Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
tingo

[Resolved] Spam reporting is dead?

Recommended Posts

Hello folks,

First of all, we have no problem accessing our mails, either POP or via Webmail. That's the most important, so maybe we shouldn't worry after all...?

Since the beginning of November we haven't been receiving any Spamcop reports (when reporting spam in Webmail) nor any of the usual confirmations (when reporting spam by e-mail).

Two e-mails to Don, admin, and to Jeff, support, (the last one on the 11th) have gone unanswered.

Question: is it because reporting is dead, or because something happened to our account? If the former is the case, we wouldn't mind knowing about it, so we just erase the spams instead of wasting our time reporting them. And of course, if it's the latter, we think it should get fixed.

I wanted to post this with the topics related to system instabilities, but it wouldn't let me.

Best,

Michel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Post was moved from the How to use ... forum section .. I didn't see any offerings of a How to ... tutrial, etc. ....

I wanted to post this with the topics related to system instabilities, but it wouldn't let me.

Last thing first ... that instability item goes along with the graphic placed at the top of this very page, label Reporting Server Status ... which if clicked on opens up a page with even more statistics ... the point being, green is showing submittals, the blue line above are reports going out. Blank spots in those color parts are the "instability" issue.

First of all, we have no problem accessing our mails, either POP or via Webmail. That's the most important, so maybe we shouldn't worry after all...?

For seemingly the zillionth time ... the Parsing & Reporting system is basically owned, maintained, and housed in IronPort space in California. The newsgroups, e-mail accounts, and this forum are housed and maintained on systems owned by JT in Georgia.

Since the beginning of November we haven't been receiving any Spamcop reports (when reporting spam in Webmail) nor any of the usual confirmations (when reporting spam by e-mail).

You don't actually offer a lot to go on here ... I'm not even sure why you seem to specifiy a difference in the "after report" actions, but you don't clearly state some of the data that I/we have to sit here and wonder about ... one obvious item is just what e-mail address is involved, specifically the one used for the "Reporting" side of the house.

Two e-mails to Don, admin, and to Jeff, support, (the last one on the 11th) have gone unanswered.

Don is Admin of that side of the house, JT runs the e-mail account side, which you already stated works fine. If you didn't provide Don the same data that I'm finding missing ...???? Don, Deputies receive a staggering amount of e-mail every day, but .... I've got unanswered e-mail from that direction myself (though there may be other reasons for that)

Question: is it because reporting is dead, or because something happened to our account? If the former is the case, we wouldn't mind knowing about it, so we just erase the spams instead of wasting our time reporting them. And of course, if it's the latter, we think it should get fixed.

36638[/snapback]

Graphic and linked page shows that the Reporting system is working for most everyone else. Too much missing data to hazard a guess on whatever e-mail accounts are involved (noting that there are a couple of FAQ entries "here" that may be applicable .. ???) ISP filtering your e-mail, are you one of the folks that work in progress on a new FAQ entry here attempts to resolve (http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=5451 ) ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, we are plain, stupid users of the Spamcop e-mail and reporting system, not Advanced Initiated as you seem to be. I'm sure you'll excuse us for not being familiar with issues as you are, for daring to venture on these Forums with our apparently ridiculous questions, and for not understanding half of what you are writing in your reply.

Post was moved from the How to use ... forum section .. I didn't see any offerings of a How to ... tutrial, etc. ....

Last thing first ... that instability item goes along with the graphic placed at the top of this very page, label Reporting Server Status ... which if clicked on opens up a page with even more statistics ... the point being, green is showing submittals, the blue line above are reports going out.  Blank spots in those color parts are the "instability" issue.

Sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about.

For seemingly the zillionth time ... the Parsing & Reporting system is basically owned, maintained, and housed in IronPort space in California.  The newsgroups, e-mail accounts, and this forum are housed and maintained on systems owned by JT in Georgia.

It is the first time I am on these Forums, not the zillionth time. Again, pardon my ignorance. I have no idea what difference the geographic locations you cite there can do for us, users in Europe, nor what kind of entities JT or IronPort space are. We only know one entity: Spamcop, to which we pay a yearly fee.

You don't actually offer a lot to go on here ... I'm not even sure why you seem to specifiy a difference in the "after report" actions, but you don't clearly state some of the data that I/we have to sit here and wonder about ... one obvious item is just what e-mail address is involved, specifically the one used for the "Reporting" side of the house.

