Cristina Cristofoli

As we are now forced to use the new UI to update security roles, I’ve encountered a few challenges that I believe, if addressed, could significantly enhance the user experience:

1. Bulk Updates for Security Roles: The current process for updating security roles can be time-consuming, especially when needing to make changes to multiple roles. Could you consider implementing a feature that allows for easier bulk updates? This would greatly improve efficiency, particularly for organizations that need to manage a large number of security roles.
2. Increase the Viewable Rows: The new UI currently displays only four rows at a time, which limits visibility and makes it difficult to get an overview of the settings. Extending the view to show more rows would be a significant improvement, allowing users to see more data without needing to scroll as frequently.
3. Optimize View Width: The current width of the permission settings view often requires horizontal scrolling, which can be cumbersome. Reducing the width of the view or allowing for more flexible resizing options would help ensure that all relevant information is visible at a glance, without the need for excessive scrolling.

I believe these enhancements would make the interface more user-friendly and efficient for those of us who regularly manage security roles.

Hi Microsoft team,

I’d like to propose an enhancement to the Brand profiles functionality in Customer Insights – Journeys.

Currently, Brand profiles allow for configuring elements like sender details, theme, and social media links, but there’s no option to upload a logo or standard image. This feels like a major gap — especially since the visual theme can already be previewed directly in the brand profile setup.

Logos are a core part of brand identity, and many organizations use them consistently across all communications. Being able to assign a logo (or a standard image like a header) directly to the Brand profile would:

• Improve consistency across marketing assets
• Reduce manual work in adding the same image to every brand-specific email
• Make full use of the existing visual preview feature by showing how logos interact with brand colors and layout
• Better support multi-brand setups within the same environment

It would make a lot of sense to align Brand profiles with real-world brand identity standards — and an image field would be a simple but powerful addition to achieve this.

Thanks for considering this improvement!

Best regards,

Cristina

I would like to submit a feature request regarding the current implementation of double opt-in (DOI) in forms within Customer Insights – Journeys.

Based on our recent testing, we have identified several critical issues with the current DOI behavior that limit its usability in real-world scenarios, particularly for organizations that want to ensure GDPR-compliant, user-friendly subscription processes.

Current issues:

1. When DOI is enabled:

• If a contact does not yet have a Contact Point Consent record:
• Regardless of whether the user checks the consent box on the form, they will receive a DOI email.
• The form submission is not completed until the recipient clicks "Yes" in the DOI email.
• This breaks the user experience, especially when the consent checkbox is optional.
• If a contact already has a Contact Point Consent:
• If the user does not check the consent box (but is already opted in), they are unsubscribed.
• If the user does check the consent box (but is currently opted out), they are subscribed without DOI confirmation.
• This logic is inconsistent and can lead to unwanted changes in consent.

1. When DOI is disabled:

• Regardless of whether the contact exists:
• If the user does not check the consent box, they are unsubscribed.
• If the user does check the box, they are subscribed.
• This means simply not selecting a checkbox results in an opt-out, which is problematic for optional subscriptions (e.g., newsletters).
• 
  

This behavior is particularly frustrating when designing lead generation forms where the primary goal is to capture interest or sign-ups for something else (e.g., a demo or a download), and the newsletter subscription is an optional add-on. In such cases, it’s crucial that users who choose not to opt in are simply left untouched — not automatically opted out. The current logic makes it impossible to offer a non-intrusive, user-friendly opt-in option without risking that existing subscribers are unintentionally unsubscribed or that contacts are opted in without proper confirmation.

Feature Request:

We would like to request an update to the DOI and consent mechanism, with the following objectives:

• Support for optional subscriptions without enforcing opt-out:
• If a user does not select a consent checkbox, their existing consent should remain unchanged.
• The system should not interpret lack of action as an explicit opt-out.
• Separate the DOI process from form submission logic:
• The form should be submitted regardless of DOI response.
• The DOI email should serve only as confirmation for opt-in, not as a gatekeeper for the entire form submission.
• Ensure that already opted-in contacts are not opted out by inaction:
• If a contact is already opted in, filling out a form without selecting the checkbox should not result in losing their consent.

