Why I Just Deleted Some of My Subscribers (And Why That’s a Good Thing)
I just went through my subscriber list and removed everyone who hadn’t opened one of my last 20 emails. If that sounds like a big cut, it was — but I want to explain why I did it, and why I think it’s actually the right way to run a free resource like this one.
The Math Nobody Talks About
Running “Norwegian Genealogy and Then Some” doesn’t cost me much, but it isn’t free either. Every subscriber on my list costs something to reach, whether that’s a flat fee or a per-contact charge, depending on the tier I’m on with my email provider. It’s a small cost per person — but it adds up, and it adds up regardless of whether that person ever opens the email.
I don’t run this blog to make money. It’s a labor of love, and I intend to keep it that way. But “labor of love” doesn’t mean “unlimited resources,” and I’d rather spend what I do spend on the people who are actually reading — not on maintaining a number that looks good in a dashboard somewhere.
What “20 Unopened Emails” Actually Means
I didn’t pick that number lightly. Twenty emails, at the pace I send them, is a stretch of many months — plenty of time for someone to be genuinely busy, on holiday, or just quietly not that interested anymore. It’s not a one-strike policy. It’s a “we’ve clearly drifted apart” policy.
I didn’t send a “please stay” email first, and I did that on purpose. If twenty emails in a row haven’t earned a single open, one more email asking for attention isn’t likely to either — and I’d rather not spend even that one extra send chasing an inbox that’s already tuned me out. I just went through the list and removed anyone past that threshold.
Why This Isn’t About Vanity Numbers
It would be easy to read this as chasing a “better” open rate for its own sake, but that’s not really the point for me. A handful of things matter more:
- Deliverability. Email providers pay attention to how many of your emails go unopened. A cleaner list means the emails I do send are more likely to land in the inbox of the people who actually want them — including you.
- Honesty with myself. If I’m going to keep writing this blog for the long haul, I’d rather have an honest picture of how many people are actually along for the ride, not an inflated number that makes decisions look better than they are.
- Respect for readers. If someone genuinely isn’t interested anymore, the kindest thing I can do is stop cluttering their inbox. Nobody owes me their attention just because they signed up once.
What This Means If You’re Still Here
If you’re reading this, you’re one of the readers who stuck around — thank you for that. Nothing changes for you. You’ll keep getting the same research notes, case studies, and Norwegian genealogy deep-dives as always.
And if you ever find your interest fading, no hard feelings — just click unsubscribe, or simply let your inbox tell the story. I’d rather you leave cleanly than sit on a list you’ve stopped reading.
If you were removed and want back in, you’re welcome any time — just re-subscribe from the blog, and you’re back on the list, no questions asked.
The Bigger Point
I think a lot of bloggers and small publishers quietly worry about this same thing: is it wrong to prune a list? Doesn’t a bigger number always look better?
I’d argue the opposite. A list of 400 people who actually read what you send is worth more — to them and to you — than a list of 1,000 where 600 have mentally unsubscribed but never clicked the button. If you’re running something similar, don’t be afraid to do the same math I did. Your engaged readers will thank you, even if they never know it happened.