I didn't think that this was proper to post on a Forum. But here it is, then:

submit.ModeratorDeleted[at]spam.spamcop.net

Don is Admin of that side of the house, JT runs the e-mail account side, which you already stated works fine.  If you didn't provide Don the same data that I'm finding missing ...???? Don, Deputies receive a staggering amount of e-mail every day, but .... I've got unanswered e-mail from that direction myself (though there may be other reasons for that)

I have previously got replies from Don (what do you mean "that side..."???) and from Jeff when soemthing was not working, and they always replied. I repeat that the reason for coming on this Forum, where my query seems to be interpreted as intrusive, is that I got no answer, even after resending the mails. I have no idea who or what JT is.

Graphic and linked page shows that the Reporting system is working for most everyone else.  Too much missing data to hazard a guess on whatever e-mail accounts are involved (noting that there are a couple of FAQ entries "here" that may be applicable .. ???)

36639[/snapback]

It might be my understanding of the English language, or of your version of it, but I cannot fathom what you are trying to say.

Michel

Edited by Wazoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First of all, we are plain, stupid users of the Spamcop e-mail and reporting system, not Advanced Initiated as you seem to be. I'm sure you'll excuse us for not being familiar with issues as you are, for daring to venture on these Forums with our apparently ridiculous questions, and for not understanding half of what you are writing in your reply.

Start Here - before you make your first Post

I see you ignored that entry on the first page of the Forum ...

Sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about.

And yet you didn't bother to look at it yet? Look at the pictures, read the legends ...???? The Forum section definitions, well, it's apparent that they weren't looked at too closely ...

It is the first time I am on these Forums, not the zillionth time. Again, pardon my ignorance. I have no idea what difference the geographic locations you cite there can do for us, users in Europe, nor what  kind of entities JT or IronPort space are. We only know one entity: Spamcop, to which we pay a yearly fee.

Once again, I put that Start here link there for a reason ... I can't help it if you chose not to even look at it. One has to make a decision somewhere in deciding what type of account one wishes to sign up for, Reporting accounts have your money going to the California side of things, an e-mail account has your money going to the Georgia side of the house ... Seems a bit late in the game to have to try to explain this ..???

I didn't think that this was proper to post on a Forum. But here it is, then:

submit.ModeratorDeleted[at]spam.spamcop.net

Why in the world you posted your Reporting account code here is beyond me .. I did edit out your codes, but ... still a security violation .. and once again, there are FAQ entries here that deal with how to "fix" this new problem ...

I have previously got replies from Don (what do you mean "that side..."???) and from Jeff when soemthing was not working, and they always replied. I repeat that the reason for coming on this Forum, where my query seems to be interpreted as intrusive, is that I got no answer, even after resending the mails. I have no idea who or what JT is.

How can you possible take "you didn't provide enough data to work with" as being something about you being "intrusive" ????

It might be my understanding of the English language, or of your version of it, but I cannot fathom what you are trying to say.

36644[/snapback]

I've lived all around the world, managed to work through and survive several different languages ... I don't see the problem here ... Links to FAQ entries have been deliberatly placed to be "in your way" .... missing information was pointed to in, other missing data was hinted at ... there are even troubleshooting steps offered up in trying to identify where "missing e-mail" might be disappearing ... but there's nothing here to work with for the "user to user" possible support mode.

Section 8 - SpamCop's System & Active Staff for yet another "starting point"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's working fine for me - my SpamCop Report email messages are going out, I'm getting my "SpamCop has accepted 1 email for processing" email messages (after about 102 seconds), and I'm getting my "Quick reporting data" email messages (all when appropriate). Please see Emailed spam Submissions Disappearing? No Confirmation e-mails?. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's working fine for me - my SpamCop Report email messages are going out, I'm getting my "SpamCop has accepted 1 email for processing" email messages (after about 102 seconds), and I'm getting my "Quick reporting data" email messages (all when appropriate).  Please see Emailed spam Submissions Disappearing? No Confirmation e-mails?.  Thanks!

36655[/snapback]

Thank you very much, Jeff, that is clear talk I can relate to (instead of the difference between Georgia and California, or Timbuktu, or Scotland, or Peshawar, which we should have been aware of, but shamefully weren't, when we subscribed to the Spamcop services some years ago).

I have looked into the link you provided, and as much as I could understand, I found that points 2 and 3 might be relevant. I went further and found that when logging in to our reporting account (something we have never have had a use for, and thus never have done before), I got at first the message "No userid found". Then, attempting with our Spamcop mail address as a user ID, I got a message to the effect that our account is closed (not the exact wording, I don't seem to be able to access it anymore right now). Figuring that that might be the same as having "authorization revoked", I got here:

Why was my authorization revoked?

