Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Lilreptile

BLAMING THE SPAMMEE

Recommended Posts

EXCUSE ME????

Um, do you guys not know that unethical spammers will harvest email addresses and then CLAIM someone registered ??

I never registered. They sent me over 20 emails in the last two days. THAT is what's going on. End of story. Wonder away.

--- SpamCop Admin <service at admin.spamcop.net> wrote:

> The mail from [snipped] that you've been

> reporting looks like something

> you signed up for when you registered for their

> service.

>

> How did you get tangled up with [snipped]?

> Why haven't you unsubscribed

> rather than report their traffic?

>

> Please fill me in on what's going on. No one

> else is reporting their mail,

> so I have to wonder.

>

> Thanks!

>

> - Don -

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what you might trying to accomplaish by posting a communication with the guy who's tasks include the administrative side of the SpamCop system. I'll ask first .... have you answered Don's questions other than by this public display of assumed outrage?

If you really wanted some kind of input, one would think you'd have identified the actual item being discussed. Based on the lack of (and intentionally munged) data, I'm going that this is actually a bit of rant, thus it gets moved to the Lounge area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, did you reply to the Spamcop admin?

What spammers are you talking about?

Why are you ranting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest SkydiveMike
Why are you ranting?

22394[/snapback]

Personally, if I received a reply "in that tone" from an admin (presumably an employee whose job exists because I pay for the service) I would rant also. Regardless of if the original poster is right or wrong the response he received in 100% unacceptable.

(*) Assuming that the email he posted is complete and accurate, of course -- can't validate that in an online forum like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no reason to come into any forum ranting.

He could rant back to the Admin but no one in the group caused any grief (Yet).

Edited by Merlyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
presumably an employee whose job exists because I pay for the service

FYI, you would get the same message whether you used the free service or the paid service. It is not a function of how much you paid.

I see nothing wrong with the message sent. THis user is the only one reporting these messages which is usually NOT the sign of a spammer. A simple reply explaining that you never signed up would do wonders.

I have received similiar messages about a list that was resurrected after more than 3 years, under a different name, about a different set of products by the same manufacturer I once had contact with. After explaining it to Don, I had no more questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EXCUSE ME????

Um, do you guys not know that unethical spammers will harvest email addresses and then CLAIM someone registered ??

Yes, we are. It happens all the time.

I assume you're unaware that SpamCop users sometimes file false reports about mail they requested. That, too, is something that happens all the time.

I also assume that you're unaware that SpamCop users sometimes use our service to prosecute a personal agenda when they get mad at a service they signed up for, and instead of unsubscribing, they take to reporting the mail as spam in order to cause trouble for the vendor.

So, when someone challenges one of our reports, I look up the report history to see what's been going on. When I discover that there is only one user reporting the traffic, I have to wonder why...

- Don -

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest SkydiveMike
FYI, you would get the same message whether you used the free service or the paid service.  It is not a function of how much you paid.

22410[/snapback]

Good to know; I will be treated rudely by the spamcop admins if I contact them directly and will be treated rudely in the support forums. Straw, meet camels back.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good to know; I will be treated rudely by the spamcop admins if I contact them directly and will be treated rudely in the support forums. Straw, meet camels back.....

I'm having a bit of an issue with your definition of the word "rude" ... stating facts, asking for more details and additional input, attempting to correlate the word of one against the "rest of the world" is a far cry from being "rude" ... just as in another of your Topics, Don's words were asking for data not found within the spam submittals/complaints from that user, and as it turns out, by that user alone ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest SkydiveMike
I'm having a bit of an issue with your definition of the word "rude" ... stating facts, asking for more details and additional input, attempting to correlate the word of one against the "rest of the world" is a far cry from being "rude" ... just as in another of your Topics, Don's words were asking for data not found within the spam submittals/complaints from that user, and as it turns out, by that user alone ...

22429[/snapback]

My definition of rude includes the comment below that was directed towards me:

you want to play around and not "help us help you"

Especially given the fact that I have been validating settings, posting tracking URL's and generally trying to provide as much information as possible.

My original post (link below) specifically states that I have the correct addresses in my whitelist; yet all you can do is tell me that I must not have the correct addresses in my white list and teo read the FAQ. I have posted after that statements that I have validated my whitelist (multiple times now).

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...indpost&p=22332

Don's words to a different user were also rude -- email (indeed the written word in general) does have a "tone" to it and Don's words did have a rude tone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don's words to a different user were also rude -- email (indeed the written word in general) does have a "tone" to it and Don's words did have a rude tone.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I saw nothing rude in Don's reply. It doesn't have the 'customer service' buzz words that make the customer feel he is always right (Rule #1; Rule #2 if the customer is wrong, see Rule #1). The only thing he could have said that he didn't was 'Did you, in fact, visit that site?'

