With Bit of News, it's easy to unsubscribe with one click. If people didn't want it, they would have unsubscribed. At least that's what I would do.
I've found that people tend to like emails that they expect, and dislike the ones that are out of the blue. If you expect it everyday, it's a pleasure instead of an annoyance.
Be careful with this assumption. It might surprise you how many people won't bother to click unsubscribe (no matter how obvious you make the option) b/c they just click "spam". I have friends who have been caught by this one in the past.
So far I haven't received any spam reports from Mailchimp - hopefully that's because I haven't received any instead of Mailchimp failing to catch any haha...
Think about it this way: if there was an auto-unsubscribe mechanism, which ethical bulk email senders honored and spammers didn't, then it would become much easier to filter spam: any message that clusters into a message-cluster that the system has sent out an unsubscribe-request for already, is junk.
Every spammer who wanted to "trick" the auto-unsub mechanism would basically have to first dox themselves for all the world to see. And any certificate that turned out to not be a valid means of contacting the spammer would be quickly revoked.
Because then they can dictionary attack a large list of random emails, send out a trivial campaign, and collect a list of valid users then sell it to someone else.
It would be nice if everyone that actually allows unsubscription would set the correct headers. In my experience, only traditional mailing-lists do, and all the stuff you really want to unsubscribe to reinvent a new interface over http(s). Which isn't great if you're in an email reader, not a web browser.
If people could get their act together and actually supply an accurate text/plain part to all the "fancy" html crap, that'd be great too.
It always makes me sad when companies realize that they've not got an interesting enough offer that stating it in a short concise text is going to get any conversions, an then assume that if they format it so it's unreadable on a small screen, add a lot of images that'll be blocked for privacy reasons, their offer will be more enticing.
Makes me even more sad that it (apparently) works.
I've been in a lot of situations where I gave out my e-mail address to some site because I needed to have them let me know about something specific and then I started receiving unrelated stuff from them. That's what I would call a form of spam. But receiving periodic content you explicitly signed up for? I personally can't find a reason to call that spam.
If there's anyone who decides to subscribe to this and then later can't be bothered to unsubscribe, that's really their own problem.
Don't get me wrong - people who want to use email this way deserve the most customizable and yet straightforward way of getting it and this looks useful for that. I just think email as a platform in this case is a one-forward-two-back thing.
I'm not in the work environment so I can't personally imagine Bit of News to be read in Outlook / Apple Mail / Gmail on desktop while sitting in a chair. Like you said, in that environment email is probably best for time sensitive / work related things. YMMV!
I would find it comforting to be able to finish reading the news every day, just like a news paper. I also like the way you can refer to stories if everyone read the same news, "did you read the top news", as opposed to hacker news where items on the front page can go up and down by the minute. The constant refreshing of news is such a time sink. Picking the right stories for a fixed list of stories of course requires good editorizing
I suppose part of the reason why I like email lists so much is the lack of redundant formatting. Just stick to the de-facto plain-text ways of formatting mail: star for bold, _underscore_ for underline (arguably redundant in itself), angle-brackets for quotation. Reply inline/below the person you're quoting. No graphical smilies. No suddenly changing text size. Just a strong focus on content and prose.
Granted, for actual news, I might want to see images -- and that's a bit of a challenge, sending out attachments to a large list doesn't sound all that appealing -- then again, we do have more bandwidth now than 20 years ago -- shouldn't actually be much of a problem.
Yes and no.
It is a more intuitive interaction that keyboard for a lot of things, and has been used as such for a lot of things… Including by Steve Jobs who introduced the iPhone with one argument only, one that tops yours: better than pens (or rather, he said stylus) we have fingers and those are more convenient. The rest of ‘touch’ is history.
Penmanship is great but as an experienced calligrapher, trained fast hand-writer and reasonably fast typist: no one writes faster and legibly than they type, not after basic training.
Finally: Yes, you should consider switching to longhand when you do what that service does: think hard about the quality of the content. Hand writing goes a tremendous way in showing and triggering appreciation. I am actually devising a business plan with a friend around those lines.