If this was the case (and I'm still not sure that that is why the process you describe as working fine for you stopped working for us some weeks ago), I cannot see how it could have anything to do with a bouncing e-mail (as far as we are aware, nothing was changed there), nor why we should have "broken" any rules, as we have followed the same reporting routines as we have ever since we subscribed to your services.

If you need more information, can you let me know? Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those coming in late,

Registrant:

TINGO TANCA

Postboks 75

Juelsminde, DK 7130

DK

Domain Name: TANCA.COM

Administrative Contact:

TANCA, TINGO tingo[at]tanca.com

Postboks 75

Juelsminde, Jylland DK-7130

DK

45-76-823030 fax: 45-76-823033

Technical Contact:

ValueWeb hostmaster[at]VALUEWEB.NET

ValueWeb

3250 west commercial Blvd.

Ft Lauderdale, FL 33309

US

954-334-8000 fax: 954-334-8001

Record expires on 07-May-2009.

Record created on 08-May-1998.

Database last updated on 26-Nov-2005 16:52:48 EST.

Domain servers in listed order:

NS.VALUEWEB.NET 216.219.253.211

NS2.VALUEWEB.NET 216.219.254.10

The point being that the Reporting Account does not appear to have been tied to the SpamCop Filtered E-Mail Account, more likely the e-mail address that had not been offered up. (Filling in the blanks best I can, with no help from the individual that has the data ...) The Domain identified in the poster's e-mail address used to register "here" is not immediatly identifiable, but the owner of that block is found in the listing if idiotic ISPs that are filtering (and deleting) outgoing e-mail that "looks like spam" .... For the third time, try the SpamCop FAQ as found "here" .... E-Mail spam submittals blocked by your ISP ... this was one of the reasons my original response pointed to the missing data of the e-mail addresses involved in your reporting ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For those coming in late,

(...)

You have published here the Whois information related to our domain name. While this information is publicly available to anyone looking for it, I cannot see that it should have any relevance whatsoever to the issues I have inquired about. As you seem to have admin permissions on this forum, I strongly suggest that you delete it immediately.

The point being that the Reporting Account does not appear to have been tied to the SpamCop Filtered E-Mail Account, more likely the e-mail address that had not been offered up.  (Filling in the blanks best I can, with no help from the individual that has the data ...) The Domain identified in the poster's e-mail address used to register "here" is not immediatly identifiable, but the owner of that block is found in the listing if idiotic ISPs that are filtering (and deleting) outgoing e-mail that "looks like spam" .... For the third time, try the SpamCop FAQ as found "here" .... E-Mail spam submittals blocked by your ISP ... this was one of the reasons my original response pointed to the missing data of the e-mail addresses involved in your reporting ....

36671[/snapback]

You have posted a link, thank you. What I could understand there does not seem to be relevant, as 1. mails (including spam reports) forwarded from our domain hosting services to our Spamcop address are not (should not be) filtered before they get to Spamcop; 2. we do not use our domain hosting services, ValueWeb, as ISP for outgoing mail; and 3. there have been no signs whatsoever that our local ISP has been filtering outgoing mails.

The rest of what you have written belongs again, sorry to say, to a realm which my limited understanding of some varieties of the English language is not able to reach. OK, I don't always understand the language used in my tax declaration either, but the trend among tax authorities, at least where I live, has been increasingly to try and make themselves understandable by common citizens.

Yet, trying to guess the sense of what you write in the last sentence, I can tell you that two addresses are filtered by Spamcop: tingo[]tanca.com and geo[]tanca.com, whereas the return address belonging to the account used for reporting spam from our e-mail application is info2[]tanca.com

Michel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have posted a link, thank you. What I could understand there does not seem to be relevant, as 1. mails (including spam reports) forwarded from our domain hosting services to our Spamcop address are not (should not be) filtered before they get to Spamcop; 2. we do not use our domain hosting services, ValueWeb, as ISP for outgoing mail; and 3. there have been no signs whatsoever that our local ISP has been filtering outgoing mails.

Not being technically fluent, I don't know what signs would tell one that the local ISP has not started filtering outgoing mail. I would think that the name of that ISP would be relevant to whether they are known to filter.

However, if your authorization has been revoked, then that is the probable cause. In the explanation of why one would get that message, it states that if you broke the rules, then you will get an email stating that. Since you haven't gotten one, it seems safe to assume that you didn't break the rules and that the 'bounce' was the problem. Have you tried to use the contact form?