The person did not say that they had never visited that site and was extremely rude. I am extremely angry that Target signed me up for all kinds of lists without my knowledge when I bought something from that site. However, after a long discussion with an admin in the newsgroups, I decided that it was more effective to complain to the company rather than report them. IMHO, spamcop should ban all reports for anything one has had a prior relationship with. The criteria for reporting unsolicited contact is too personally based (some think that, as I did, that if I didn't explicitly ask for contact, they are spamming; others, that if they unsubscribe - which I also did - but the unsubscribe didn't work for 30 days - and continue to receive mailings that it is spam; others that one should try several times before reporting, etc.).

The basic problem with seeing 'replies' as 'rude' is whether you are talking to customer service (who has to always be polite and conciliating) or to a 'peer' - another user who is trying to be helpful. From my experience, in the newsgroups and on this forum, those who don't expect to be treated as a customer and accept the advice, etc. are extremely pleased with the results. Those who expect to hear replies couched in 'customer service' jargon are not.

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don's words to a different user were also rude -- email (indeed the written word in general) does have a "tone" to it and Don's words did have a rude tone.

22437[/snapback]

It's too bad the original poster snipped out the context of the message. For example, if it were something like a "word of the day" message from a dictionary web site, then maybe anyone would respond to the user in the same way.

Here's another way to think about it: Would be better for Spamcop administrators and volunteers to respond to these situations using carefully composed (but completely generic) form letters rather than off-the-cuff messages? How would that make a typical user feel?

Lilreptile (the topic starter) felt "spanked" or punished by the tone a message from the administrator. We don't know whether Lilreptile responded directly to the administrator and/or did a "reality check" on the spam reports, or just jumped in to complain on the BB.

For SkydiveMike, he has felt repeatedly "spanked" or punished by the responses by posters to the BB. His response is understandable in that light -- he has "spanked" back. Presumably we can see both sides of the exchanges so we can form our own opinion on the rhetoric. Again, we don't know anything about any exchanges with the support email address, but even on the BB, a pre-composed generic form response (including hot links) might have generated a different response.

SkydiveMike's situation is the downside of the "user bulletin board" support model. (Spamcop is not alone here, lots of companies operate BB software.)

Maybe Spamcop is prone to heated exchanges because unwitting system administrators wrongly accuse the Spamcop BL for all sorts of network ills, so maybe it would be helpful to step back and come up with a different model. And of course Spamcop email support is pretty far removed from the Spamcop spam reporting support, so from a user's perspective maybe they should be separated by a name change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's too bad the original poster snipped out the context of the message. For example, if it were something like a "word of the day" message from a dictionary web site, then maybe anyone would respond to the user in the same way.

I'm still working hard to figure out the "rude" thing. All I see are a couple of questions and a factoid offered to explain why the questions were being asked.

Here's another way to think about it: Would be better for Spamcop administrators and volunteers to respond to these situations using carefully composed (but completely generic) form letters rather than off-the-cuff messages? How would that make a typical user feel?

In general, that's what the FAQ is for.

Lilreptile (the topic starter) felt "spanked" or punished by the tone a message from the administrator. We don't know whether Lilreptile responded directly to the administrator and/or did a "reality check" on the spam reports, or just jumped in to complain on the BB.

After kicking a note to Don and seeing Don's response 'here' ... I'd say it was pretty obvious that there was never a response to Don.

For SkydiveMike, he has felt repeatedly "spanked" or punished by the responses by posters to the BB. His response is understandable in that light -- he has "spanked" back. Presumably we can see both sides of the exchanges so we can form our own opinion on the rhetoric. Again, we don't know anything about any exchanges with the support email address, but even on the BB, a pre-composed generic form response (including hot links) might have generated a different response.

Having run a BBS for years, this is no BBS ... you repeat this "generic form with hotlinks" ... how about an example?

Maybe Spamcop is prone to heated exchanges because unwitting system administrators wrongly accuse the Spamcop BL for all sorts of network ills, so maybe it would be helpful to step back and come up with a different model. And of course Spamcop email support is pretty far removed from the Spamcop spam reporting support, so from a user's perspective maybe they should be separated by a name change.

You are correct in that e-mail accounts are handled completely separate from the reporting side .. but that also goes along with learning how to use your tools ... and now there's another take on things .. rude, then alleged name-calling, then alleged "go away" statement", and now "heated exchanges" ... let's toss out yet another factor then .... it's the first set of "normal" days after the holidays ... there are a lot of folks getting inunfated with e-mail, phone calls, etc. from those wonderful people that got those neat presents for christmas, and only now getting around to trying to figure it all out .... the point being that a two line quickie is easier to kick out than sitting back and composing a "nice" long letter ... that some people take that two=line quickie as being "rude" ... that's on them .. sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest SkydiveMike
The basic problem with seeing 'replies' as 'rude' is whether you are talking to customer service (who has to always be polite and conciliating) or to a 'peer' - another user who is trying to be helpful.  From my experience, in the newsgroups and on this forum, those who don't expect to be treated as a customer and accept the advice, etc. are extremely pleased with the results.  Those who expect to hear replies couched in 'customer service' jargon are not.

