A Visible customer recently faced a troubling misunderstanding with the company’s automated spam detection system. After working with customer service to reactivate their account, the individual was informed that the deactivation stemmed from being flagged for excessive texting, which the company identifies as spam. However, the user contends that their replies of “STOP” were not spam, but instead legitimate responses to a series of unwanted political messages. This incident underscores a growing tension between automated spam detection systems and genuine user interaction, particularly as political texts become increasingly common.
The affected customer shared their experience on Reddit, explaining they were unable to send messages due to the system categorizing their repeated “STOP” replies as spam. This misunderstanding also resulted in the individual losing $20 to reactivate their line. The scenario illustrates the complications posed by the influx of political campaign messages that many Americans faced during recent election cycles. Individuals have typically three options when inundated with such messages: ignore them, mark them as spam, or reply with “STOP.”
Unfortunately, in this case, choosing to reply with “STOP” activated the spam flag within Visible’s automated systems, leading to the disruption of normal service. Other users in the online discussion advised against replying to spam texts, suggesting it alerts the sender that a human is engaged. After the customer’s Reddit post, a Visible employee reached out, indicating the company was aware of the potential issues with its spam detection methods. This response suggests that service providers must strike a balance between protecting users from spam and preserving their communication abilities.
As political campaigns continue to utilize text messaging, it is essential that carriers refine their detection processes to prevent such misinterpretations in the future. Addressing these concerns will be crucial as more individuals experience similar situations with the evolving landscape of political communication.