I looked at the FAQ here(very quickly) in the Forum and didn't see an explanation of why a 'bounce' would occur, but it did say this:

If your login is successful, then (also noted in the above FAQ) the issue may simply be that for some reason, your secret e-mail address has been flagged by the SpamCop Parsing and Reporting Service as having bounced. Once flagged, the Service will not waste any more time trying to send anything to that address. If you are in this situation, it will be very clear on the Service page - instead of being able to paste your spam, you will be presented with the following: <snipped>

IIRC, the glitches to cause a 'bounce' when there is no change in the email address are varied from power outages to more technical problems that are transient.

If you have further problems deciphering the FAQ, ask more questions. Try to anticipate what someone would need to know in order to advise you. Although one's submit address is secret, there is no secret about domain names - your own or your ISP.

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have posted a link, thank you. What I could understand there does not seem to be relevant, as 1. mails (including spam reports) forwarded from our domain hosting services to our Spamcop address are not (should not be) filtered before they get to Spamcop; 2. we do not use our domain hosting services, ValueWeb, as ISP for outgoing mail; and 3. there have been no signs whatsoever that our local ISP has been filtering outgoing mails.

36695[/snapback]

There have been dozens of people in here claiming their ISP did not filter outgoing messages only to later find out that this was put in place without telling the users. That is the reason it became a FAQ. It may not be the case, but needs to be investigated. As Miss Betsy stated, bounces can happen for a variety of reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From: "Wazoo"

To: "SpamCop, Argyle"

Subject: Account status in question, assumed closed

Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 09:53:18 -0600

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=5475

User states e-mail to Don and JT has gone unanswered.

Thought starting the Topic off with "SpamCop is Dead" ..

it took 8 posts to get around to getting some clue as to

what host, Domain, whatever was involved.  I can only

pass on what was posted, but asking if you can advise

this user as to what's going on with the Reporting Account

for ....(???)

tingo[at]tanca.com

geo[at]tanca.com

info2[at]tanca.com

I think the last one is supposed to be the Reporting Account

registered e-mail address, but ....????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have published here the Whois information related to our domain name. While this information is publicly available to anyone looking for it, I cannot see that it should have any relevance whatsoever to the issues I have inquired about. As you seem to have admin permissions on this forum, I strongly suggest that you delete it immediately.

Reminding you that data had been asked for several times, you chose not to answer those questions. Yes, I used Admin powers to dig a bit to see what data I could find. Data was posted such that other could possibly use that to work out your issues.

You have posted a link, thank you. What I could understand there does not seem to be relevant, as 1. mails (including spam reports) forwarded from our domain hosting services to our Spamcop address are not (should not be) filtered before they get to Spamcop; 2. we do not use our domain hosting services, ValueWeb, as ISP for outgoing mail; and 3. there have been no signs whatsoever that our local ISP has been filtering outgoing mails.

ns2.valueweb.net reports the following MX records:

Preference Host Name IP Address TTL

10 mailhost.tanca.com 216.219.254.203 1800

Again, I can only come up with the data that I can dig up. If you are using something else for your outgoing, then help us help you and identify it ....

Yet, trying to guess the sense of what you write in the last sentence, I can tell you that two addresses are filtered by Spamcop: tingo[]tanca.com and geo[]tanca.com, whereas the return address belonging to the account used for reporting spam from our e-mail application is info2[]tanca.com

36695[/snapback]

Yes, these look amazingly like e-mail addresses, one of them apparently being "the e-mail address associated with your Reporting Account" .... and as such, I generated an e-mail to ask for help from the person that is the Admin on the Reporting side of the house. There is just the possibility that your previous e-mail to Don and JT were not answered because they never saw them, those e-mails being filtered/deleted by your (still un-named, but I'm going with the data I see) e-mail hosting ISP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reminding you that data had been asked for several times, you chose not to answer those questions.

Let's say that I had no idea what you were talking about with your (in our local vision of the world) rather untraditional use of the word data ("data" = the contents of my harddisk? my mother's maiden name? my medical records? our Whois information?). The only "data" I thought might be relevant, you had chosen to erase.

Yes, I used Admin powers to dig a bit to see what data I could find.  Data was posted such that other could possibly use that to work out your issues.

ns2.valueweb.net reports the following MX records:

Preference Host Name IP Address TTL    

10 mailhost.tanca.com 216.219.254.203 1800

I have not a clue what these three lines mean, and, again, how they can in any way be related to our use of Spamcop, as any mail sent to our domain on the ValueWeb server gets automatically forwarded to the Spamcop account, and as we NEVER use ValueWeb's SMTP servers. But if you think so...

Again, I can only come up with the data that I can dig up.  If you are using something else for your outgoing, then help us help you and identify it ....

