The more it changes ... the more it is the same. Could still serve as a template after nearly eight years:
(epub) In defense of SpamCop and vigilantes - in the midst of some robust discussion on the 'evils' of SpamCop, some real information is thrown into the ring by the redoubtable 'Bob Cortez'. Yes, this is at the heart of why FAQs are favored 'here' and why people are often pointed, firmly, in their direction if they seem unable to find them unaided. Few regular denizens have the stamina for endless repetition and paraphrasing has disadvantages as well as advantages. Miss Betsy's pinned http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=972 covers the points in (much) greater detail and there have been several occasions when they have been stated in posts in something like the short form given by Bob Cortez so that evidently has some merit.

The saga at epub is pretty well played out within http://emailuniverse.com/epub/2001/04/index.html and http://emailuniverse.com/epub/2001/05/index.html (each having two pages in the full listings) but the thread structure is a little chaotic. Some interesting notions here and there, such as inconvenient TOS provisions not being worth the paper they're (not) written on (in other words, freedom of action is the consumer's alone ). The recurrent themes of hair-triggered ISPs and the unfairness of affecting innocent co-users of IP addresses are stated as well (those are valid concerns of course). Robbie Burns versified the useful (though strangely absent) gift of seeing ourselves as others see us. The referenced pages (pre CAN spam) offer a glimpse.

IMHO, it is not unfair that co-users of IP addresses are affected also. Users can choose email providers and if they choose irresponsible email service, that's caveat emptor. There may, of course, be occasional blips because no one is perfect, but they should be of short duration, being immediately addressed by the email provider.

There should always be short and long versions. The practice of providing links in short versions to a more complete explanations is the best way. Part of the reason that many of our FAQs are long is that techies insist on including every possible instance - three people responded to a 'short' post I made that only mentioned the FROM and didn't mention the return-path (because I didn't think the OP would know what a return-path was).

Miss Betsy

Yes, it is all down to admin at the offending IP and they are driven more by commercial considerations than by 'truth, beauty and the American dream' though some are still of the opinion there is no conflict there (and yet others have different dreams). But it is not SC's 'fault' in any event. SC is the messenger and there are far sterner BLs out there which might come into play if the message is not heeded in time.