Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
zen4dummies

Contacting SpamCop about a problem

Recommended Posts

I have used SpamCop for about two years and paid up twice, the last being March 17 of this year. I use Outlook Express and have to forward the spam as an attachment. In the past SpamCop would report right back but for the past few weeks I only get a response on about one out of 10 messages. I do not see anyway to contact SpamCop about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gosh, I guess you're right. There's nothing that looks like a "FAQ - please read before posting" anywhere around here. There's nothing that looks like the word "Help" on the www.spamcop.net pages, even when logged in there. No where do I see any evidence that someone before "us" ever posted a question into this Forum thing and even half-expected to get a response. I, like you, have decided that it's probably a waste of time to take a look at all this other stuff on my screen ... it might look like someone else might have typed something in the past, but of course, none of that means anything to "our" particular problem, huh?

Sarcastic? Hell yes!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Please have a look at the FAQ by following these steps:

...HTH!

Edited by Jeff G.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walked in the door, made some coffee, cranked up the stereo with a Sunday morning blues radio broadcast, sat down on front of a screen, fired up three instances of a Flight-Tracker screen to watch the progress of some family members travelling today, fired up another screen, ran through the newsgroups, handled some e-mail, then hit the SpamCop Forum ... this Topic Title grabbed me right off. Then reading ... two years of use, but never looked at the FAQ. Stuff's been screwy for two weeks, but only now getting around to making a complaint about it. Not a lot of data provided to go anywhere for an answer, but what was presented has been much discussed before. I'll admit, I was caught in the moment. Your response was probably more appropriate, but the point remains ... <g>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good answer Miss Betsy,

But my question was why did Spamcopy quite responding to my spam mailings. Maybe SpamCop is now with the DarkSide? I suppose that the only alternative is to change my email address. I can only use so many discount drugs and software and advertisements for my website (which will only produce more spam). Faith and begorra!

zen and FAQ for dummies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suppose that the only alternative is to change my email address.  I can only use so many discount drugs and software and advertisements for my website (which will only produce more spam).  Faith and begorra! 

    zen and FAQ for dummies

20978[/snapback]

What you might want to do is create a new e-mail address that you use for just friends and family. When you subscribe to something, use your old spam-ridden e-mail address. This will (for the most part) keep your new e-mail address clean and shiny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<snip>

  But my question was why did Spamcopy quite responding to my spam mailings.  Maybe SpamCop is now with the DarkSide?  I suppose that the only alternative is to change my email address.  I can only use so many discount drugs and software and advertisements for my website (which will only produce more spam).  Faith and begorra! 

    zen and FAQ for dummies

20978[/snapback]

...Did you follow Jeff G's advice 20948[/snapback]?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But my question was why did Spamcopy quite responding to my spam mailings.  Maybe SpamCop is now with the DarkSide?

"Quit responding" also brings up the spector of an ISP that has brought some new filtering on line (also an item covered in the FAQ here) .... However, "quit responding" is also a change from the original "1 out of 10" that the Topic started with. Changing what few facts you provide isn't going to help with pinning down a solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Quit responding" also brings up the spector of an ISP that has brought some new filtering on line (also an item covered in the FAQ here) .... However, "quit responding" is also a change from the original "1 out of 10" that the Topic started with.  Changing what few facts you provide isn't going to help with pinning down a solution.

20987[/snapback]

Why don't you 'quit responding' Wazoo and keep your sarcasm in Ioway.

zen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There can be several reasons why you have stopped getting replies to your submissions. It depends on whether you never get a reply or whether sometimes you get a reply, which answer would be the best to investigate - and only you know exactly the 'symptoms' of your problem.

If you don't understand Jeff G's post, please ask. Wazoo can be incredibly helpful when he has enough facts to diagnose the problem (rather than incredibly sarcastic when he doesn't. You have to understand that he has worked very hard to incorporate the suggestions of other posters who got lost in the FAQ so that the FAQ are easier to use and where people can see the different scenarios which may be causing the problem so that they can fit their symptoms to the correct solution - or at least know what they could ask to clarify the FAQ). You do have a sense of humor - since you laughed at my little joke. As with most things, a sense of humor makes even difficult problems easier to deal with.