The SMTP server of our local IP is "smtp.mail.dk". The SMTP of the IP we use when not in house is "smtp.site1.csi.com", but we seldom if ever report when out of house. Is this satisfactory "data"?

While I do understand how some of this might be relevant if we are talking of "bouncing mails", it doesn't explain to me why spam reporting from the Spamcop web mail interface doesn't seem to be working either.

Yes, these look amazingly like e-mail addresses, one of them apparently being "the e-mail address associated with your Reporting Account" .... and as such, I generated an e-mail

I saw this, and we certainly appreciate that you wrote this mail, which is what we thought we had been doing in the first place.

to ask for help from the person that is the Admin on the Reporting side of the house.  There is just the possibility that your previous e-mail to Don and JT were not answered because they never saw them, those e-mails being filtered/deleted by your (still un-named, but I'm going with the data I see) e-mail hosting ISP.

Incoming: ValueWeb (Affinity)

Outgoing: TDC, SMTP "smtp.mail.dk"

Thank you for making yourself understandable. Maybe we'll be less confused by all this at the end of the day.

Michel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's say that I had no idea what you were talking about with your (in our local vision of the world) rather untraditional use of the word data ("data" = the contents of my harddisk? my mother's maiden name? my medical records? our Whois information?). The only "data" I thought might be relevant, you had chosen to erase.

36709[/snapback]

Let's start with the yet un-named ISP you use to send in your reports to spamcop. Specifically, who do you use for outgoing email?
I have not a clue what these three lines mean, and, again, how they can in any way be related to our use of Spamcop, as any mail sent to our domain on the ValueWeb server gets automatically forwarded to the Spamcop account, and as we NEVER use ValueWeb's SMTP servers. But if you think so...

36709[/snapback]

Again, he is trying to use the little information we have to determine who you might be using for outgoing email...answer the question and the guessing can stop.
The SMTP server of our local IP is "smtp.mail.dk". The SMTP of the IP we use when not in house is "smtp.site1.csi.com", but we seldom if ever report when out of house. Is this satisfactory "data"?

36709[/snapback]

Yes...thank you.
While I do understand how some of this might be relevant if we are talking of "bouncing mails", it doesn't explain to me why spam reporting from the Spamcop web mail interface doesn't seem to be working either.

36709[/snapback]

Your incoming SMTP would be relevant for bouncing of messages sent to your address which could close down your machine. Your outgoing SMTP would be relevant to see if it is on the list (or needs to be added to the list) of ISP's using spam filters on outgoing message meaning they never reach spamcop for reporting. The reporting failure from spamcop leansmore on your account being disabled because your incoming SMTP bounced a message (even once).

I think we are getting to the bottom of this, though we will probably need the input from the Deputies for confirmation. Most likely, your Affinity address bounced disabling your reporting account. The rest is fallout from that problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's start with the yet un-named ISP you use to send in your reports to spamcop.  Specifically, who do you use for outgoing email?Again, he is trying to use the little information we have to determine who you might be using for outgoing email...answer the question and the guessing can stop.Yes...thank you.Your incoming SMTP would be relevant for bouncing of messages sent to your address which could close down your machine.  Your outgoing SMTP would be relevant to see if it is on the list (or needs to be added to the list) of ISP's using spam filters on outgoing message meaning they never reach spamcop for reporting.  The reporting failure from spamcop leansmore on your account being disabled because your incoming SMTP bounced a message (even once).

I think we are getting to the bottom of this, though we will probably need the input from the Deputies for confirmation.  Most likely, your Affinity address bounced disabling your reporting account.  The rest is fallout from that problem

36712[/snapback]

Thank you, Steven. Some time (months? year?) ago, ValueWeb/Affinity offered their hosted customers an in-house spam filter, with the option to have it ON or OFF. In the first case, they assume no responsibility for any mails their filter might erase. They didn't say whether they bounced them or not. We chose OFF, partly because we were already using Spamcop, partly because we didn't wan't to run any risks (don't trust automated solutions, especially as we have business with places in Asia, Africa, Brazil which are more likely to be filtered away) and partly because we never use VW/A's web mail interface.

I have looked into our mail settings at VW/A. I couldn't find a clear answer as to which SMTP is used by their automated forwarding function, but it might be smtp.tanca.com (our own domain, that is).

