重新发送邀请/操作电子邮件
我有一个网络应用程序，可以发送电子邮件以响应用户启动的操作。 这些电子邮件会提示收件人做出响应（包含与特定操作相关的 URL。）
我有一些用户要求使用“重新发送”功能来再次推送该电子邮件。
我的反对意见是，如果原始电子邮件最终进入垃圾邮件文件夹（或者第一次没有成功），那么第二次可能会发生同样的事情。 （我已经确认电子邮件没有被退回；它们已被收件人的邮件服务器接受。）
那么社区认为：重新发送和电子邮件邀请/通知的功能有用还是毫无意义？
I've got a web app that sends out emails in response to a user-initaited action. These emails prompt the recipient for a response (an URL is included related to the specific action.)
I've got some users asking for a "resend" feature to push that email again.
My objection is that if the original email ended up in a spam folder (or didn't make it all the first time), the same thing is likely to happen the second time. (I've confirmed that the emails haven't bounced; they were accepted by the recipient's mail server.)
So what does the community think: is the ability to resend and email invitation/notification useful or pointless?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（9）
绝对有用，至少从用户的角度来看。 通过手动重新发送电子邮件，他们知道电子邮件已发送，并且可以立即检查垃圾邮件文件夹以捕获邮件。 否则，他们可能不知道该邮件，并且在他们发现之前该邮件就会从垃圾邮件中消失。
Definitely useful, at least from the user's point of view. By manually resending the email, they know that it has been sent and can check their spam folder immediately to catch the mail. Otherwise, they might not know about the mail and it will dissapear from their spam before they can catch it.
它可能很有用。 用户可能不小心删除了它。 这可能是收件人邮件服务器中的暂时性错误。 垃圾邮件过滤器并不是丢失邮件的唯一原因。
It can be useful. The users may have deleted it by accident. It may have been a transient error in the recipient's mail server. Spam filters aren't the only cause of lost mail.
绝对没有意义。 但是，如果用户想要它，并且不需要太长时间，那么这可能是值得的。 用户有时很傻，如果这能让他们高兴......
Absolutely pointless. But, if the user's want it, and it doesn't take too long, it may be worthwhile. Users are silly sometimes, and if it makes them happy...
如果你实现它，我会让用户重新输入并重新确认他们输入的电子邮件地址，并且我不会允许它使用多次，否则很容易编写滥用脚本来轰炸某人的邮箱。
If you implement it I would get the user to re-enter and re-confirm the email address they entered and I would not allow it to be used more than a few times, otherwise it would be very easy to script an abuse script to bomb someones mailbox.
这绝对是有用的。 可能有很多情况。 例如，用户意外删除了原始电子邮件。
It is definitely useful. There could be a number of cases. For example, user deleted the original email accidentally.
有用 - 在第一次和第二次发送之间，许多因素都可能发生变化。
Useful - any number of factors can change between the first and the second sending.
没有人反对重新发送它的能力，不是吗？ 假设重新发送它会以相同的操作结束，则不算数 - 重新发送它没有坏处。
如果有人支持它，并且没有人反对，那应该是一个简单的决定。
There's no argument against the ability to re-send it, is there? Assuming that re-sending it will end up with the same action doesn't count - there's no harm to re-sending it.
If there's an argument for it, and none against it, that should be an easy decision.
这是绝对必要的。 仅仅因为您的申请没有被退回并不意味着邮件实际上已通过。 许多网站会丢弃触发垃圾邮件过滤器的电子邮件，而不是将其发送到垃圾邮件文件夹。 在这种情况下，可以想象，用户可能会同时选择退出其网站的垃圾邮件过滤，然后想要重试。
This is absolutely required. Just because your application didn't get a bounce doesn't mean that the mail actually went through. Many sites drop e-mails that trigger a spam filter rather than deliver them to a spam folder. In such a circumstance, it's conceivable that a user might in the meantime opt-out of his sites spam filtering and then want to retry.
您的反对意见是假设问题是邀请被发送到垃圾邮件文件夹。 您不确定（或者至少您暗示了这一点）。 他们可能需要一个“重新发送”按钮，因为他们想提醒客户付款或再次通知他们某些事情或其他什么。 原因并不重要，因为效果应该相当容易实现，并且允许他们发送任意数量的消息。
其中之一是“客户想要它，这并非完全不合理，也许你应该实施它，而不是质疑他们或想出理由否决它”交易者:)
Your objection is assuming that the issue was the invitation was going to the spam folder. You don't know that for sure (or, at least, you hint at such). They could want a Resend button because they want to remind the customer for payment or notify them of something again or whatever. It doesn't matter the reason because the effect should be fairly easy to accomplish and allows them to send as many messages as they like.
One of those 'the customer wants it, it's not entirely unreasonable, maybe you should just implement it instead of questioning them or coming up with a reason to veto it' dealies :)