midimuso Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 Hi All, After many happy reports of spam to Spamcop via my Mailwasher, and really seeing the benefits of reporting as a Mole, I am suddenly (and with no changes at my end) getting EVERY SINGLE report I send in and then manually approve as 'No source IP address found, cannot proceed.' Nothing has changed here...email format exactly the same, being sent via Mailwasher as it has been for months, no differences at all. I must have reported around 40 spams today...all with that error message. Strange! Is it something that the team are aware of, or has my ISP somehow gone and changed things at their end do you think? Anyways, thanks for all your efforts, as ever. Midi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 Not sure at all about what benefits you may be seeing as a Mole reporter (please see a Topic up in Announcements about this subject) .... but there's nothing anyone here can tell you without seeing what exactly what is going on ... and the only real way to do that is by means of a Tracking URL of one of your failed submittals. Please provide one or two of these and perhaps an answer can be derived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbiel Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 One possible problem is an incomplete or non existing Mailhosts set up file. Have you set up Mailhosts yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuantumMechanic Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 I just started using the option to email in spam as attachments, I get Parsing header: No source IP address found, cannot proceed I checked the emails in the sent items and all the data in the attached emails headers is still there. However I checked them once sent to an account with webmin email and the email attachments were just as Spamcop complained of- all IP data had been removed! Is this problem caused by my email client being at fault and is it possible to 'correct' or am I back to copy and pasting the header and then the body directly into Spamcop? Here is a stored report of one of the email attachments I sent in with my Outlook 2000 client. http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z628354927z11...61c72c34a1ef6ez Skip to Reports Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbiel Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 I think the key to your problem is "Outlook 2000" Review the FAQ for information about problems with Outlook and fixes and workarounds for the problems. You may want to start here http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...indpost&p=15843 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 I think the key to your problem is "Outlook 2000" Review the FAQ for information about problems with Outlook and fixes and workarounds for the problems. You may want to start here http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...indpost&p=15843 15895[/snapback] Hi, dbiel! ...This looks like a compliment (to me) -- thanks! <g> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midimuso Posted August 27, 2004 Author Share Posted August 27, 2004 Not sure at all about what benefits you may be seeing as a Mole reporter (please see a Topic up in Announcements about this subject) .... but there's nothing anyone here can tell you without seeing what exactly what is going on ... and the only real way to do that is by means of a Tracking URL of one of your failed submittals. Please provide one or two of these and perhaps an answer can be derived. 15859[/snapback] Benefits...I think that when reporting, because of subsequent investigations/actions by Spamcop, source of spam is stopped quickly; obviously all not down to me, or my reports, but as a small contribution, I see the benefits as indeed we all do from SC's efforts on our behalf. However, problem is now fixed; it was down to my mail provider (Netidentity) changing their entire server range/names and thus the mailhosts were not being recognised anymore. All back to normality, thankfully. Thanks for all your help, appreciated. Midi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 You obviously did not pursue the educational benefits of reading the suggested sources of other data. But, glad one problem has been resolved. I would suggest that you do take the time to actually read about the current status of Mole Reporting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midimuso Posted August 28, 2004 Author Share Posted August 28, 2004 You obviously did not pursue the educational benefits of reading the suggested sources of other data. But, glad one problem has been resolved. I would suggest that you do take the time to actually read about the current status of Mole Reporting. 15923[/snapback] You presume far too much, and thus to all purposes appear to be suffering from a superiority complex for this jump to the 'obvious', for I did read it and imbued all educational benefits from it and it has enriched my life somewhat, but nonetheless I have decided to effect no changes to my reporting mode. As stated at Spamcop*, [whose 'suggestions' I am happy to heed] I am adhering to the one mode of reporting, for now, and am content to do so. I will let SC do what it will with my reported spam, and count myself glad to be able to participate in the schemata. Midi *It is recommended that users pick one mode or the other and use that exclusively. http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/373.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 I'm sorry .. you quoted the FAQ .. wonderful deal. But reading your previous remarks; Benefits...I think that when reporting, because of subsequent investigations/actions by Spamcop, I don't see where it would appear that you read the disussion as seen in the Announcements section (which also talks about the "changed" FAQ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midimuso Posted August 28, 2004 Author Share Posted August 28, 2004 I'm sorry .. you quoted the FAQ .. wonderful deal. But reading your previous remarks; I don't see where it would appear that you read the disussion as seen in the Announcements section (which also talks about the "changed" FAQ. 15943[/snapback] I am but a mere plebian, reporting his spam...I will leave the programming/admin/ and 'completeness' of the 'customer'/'front of office' side of SC to the Gods and let my mole activities run, regardless of whether they are simply being counted-metaphorically or literally. I am aware, from the 'announcements forum' that the FAQ is showing an older version, but I can hardly quote a (more recent) FAQ that I am unable to see, after all. Perhaps you could enlighten me, with regard to the up-to-date SC FAQ/ policy on reporting mode(s), and the recomended frequency of mode changes therein? I would be most grateful for any new, perhaps differing, information in this direction thus adding to my education, limited as it woefully is. Midi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 Strange that you elected to snip out the critical portion of what I'd quoted from one of your previous .. and then you ask me to respond to just that missing portion of data .... mole reports go no where, mole reports currently are not used to load the BL, mole reports only show up if an ISP chooses to look at his/her status, which is generally known, as a result of non-Mole reports (ignoring the spamtrap issues for now) .... The point is/was that your excitment over helping with the complaint results, and basing that excitement on the "subsequent investigations/actions by Spamcop" due to "your" reports just seems to be a bit mis-placed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.