Now, just to make things clear for everybody. We are paying end users of Spamcop's filtering services, and as far as spam reporting is concerned, we believed that this was a community effort of sorts against the plague of spam. Reporting has worked fine for us, and it certainly wasn't our intention to cause a hassle either for you folks, or for ourselves (beyond, to no personal advantage, the tiresome task of browsing day in and day out through anything between 200 and 500 spams a day in order to avoid reporting valid mails)

Actually, we could very will live the rest of our lives without ever having to report spam.

Michel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to make things clear for you .... start with translating the word "volunteer" please ....

Distance involved: I'm a volunteer sitting in the middle of the U.S. The Reporting system is on the west coast of the U.S. This Forum is running on a server on the east coast of the U.S. I have no "access" to the Reporting system other than as a free-reporting account holder. You access your web-mail on the east-coast systems, but when "reporting" (and the problem there is that there are multiple ways to "report from a web-mail account and you've not identified how you perform this action) you cause the east-coast and west-coast systems to exchnage "data" .... When you attempted to login to "your" www.spamcop.net web-page, that was on the west-coast systems. Tryng to work out just where your issue exists in all of this is a bit hard from this side of the screen.

Then we add in that there is no knowledge "here" on how your e-mail is being handled, or by whom. Once again, that data isn't "here" and it's been an exercise to get you to offer up any of that "data" ... now we've got something to start with, but even then you throw in that you aren't even sure of how your e-mail is handled ....???? I'm doing the best I can, once again, volunteering my time and efforts to try to help you out (the same for the Moderatores here)

What you do in the future is your call, but I believe you are missing some of the obvious points here ... thus far, you've not been talked to by anyone being paid for their time, effort in trying to help you (though I do note that Don is on-line here as I type this)

Outgoing: TDC, SMTP "smtp.mail.dk" --- trying to track that down leads me to http://mail.tdconline.dk/ which really doesn't help me at alll ..... http://kundeservice.tdc.dk/privat/internet/faq.php?id=72048 doesn't seem to offer anything that I'm looking for .... seems to boil down to asking that actually send me an e-mail so I can see how you e-mail does go out and from where .... are you willing to do this? (in contrast to say sending yourself an e-mail to an off-site account, such as HotMail, Yahoo, etc. and posting the headers from that e-mail here ... again, such that anyone tryng to help can use that data for research)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, we have no problem accessing our mails, either POP or via Webmail. That's the most important, so maybe we shouldn't worry after all...?

Since the beginning of November we haven't been receiving any Spamcop reports (when reporting spam in Webmail) nor any of the usual confirmations (when reporting spam by e-mail).

Two e-mails to Don, admin, and to Jeff, support, (the last one on the 11th) have gone unanswered.

Please accept my apologies for the rude reception you've gotten on your first foray into our user support forums. I assure you it wasn't intentional.

On October 31st, your tingo [at] cqmail.net reporting account was suspended for a reporting violation. Your email services are not affected because they are separate from the spam reporting function. I sent you a notice about it at the time. When you wrote to me from tingo [at] tanca.com on November 4th, and again on November 11th, I answered both times. Neither of my messages bounced, and I know they went out because I can see copies of them in our off-site archives.

I know we have successfully corresponded in the past, but that was back in early July. Something appears to have changed since then.

I'll resend my last email from a different account to see if that will work. I'm afraid that's the best I can do for you. Part of the deal with using our service is that my email has to get to you. I can't use backdoor routes, such as this form, to resolve issues.

- Don D'Minion - SpamCop Admin - service [at] admin.spamcop.net

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please accept my apologies for the rude reception you've gotten on your first foray into our user support forums.  I assure you it wasn't intentional.

If you are going to criticize the VOLUNTEERS who work your help desk for free, you had better think again.

While Wazoo can be irritating to non-technically minded people, there are lots of people who have benefited from his expertise (including myself, a non-technically fluent person). Those who benefit are the ones who read the "peer to peer' announcement.

I was extremely clear on what was needed and also on where to look for further information (which, apparently, the OP ignored). If you are implying that I was rude, then perhaps you need to hire people that you can instruct in proper customer handling.

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you are going to criticize the VOLUNTEERS who work your help desk for free, you had better think again.

I didn't name any names or point any fingers. If you think what I said applies to you, it is an assumption entirely of your own making.

I fully appreciate the time and effort our volunteers contribute to the cause. I spent a long time in the user support forums in the before times. I know what you're going through, and I assure you that we all appreciate the job you all do.

However, no matter how difficult or exasperating user support might be, there is NO excuse for rude behavior.

People come here for help, not abuse and criticism. When they get here, they should get a friendly, cheerful, and helpful reception. There is simply no place for snide or critical remarks.

- Don -

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<snipped>

Actually, we could very will live the rest of our lives without ever having to report spam.