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Quit responding" also brings up the spector of an ISP that has brought some new filtering on line (also an item covered in the FAQ here) .... However, "quit responding" is also a change from the original "1 out of 10" that the Topic started with.  Changing what few facts you provide isn't going to help with pinning down a solution.

Why don't you 'quit responding' Wazoo and keep your sarcasm in Ioway.

Sorry? There was no sarcasm in that response.

You changed symptoms.

You still haven't provided any of the basic data. OS, application, method of submittal, whether it's just the confirmation e-mail that's missing or if the Report Now function is alive and well when you login at the www.spamcop.net page ... just a few of the items not mentioned in your query thus far.

And for the final item in question, your Topic Title and your continued query don't jive. "How to contact SpamCop" is in fact addressed in a number of FAQ entries, most recently made a direct link from the single-page access list form of the FAQ 'here' .... Coincidentally, you'll find that this Forum is just one of those contact points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why don't you 'quit responding' Wazoo and keep your sarcasm in Ioway.

    zen

21016[/snapback]

Sorry? There was no sarcasm in that response.

<snip>

21019[/snapback]

...Why don't we all just give zen what s/he wants and "quit responding?" S/he seems more interested in ignoring good advice and making nasty comments like this to those trying to help her/him than in resolving the problem.... :( <frown>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry? There was no sarcasm in that response.

<snip>

21019[/snapback]

...Why don't we all just give zen what s/he wants and "quit responding?" S/he seems more interested in ignoring good advice and making nasty comments like this to those trying to help her/him than in resolving the problem.... :( <frown>

21023[/snapback]

Did wazoo give me good advice? S/he didn't even read my original post where I stated "I use Outlook Express and have to forward the spam as an attachment." . I don't think that the sarcasm was called for.

Edited by zen4dummies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Please have a look at the FAQ by following these steps:

...HTH!

20948[/snapback]

Thanks for the help Jeff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose 'sarcasm' is never called for, but the fact is that your post was answered by JeffG and you never acknowledged it so no one knew whether you had solved your problem or not.

When one is new to troubleshooting, one sometimes doesn't understand the problems of the 'helper' and since one is frustrated to start with, it is sometimes difficult to understand the help - especially if what you want to know is not the most direct way to getting that help. I know I feel remarkably foolish when I finally understand what the problem is. However, as I said before, a little sense of humor - especially the kind that can laugh at oneself is a valuable thing.

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the help Jeff.

21061[/snapback]

You're welcome. I hope that you were able to benefit from those FAQ Entries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Why don't we all just give zen what s/he wants and "quit responding?"  S/he seems more interested in ignoring good advice and making nasty comments like this to those trying to help her/him than in resolving the problem....  :( <frown>

21023[/snapback]

Did wazoo give me good advice?

21060[/snapback]

...Looks like it to me.
  • "Quit responding" also brings up the spector of an ISP that has brought some new filtering on line (also an item covered in the FAQ here) ....

    20987[/snapback]

    (Which I understood to mean: there's a reference in the FAQ to "quit responding," so you may want to have a look at the FAQ.)
  • However, "quit responding" is also a change from the original "1 out of 10" that the Topic started with.  Changing what few facts you provide isn't going to help with pinning down a solution.

    20987[/snapback]

    (Which I understood to mean: please clarify to make sure we understand you so that we can provide appropriate answers without wasting your time or ours.)

S/he didn't even read my original post where I stated "I use Outlook Express and have to forward the spam as an attachment." .

21060[/snapback]

..."Didn't read" is, IMHO, an unjustified accusation; "failed to notice" would be justified! :) <g>

I don't think that the sarcasm was called for.

21060[/snapback]

...Neither Wazoo nor I were able to see any sarcasm in this reply (of his) (as opposed to his original reply -- was that what you were referring to by reference to sarcasm?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×