheme in place (users do not seem to care much about regulations although we have to), even though it was set up to leverage how the system was already being used at the time.

All of the requests and feedback is based on real experience, not hypothetical, of processes and problems that I encountered in 10 clubs in five districts in NY and CA as well as over 250 clubs that I visited in eight countries across four continents.  Some are online clubs that have more regulations, such as GDPR, to follow given the higher chance of having European visitors and members.  For example, three officers in one of my clubs, which won best website using FreeToastHost in a district, struggled to get a young professional member, who worked in design at tech companies, to opt in to no avail for over three months (even though s/he repeatedly consented verbally at meetings to add her to our mailing list).  Since most of my clubs are also volunteer organizations with a member-centric focus, we aim to make members' live easier (even with a white glove service model for club growth and retention, not frustration).  This might be where our disconnect starts where one trades-off service with self-sufficiency, sustainability, etc.    

Since email doesn't enable us to ask clarifying questions for complex. sensitive, and/or dynamic topics, I'm happy to brainstorm solutions when convenient to exchange perspectives for serving district officers as an Admin Manager, a club officer (all roles), sponsor, and coach who also works in product management for regulated industries, such as health care.  Given the decentralized governance of Toastmasters over districts and clubs, I've witnessed firsthand how they vary in following laws, policies, and protocols even in proximity. 

Hence, district leaders around the world founded and joined Virtual Parliamentarians to help Toastmasters Int'l become the place where ethical "leaders are made" using parliamentary procedure and growing parliamentarians for following rules and regulations.  By understanding the spirit and intent behind these policies that most haven't read and/or been trained on, we hope to reconcile diverse processes and interpretations using the Pathways ethical framework and other decision-making tools for the best, holistic solution that may complement each other's blind spots, cultural way of doing things, etc.