Michel

36714[/snapback]

The reason spam persists is because end users like you do not take the time to understand the concepts of email and blocking and do not complain to the *senders* who have the only control over whether spam is sent or not.

Don't report spam. Be part of the problem.

]

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I fully appreciate the time and effort our volunteers contribute to the cause.  I spent a long time in the user support forums in the before times.  I know what you're going through, and I assure you that we all appreciate the job you all do.

I don't think you know what we (tinw) are going through. Things have changed since the newsgroups. One of the reasons that the forum was created was because people who are non-technically fluent were having a difficult time getting answers in the ngs because they objected to the way that people like Larry Kilgallen answered their questions. If you notice, he still makes comments, but doesn't offer his very instructive 'templates' any more.

IMHO, most of the people who have questions, get their answers from the FAQ and never have to make a post. The ones who make posts have either not read the FAQ or read something that confuses them (which I probably would do if I were still a newbie), or have a problem that the FAQ doesn't cover. The latter two are generally pleased with the replies and gets lots of help. A few admins who were angry in the beginning may trade a few insults, but from my observation that is not considered rude in the 'admin' world.

Each poster has hir style. If one has done any prior reading (or lurked), one recognizes that style. If one hasn't and - this is where the problem lies - expects a customer oriented answer, then that person thinks the answers are rude instead of just advice from another user. And, although I didn't think you meant my earlier reply, my answers have sometimes been attacked (my second post is not so polite, but I was a little annoyed at being ignored). I don't believe that when you were answering questions in the ngs (which was before my time) that people had those expectations. They didn't when I first started, but just before the forum was created, there were many, many people who felt that the answers were 'rude' from the same people like Larry that I learned a lot from. There were also several discussions among regulars about how to deal with it. In general, although there were several who advocated using 'customer oriented' language, most of those who posted didn't want to take the time and just answered as 'people'.

Peer to peer is much more interesting and helpful than a paid help desk, but it doesn't help those who just want the problem fixed.

People come here for help, not abuse and criticism.  When they get here, they should get a friendly, cheerful, and helpful reception.  There is simply no place for snide or critical remarks.

IMHO, they do get a friendly and helpful reception, in the style of the poster, but not everyone recognizes that because they don't want to learn about the problem; they just want it fixed. They are expecting service from SpamCop.

IMHO, it doesn't help matters for the 'true' spamcop admin to apologize for the volunteers' style. Ellen has done it also in the past or ignored the volunteer input. If the primary means of support is to be peer to peer, then the official stance needs to be supportive of that effort. If, when you actually reach this person, you want to be apologetic, that's another matter. It's your customer and the customer is always right. He's not our customer, though.

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think you know what we (tinw) are going through ... 

36746[/snapback]

Ah Miss Bestly, seeing your hurt all alone and forlorn and flapping in the winds ... You make valid points Miss Betsy and for the life of me I can't see the justification for Don's"rude reception" comment in relation to this particular topic/thread. It's almost like a "II Corinthians 13" thing ("I've written to you and you took no notice, I've fronted you only to have you backslide the minute my back was turned. If I have to front you again, I will have my kicking boots on!") - or words to that effect, in the King James version.

"No finger was pointed"? In any event Miss Betsy you have flown to the defence because nobody could be more the antithesis of your presumed namesake "Miss Betsy Thoughtless" (in her early, unmetamorphosed state). Wazoo knows his own strengthts and weaknesses better than any of us, I'm sure, and works like a maniac to maximize the first and minimize the second.

For all of that, one learns more from the critic than from the fan and the thing that subverts any group is "groupthink", the inability to "see ourselves as others see us" as Rabbie Burns almost said. You are our chiefest and best practitioner of the "outsider view", let's try not to take it too personally if someone sees it a little differently. But yes, Don's action/reaction in this instance seems inappropriate and disproportionate to me too, however it is viewed. Ah well, gratitude should never be expected ('twould demean the sheer joy of service :))

Edited by Farelf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The reason spam persists is because end users like you do not take the time to understand the concepts of email and blocking and  do not complain to the *senders* who have the only control over whether spam is sent or not.

Don't report spam.  Be part of the problem.

]

Miss Betsy

36739[/snapback]

Miss Betsy, I certainly didn't experience anything that might be interpreted as rude, or demeaning, or anything similar from your side in particular.

