“From” Addresses in QuickBase
In the next major update to QuickBase one of the things I would like to address is the issue of how we set the FROM address for emails sent by QuickBase.
First some background. All email messages contain 3 email addresses, the TO address, the FROM address and the REPLY-TO address. The REPLY-TO is optional and most email clients will just use the FROM for replying if the REPLY-TO is absent. A second bit of background is that an email address may contain text that is purely informational such as the full name of the user to whom the email is being sent.
Today QuickBase sends the following emails:
- Notifications
- View Subscriptions
- Reminders
- Email-a-record
- Email-a-view
In the first two cases we give you some control over the FROM address. In the other cases we don’t.
This issue is whether the FROM address should be the email address of the actual sender or an email address from notify@quickbase.com that might look like this:
fred_smith @ example.com (via quickbase) <notify@quickbase.com>
The reason for using the latter is that, more and more, email servers are rejecting as SPAM any incoming mail message that has a FROM address in the same email domain as what is normally sent out from that server.
So here is what I am proposing to do: Email messages sent out from QuickBase will always come from notify@quickbase.com. However, we will give you, the user, control over what appears in the informational part of the FROM address. More importantly we will give you control over the REPLY-TO address.
But the biggest change is that we will remove these options from individual notifications, subscriptions, etc. and, instead, provide these options at the application level or even possibly at the Workgroup level. My feeling is that this is a fairly technical configuration option that someone subscribing to a view isn’t necessarily going to have the expertise to understand. Much more likely that the application/workgroup administrator will be able to make these decisions and that, in fact, this configuration should apply to all emails sent from that application/workgroup.
Comments?
Joe Rice
QuickBase Lead Designer | www.quickbase.com | Intuit – Waltham Office
9 Trackbacks/Comments
Scott on June 15, 2005 at 11:53 pm
This is SO needed but what I really need is a way to have the reply-to address be set on a database-by-database basis. Maybe a reply-to [username field]. Here is a ‘for instance’:
I’ve build a simple task-tracking system for one of our VP’s. He basically is using QB for himself and having it send out the emails. He doesn’t need people to update the actual QB (just want’s people to do what he needs done and not worry about maintaining the db). Anyway, it would be so cool if the message from QB could have a reply-to so that users clicking reply sent messages back to him.
Same goes for out contracts database. People keep replying to me when I was just the builder. I have to forward the message on to our contracts administrator when a reply-to field would work perfect.
[Reply]
Raphael on June 16, 2005 at 10:17 pm
I agree that being able to set the reply-to address based on a field in a table would be great.
[Reply]
David Snyder on June 17, 2005 at 1:38 pm
So with this new version when a person hits in outlook reply will they be able to send to me at dsnyder@burrelles.com?
[Reply]
Jeff on June 17, 2005 at 1:55 pm
We definitely need the ability to set the reply-to address, and using a field for the information would be very useful. However, we consistently use a different option for different view subscriptions, notifications, etc., so setting this as an application-wide option sounds like it might eliminate that flexibility? I understand that this may be an option more technical than the average user needs, but you do have an Advanced Options section in the email setup–could it not remain there?
[Reply]
Joe on June 17, 2005 at 2:45 pm
While I can’t promise it, I definitely hear that being able to set the REPLY-TO address to the value in a field in the app would be powerful.
Jeff, I think it would be possible to leave it in the Advanced Options as an override of the application default.
David, it’s not clear whether we will be able to allow you to set the REPLY-TO to an arbitrary address. The problem is that we have to control it somewhat so that people can’t use QuickBase to send SPAM. For instance, we couldn’t allow someone to set the REPLY-TO to ’support@microsoft.com’.
[Reply]
Mark Shnier on June 17, 2005 at 5:09 pm
I can see that I am late jumping onto this bandwagon, but as an application builder internally in our company, I know get people REPLYING to me, when I’m just the builder or owner of the application, but not the one they should be replying to.
95% of my issue would be met with an appplication wide variable which could be limited to members of my WorkGroup, or if you prefer, registered QuickBase users. The last 5% would be an override at the View Subscription or email notification level, but that would just be icing on the cake.
I know this is a bit off topic, but it also bugs me that you can send an email notification to a list of QuickBase Users, but for a View Subscription you are forced to select from your various Roles. I end up creating dummy subset Roles in order to get the View Subscriptions going to the correct Distribution List.
I just mention this now, because I know in programming, once you have a patient on the operating table, you may take out an appendix while you are on there for some other reason.
Mark Shnier
[Reply]
james lacorte on June 20, 2005 at 9:44 pm
Whoever is sending the email a view or record should have an option to be the reply to.
Views, subscriptions should also allow admin to set the replt to
[Reply]
Tim Rowe on June 24, 2005 at 10:11 am
We are a relatively new Quickbase user that has jumped in with both feet creating a pretty massive app (we’re up to about 15 tables and lots of inter-relationships).
Joe, I think you are missing a beat when you choose to limit the reply-to flexibility on the basis of wishing to avoid being a source of spam. This is more of a theoretical concern than actual, I believe. I can sign up for a hotmail or a gmail account, and send out spam very conveniently. Few spammers would pay $250/mo for a tool to do this, and it would be trivial for you guys to monitor the volume of outbound emails and flag anyone doing an unacceptable volume of mail. In fact, you could simply set a system limit on the # of outbound mails.
One of the really special things about Quickbase, that separates it from every other tool I’m familiar with, is that it is ‘mail aware’. I’m hoping that you actually push this functionality much farther, and it would certainly further differentiate Quickbase from the pack. For instance, I would like to be able to send an email to an individual in a user field with a form asking them to update or input data, which then makes its way back into the database. I imagine I can do this already with some programming, and that is a very cool thing.
TIm
[Reply]
John on January 14, 2006 at 12:29 am
How about allowing the app owner to specify a mail server so all outbound email goes through the company mail server? This will eliminate the spam problem alltogether.
John
[Reply]
