APEWS FAQ

[Derek T]

Is it not high time we had a pinned, prominent APEWS FAQ?

farelf's standard reply would be a good starting-place IMHO.

(feel free to move to lounge)

[lisati]

Is it not high time we had a pinned, prominent APEWS FAQ?

farelf's standard reply would be a good starting-place IMHO.

(feel free to move to lounge)

Good suggestion, but do people read stickies? I've seen many requests for help with removal from APEWS on the WhatIsMyIpAddress forum even though it's covered in an announcement there.

[Farelf]

Good suggestion - will add when I can, in the meantime have included a link to the APEWS FAQ in the standard response (multi-moderation) template and test posted. Heh, MM even warns that post has already been "touched" - Wazoo did a great job on this stuff.

[Farelf]

Pinned note added, FAQ entry cross-reference, the Multi-moderation [APEWS] response modified (see result in test topic). petzl has quite properly pointed out (elsewhere) the Al Iverson references in the previous MM are a bit old whereas APEWS certainly seems to be active and up-to-date ("... the report of my death was an exaggeration," as the man said). To avoid any possibility of us being used as a catspaw in some unknown game, I have removed the backlinks to the Iverson advice on "what to do" in recent instances of the MM. I note though that the CBL is similarly dismissive/uncomplimentary of APEWS - but, whatever, they abide, they are satisfied with themselves, networks use their lists. And they remain inscrutable, no clear indication which "public forums" the network owners are supposed to utilise to publish their error reports to invite review but the general assumption seems to be that the incidence of false positives is very low and fairly-well only spammers and spam hosts are listed.

[Farelf]

Evidently NOTHING works. The language barrier is a big factor I guess. Not surprised by that, it all confuses the heck out of me too.

To reduce the frustration of our long-suffering SC membership, I gathered up all the (relatively) recent APEWS removal requests I could find at a glance together with responses and merged them all into a master topic in the SpamCop Lounge (http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=13067). No doubt that muddles the sequencing of post and response in some cases but since those things don't belong on this forum at all - too bad.

Any further APEWS removal requests as individual topics here or in the Lounge will be merged there too. No more Mr. Nice Guy (we shall miss him, I'm sure).

That applies to removal requests. Any more generalized discussion of THAT blocklist or the spamming which supposedly leads to listing in it is perfectly acceptable in this forum and, as it says in the sticky (http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=13802) can be discussed in separate topics - IN THE LOUNGE (SpamCop Lounge).

[Farelf]

And still the little devils straggle in, all forlorn and disconsolate (but ever hopeful). Thanks for handling the last couple Steve T, I have merged them into the master thread in the lounge.

Pinned note has been modified (APEWS Removal, DO NOT post removal requests) with the addition of

For some independent, calm advice on APEWS listings (and supposed APEWS blocking), read Listed on APEWS: what to do (and what definitely not to do). DO NOT post removal requests ANYWHERE, in any section of this forum!

The point made in the link (anta.net) - that it may be unwarranted to assume APEWS listing is the actual cause of any blocking - is well made.