22450[/snapback]

I don't expect "customer service jargon" on this forum I expect customer service. Given that this is a support forum hosted on a spamcop.net server I have every right to expect that service. I should not be required to report my problem in multiple places, nor should I be subject to "peer" behavior on an official support forum.

P.S. Don't argue that the official support is support[at]spamcop.net and that this is not official. This forum is hosted at spamcop.net and therefore is, by definition, official support. If spamcop wanted a "peer only" forum they could have hosted one at yahoogroups.com, exboard.com, friends-of-spamcop.com or any other non spamcop official domain. The fact that the spamcop admins chose to put a forum at spamcop.net means that they created an official support forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm still working hard to figure out the "rude" thing. 

...

the point being that a two line quickie is easier to kick out than sitting back and composing a "nice" long letter ... that some people take that two=line quickie as being "rude" ... that's on them .. sorry.

22458[/snapback]

Of course it is "on" them, HOWEVER nobody needs to attempt to invalidate people's feelings. It doesn't work, and in a lot of cases it has exactly the opposite effect from what you intend.

What I was trying to say is that two people in this thread felt communications sent to them was disrespectful. It doesn't matter whether anyone else agrees or disagrees (except that it has become a public exchange, basically inviting public debate). You don't make any progress on the technical issue by addressing a person's feelings with anything other than an apology.

This Bulletin Board software may not accommodate boilerplate, but that's what I was recommending -- people come here with a question that looks like it's covered in the FAQ, and a volunteer could reply with (polite) boilerplate, which includes hot links to one or two specific FAQ entries.

I don't think this is a good model for support, however. Given the complexity of the tools, I don't think very many people have the time or patience to discover all the ins and outs, not even the volunteers. Several frequent responders here, for example, disavow any knowledge of the Spamcop email service. Because it has the Spamcop name on it, however, there will be a sizable fraction of people who assume it's part of the package and expect to get support on it in exactly the same way.

I just checked the forum and I'm posting this in the "lounge" so I presume I am not taking this thread off topic ;)

P.S.: If I were going to suggest an improvement, I would suggest an automated FAQ sorter (aka "wizard") where the person hitting the board with a support request at least gets to the right general area based on choosing among some radio buttons. The forms could also allow people to discover and paste in IP addresses and other helpful information, and then and the end, if the person's issue hasn't been resolved as a result of going through the process, all of the basic information would be collected in a standard format, ready to submit to a support person. Since it might be most efficient to include personal or sensitive information in this format, a public Bulletin Board for vounteers would NOT be a good place to do this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the tone seemed a little rude, but of course I do not know the whole story.

In addition, I also believe that the site should have a challenge “3 way handshake” type system in place before sending someone “spam”. I have no tolerance for a site that fails to take these steps in this day and age (of spam).

On another note, and maybe along the same lines, I have never visited yourbigvote.com and I receive many spam from them all the time. I never signed up to receive anything from them and never visited their site until I tried to remove myself from their list weeks ago. I still get spam from them and their IPs never seemed to be listed, so I have been wondering if I am the only one reporting them. Although, I have never heard from an Admin asking me for more info. :)

Have any of you ever heard of this site, or received spam from them?

Edited by dhanna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://groups-beta.google.com/groups?q=yourbigvote.com - hits going back to at least 2002

http://www.mxtoolbox.com/index.aspx says No MX records found for yourbigvote.com

whois -h whois.crsnic.net yourbigvote.com ...

Redirecting to ALLDOMAINS.COM INC.

whois -h whois.alldomains.com yourbigvote.com ...

MarkMonitor.com - The Leader in Corporate Domain Management

Registrant:

North Plains, LLC (DOM-172243)

8391 Beverly Blvd., #297 Los Angeles CA 90048 US

Domain Name: yourbigvote.com

Administrative Contact:

Eunice Ko (NIC-1102903) North Plains, LLC / Brenda Closser

4712 Admiralty Way #604 Marina del Rey CA 90292 US

brenda[at]yourbigvote.com +1.3108544206

Technical Contact, Zone Contact:

eunice Ko (NIC-1102904) North Plains, LLC / Brenda Closser

4712 Admiralty Way #604 Marina del Rey CA 90292 US

brenda[at]yourbigvote.com +1.3108544206

Created on..............: 2001-Dec-17.

Expires on..............: 2005-Dec-17.