On the other hand, our company is kind of busy, generally speaking, and we are not in the IT business or anything close to it. We're quite happy to have the Spamcop services help us before physically going through at least 73,000 spams a year before reporting them, but I'm sure that you'll understand that we are not prepared to put more energies into just that, screening 73,000 spams a year (plus about the double of this quantity through other providers that DO NOT get redirected through Spamcop's filters)

Michel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, folks, sorry for not getting back to the thread earlier, but Don and I have been busy sorting things out off-forum. And then, being 6 to 11 hours ahead of you'all, I've dedicated my time to a night's sleep.

Several imponderables have compounded to create this whole series of misunderstandings. First thing, I had been used in the past to receiving a rapid and effective reply from Don and Jeff whenever something needed to be sorted out. Second, for reasons that we think we've figured out, Don's two replies to my mails regarding the sudden absence of reporting disappeared, likely as a part of the original problem. Thirdly, and most important although I didn't mention it in the original posting, during that same period (over at least a couple of weeks) there was a mention on the Spamcop site to the effect that there were outages in the reporting system that were still awaiting a solution. Fourth, I figured that Don and/or Jeff were too busy getting these outages fixed to reply to my mails. Fifth, after three weeks or so, as nothing else was happening, I came on these Forums and found a topic called "Outages", or something like that, and thought I'd ask the simple question: What's going on? Sixth, that particular topic/thread wouldn't let me post, for whatever reasons, but there was a link to some place that did let me start a topic. Which, seventh, I did, not thinking that, as a plain Spamcop user, I should read through pages and pages of intricate technical issues before asking, What is going on?

That's when the drama started, beyond my modest expectations. I felt as if I'd gone to a doctor and been asked, How does it feel? Me: How does what feel? Dr: Well, you tell me, that's what you came here for, didn't you. Anyway, what's your osmeotic pressure? Me: Uhh, pressure, what pressure? Dr: You shouldn't be coming here for treatment if you don't know what pressure I'm talking about!

Wazoo, if I may make a kind comment to close this subject, what 30 years of business in six languages and an even broader number of cultures have taught me is that if you want to explain something to somebody, you have to try to understand where they're coming from, or their head space, and you have to do so in a language that they can relate to.

Don has posted a note about what the issue had been about. I'd like to thank you'all for your efforts in this matter.

Michel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah Miss Bestly, seeing your hurt all alone and forlorn and flapping in the winds ... You make valid points Miss Betsy and for the life of me I can't see the justification for Don's"rude reception" comment in relation to this particular topic/thread.  It's almost like a "II Corinthians 13" thing ("I've written to you and you took no notice, I've fronted you only to have you backslide the minute my back was turned.  If I have to front you again, I will have my kicking boots on!") - or words to that effect, in the King James version.

36752[/snapback]

One tends to be brief at times when one posts, but since Don did answer my post, I wanted to point out again the difference in the kinds of posts that we are getting than even from the beginning of this forum and certainly from when I first joined the ngs (way after Don had retired from them).

I don't know what the solution is. You read Michel's final response 'he is too busy' which I understand. I, also, am 'too busy' to do other people's work which sometimes results in 'blunt' language. The problems with help desks of other companies is well documented and even if a few people who come to the forum get frustrated, the peer to peer help is much better.

For all of that, one learns more from the critic than from the fan and the thing that subverts any group is "groupthink", the inability to "see ourselves as others see us" as Rabbie Burns almost said.  You are our chiefest and best practitioner of the "outsider view", let's try not to take it too personally if someone sees it a little differently.  But yes, Don's action/reaction in this instance seems inappropriate and disproportionate to me too, however it is viewed. Ah well, gratitude should never be expected ('twould demean the sheer joy of service :))

No, Don's reaction is what an employee would have (since the customer is always correct; if s/he feels insulted, it is so.). It was only inappropriate because it was public. Also, the reason the forum was created was because the same kind of thing was happening in spamcop.help. The advantage of the forum would be the 'thought out, polite, helpful explanations' so that newcomers would not have to ask simple questions and get the highly personalized replies from a bunch of users rather than a 'customer oriented help desk' reply. And, IMHO, it is working so that the only questions that are asked are difficult ones or from difficult people.

IMHO, SpamCop should have been more like a trade association. In that case, when someone asks (which wasn't true in this particular case) for help which is above and beyond the capacity of the volunteer staff, they could be referred to a list of professionals who would 'fix' it for them. That might be a partial solution for those who are too busy to read the FAQ - that SpamCop has a list of IT professionals they can hire to sort it out for them. I don't know, since SpamCop is a business, whether that is feasible.

And, other than the support that I get here, most of the time all I get is derision for wasting my time so it was not a personal feeling of attack.

I did appreciate the biblical quotes! that got me chuckling.

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×