Jump to content

art0l0

Members
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About art0l0

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. turetzsr, Clicking the link in your post gets me the same message as I posted above. I went to the spamcop home page via the first link in your post and found only the three radio buttons that I have seen before follow by the donate via PayPal button. I am using Internet Explorer 6 for my browser. I went to internet options an put an 'always allow' spamcop cookies in my list. I have a screen shot of the left side of the homepage, but don't know how to post that here. I have no trouble getting to the reporting page. OOPS, There is a MailHosts button on my reporting page!! It does get me to the information without problem, but the link in your post comes up with the same message as the link in Julian's post. I was looking for the HOME page rather than the MY SpamCop 'home' page. Thanks for the help!!
  2. I may well be blind, but I have been unable to locate a link from the home page. Maybe I have just not located the home page, I have put: http://www.spamcop.net/ in the address bar. I have logged into the forum and tried the link in Julian's post and the above quote is copied from the resulting page. Julian does mention paid and free users in the post.
  3. art0l0

    Question about Mole

    Why not just remove the option if the experiment has failed??
  4. art0l0

    Question about Mole

    After nearly 12,000 practice runs I suspect that I submitted my first report that was transmitted to a system administrator very early this morning. I signed up for the free reporting service in late December '03. At that time, and as late as March according to Question, the FAQ indicated that mole reporting was the recommended approach. I had always seen the line about the check boxes, but had never seen a check box until I reregistered last evening. I had never seen a report ID before that time. (That might indicate that the actual change took place quite some time before the FAQ change that has been noted.) Thank you to Question for paying attention and for calling this to my attention. I was unclear as to how to go about the reregistration process, but finally decided, after trudging about the site in search of clear instructions, to just fill in the blanks on the registration form and see what happened. My new authorization code arrived and when I went to my reporting page my average reporting time was unchanged, even through I had not submitted any spam under the new authorization. I would like to see a line of clear instructions as to the mechanics of reregistration either in the mole FAQ or a new FAQ dealing with this. Also, a notice posted on the reporting page might draw attention to this to those that are really interested in having their complaints heard.
  5. art0l0

    Question about Mole

    Since the time frame is about right, is there any speculation regarding weather this change is reflected in the significant change in the statistical graphs??
  6. art0l0

    problem

    I have had two or three reports with this same problem. The first I tried submitting at least three times and then gave up on it. It never showed up on my page as unreported spam. The next time I tried resubmitting one the result was back in a flash with the normal reporting buttons. If it happened a third time that email also processed on the second pass without problem.
  7. art0l0

    Slow Today?!

    I have experienced the delays and the slow reporting that others have posted about. I understand that there has been some new code put into place. It appears that this allows the parser to handle spam with a very large number of links. The statistics graphs have been strange since about the time that this change was made, and the slowdowns also seem to coincide. There have been periods where the number of reports sent (the blue graph) has been less than the spam that was reported. Since there are reports sent for the origination of the spam and for the links included in the spam, this is an abnormal situation. The graphs have also shown a very low level of spam whenever the system is operating at a reasonable speed. I have been reporting since just before the first of the year. At that time the graph usually showed 10 - 12 messages per second. With all the backdoor viruses the volume at least doubled. There were a couple of days last week, and the same is true this evening, where the volume indicated is averaging in the 6 - 8 messages range. If I were guessing, I would say that admin is working out some kinks in the new code.
×