This change would align better with common email marketing practices and legal expectations in many regions (especially under GDPR), while also supporting a more intuitive and respectful experience for end users.

We appreciate your consideration of this request and would welcome any opportunity to elaborate further or assist in testing future improvements.

Hello,

There is confusing and counterintuitive behavior with how consent is managed through Marketing forms. The logic for both new and existing contacts, especially concerning Double Opt-In (DOI), seems to create significant risks for data integrity and GDPR compliance.

Scenario 1: Form with NO Double Opt-In Enabled

Observed Behavior:

New Contact:

• Checkbox is checked: A new contact is created and is opted-in. (This is expected).
• Checkbox is not checked: A new contact is created and is opted-out.

This is incorrect and problematic. A new contact who simply doesn't check a box has not actively opted out; they have simply not opted in. The system should create the contact with no consent record, leaving them in a neutral, default non-consented state. Creating an explicit "opt-out" record is a destructive data action that was not initiated by the user.

Existing Contact:

• Contact is currently opted-out, and the checkbox is checked: The contact's consent is updated to opted-in. (This is expected).
• Contact is currently opted-in, and the checkbox is not checked: The contact's consent is updated to opted-out.

This is a major issue. For example, an existing subscriber might use a "Contact Sales" form to ask a question. If they forget to re-check the marketing consent box on that form, they are unintentionally removed from all communications. This is not a desirable or logical outcome.

Primary Question for Scenario 1:

Is it the intended system behavior for an unchecked consent box to create an "opt-out" record for new contacts and overwrite the consent of existing opted-in contacts? If so, what is the recommended method to prevent accidental opt-outs and ensure an unchecked box results in no change to consent data?

Scenario 2: Form WITH Double Opt-In Enabled

Observed Behavior:

• New Contact & Checkbox Checked: A DOI email is sent. Upon confirmation, the contact is created and opted-in. (As expected)
• New Contact & Checkbox NOT Checked: A DOI (double opt-IN) email is still sent. Upon clicking the link, the contact is created with an explicit "opt-out" record.
• Existing Opted-In Contact & Checkbox NOT Checked: A DOI email is sent. Upon confirmation, their consent is changed to opt-out.

Questions for Scenario 2:

1. Why is a Double Opt-In email sent when the user has NOT opted in? Sending a confirmation email to create an "opt-out" record is illogical, confusing for the user, and goes against the principle of Double Opt-In.
2. Why are new contacts not created until after DOI confirmation? The initial submission is a valuable lead, even if marketing consent is never confirmed. We need to capture this contact information immediately upon form submission. Is there a way to enable this?

Scenario 3: Compliance Profile DOI Setting

We have tested the setting: "For new customers only - Do not send DOI email if the mail address already has consent."

Observed Behavior:

If an existing, opted-out contact submits a form with the consent box checked, this setting causes them to be immediately opted-in without receiving a DOI email.

Question for Scenario 3:

This behavior seems to completely undermine the purpose of DOI. A contact who was previously opted-out is precisely the person who should receive a DOI email to re-confirm their consent. This setting should only bypass DOI for contacts who are already opted-in. Is this behavior intentional?

Summary of Core Issues:

1. Destructive Consent Logic: Forms actively create "opt-out" records or overwrite existing "opt-in" records when a consent box is left unchecked. This is a critical flaw.
2. Illogical DOI Process: Sending DOI emails when contact is not opting in is confusing and incorrect.
3. Delayed Contact Creation: Not creating contacts until DOI is confirmed results in lost lead data from initial form submissions.
4. Flawed Compliance Setting: The "For new customers only..." setting incorrectly bypasses DOI for previously opted-out contacts, which is a major compliance risk.

The current implementation of consent is far from useful and presents serious risks. We need clarification and solutions for these behaviors.

Thank you.