Domain servers in listed order:

64.156.186.15

64.156.186.16

01/06/05 21:35:45 dns yourbigvote.com

Mail for yourbigvote.com is handled by mail2.yourbigvote.com mail.yourbigvote.com

Canonical name: yourbigvote.com

Addresses:

64.156.187.108

http://www.openrbl.org/ip/64/156/187/108.htm - in 20+9 Zones

http://www.senderbase.org/?searchBy=ipaddr...=64.156.187.108

Volume Statistics for this IP

Magnitude Vol Change vs. Average

Last day ........ 0.0 .. -100%

Last 30 days .. 0.0 .. -100%

Average ........ 1.1

http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/sbl.lasso?query=SBL21472 ... no dealings with your bugvote outfit, but from this list, there's a couple of other users that I know of that "enjoyed" dealing with quickinspirations a few years back <g>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course it is "on" them, HOWEVER nobody needs to attempt to invalidate people's feelings. It doesn't work, and in a lot of cases it has exactly the opposite effect from what you intend.

I do know a lot about 'listening' skills and validating people's feelings (feelings are neither right nor wrong). It is what a lot of the customer service jargon is based on. And it works most of the time. However, just as it seems impossible to teach people to be responsible internet users, most people don't understand how it works. It is also difficult to master the art and to remember to use it all the time.

You don't make any progress on the technical issue by addressing a person's feelings with anything other than an apology.

I am not so sure that is a correct statement. It is always a good idea to acknowledge a person's feelings so that s/he feels that s/he is being understood and sometimes that is all that is required.

The problem, basically, is that the originator (and many of the responders) knew the internet when everyone were 'peers' and it was internet protocol to be cooperative and helpful with problems and to give assistance to newbies. Spamcop, although a business, is basically a cooperative (like a farm co-op). If people want to be a part of it, that's good. If they don't, that's their loss. Those who don't understand the technical aspects are expected to learn. Now that there are more and more people who are technically non-fluent who are using spamcop, the 'natural' inclination of the techies to help is to 'fix' the problem without teaching the whys (hence all the questions which so many people find rude).

a public Bulletin Board for vounteers would NOT be a good place to do this.

That sounds like a good idea, but usually the people who complain about 'rudeness' do not want to (or cannot) navigate such a form. And the problem is that there are not enough 'paid' staff to be able to handle the questions from such a form. As I said, spamcop reporting is a cooperative in philosophy and volunteer help is the only way to provide help with most of the questions.

The other factor is that there are people who post here just to make trouble. It is my impression that the ones who really have a problem, eventually understand that the responders are trying to help and while some of them cannot admit that they were wrong in accusing people of being rude, they do get the help they want. Even a good customer service department has people that just won't be helped, whose expectations of the service they want is not what the business provides. The ones who want to make trouble continue to complain and eventually are ignored (or are content to just have their complaints be part of the record).

IMHO, it is not a good idea to mix a business with volunteers, but that's the way it is with the spamcop reporting end. (and I am one of those who does not know anything about the email end).

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't expect "customer service jargon" on this forum I expect customer service. Given that this is a support forum hosted on a spamcop.net server I have every right to expect that service. I should not be required to report my problem in multiple places, nor should I be subject to "peer" behavior on an official support forum.

P.S. Don't argue that the official support is support[at]spamcop.net and that this is not official. This forum is hosted at spamcop.net and therefore is, by definition, official support. If spamcop wanted a "peer only" forum they could have hosted one at yahoogroups.com, exboard.com, friends-of-spamcop.com or any other non spamcop official domain. The fact that the spamcop admins chose to put a forum at spamcop.net means that they created an official support forum.

22462[/snapback]

...Thank you, oh god of the definition of "official support." :) <g> You can define things your way, the rest of us will use our own definitions, thank you very much.

...IMHO, you're in the wrong place -- you need to subscribe to a service with a support model that involves listening to "elevator music" for a few dozen minutes, being disconnected, calling back, listening to "elevator music" for another few dozen minutes, then talking to someone whose communication skills are less than sterling and who knows next to nothing about the service about which you are calling. Me, I prefer the peer-to-peer support with the occasional participation of a SpamCop "official." :D <big g>

Edited by turetzsr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To restate Don's email in a friendlier manner (with no inside information):

Hi, and thanks for your continued support of SpamCop.

The email from [snipped] that you've been reporting looks like something you signed up for when you registered for their service, no other SpamCop Reporters are reporting their email, and [snipped]'s email admins are writing to us swearing up and down that you did sign up for it.  Please confirm via return email that you definitely did not sign up for it so that we don't look like idiots when we call their bluff by asking them to back up their claim that you signed up for it.

Of course, if you find that you did sign up for it, please unsubscribe rather than reporting, apologize to them, and copy us on your apology.

Thanks!

- Don -

Does that read better? Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To restate Don's email in a friendlier manner (with no inside information):Does that read better?  Thanks!

25701[/snapback]

Is anyone going to advise "Don" that his "tone" could be improved??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably. :)

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  

×