Wazoo

This is all I can offer, and not even sure what it actually means at this point, other than Julian says that it's back (in some form) Thankfully, it would appear that I'm not alone in not knowing of the (recent?) change. http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/373.html A while back, RW made mention of holding off on updating some FAQs due to waiting for a hard drive replacement. I was just notified by a Forum user that the existing "mole" FAQ has been changed, noting a date of 2 July .... Though I did conjecture elsewhere that Julian might resurrect mole reporting, the current FAQ looks more like a rebuild from a backup .... Is mole reporting back or is the FAQ hosed? Wazoo sigh.... the faq is wrong. I think you are right in assuming the faq was rebuilt from an old backup. I wonder how many other faqs are wrong and/or missing :-( Looks like I know what I'm doing for the next few days :-( Richard I have no idea -- I'll ask Julian. TTBMK mole reporting has not been resurected altho I could be wrong about that. Ellen The mole reporting is enabled, but there has been no decision on what weight it will be given for the blacklist. It does work though, and ISPs may see aggregate counts of mole reports, if they request them. -=Julian=-

(extracted from another discussion elsewhere) That quote is not true. White/black listing is server based. The original quote should have been the additional filters are client based. These are filters the user can create to move messages around between the various folders on the server. Steven P. Underwood, DNRC Whitinsville, MA StevenU[at]POBoxes.com

(extracted from another discussion elsewhere) White/blacklisting is a mail client rule, so only kicks in if the mail is picked up through the webmail interface and will override the blocking lists. The blocking lists are a server rule, so are applied regardless of how you obtain your mail (unless overridden by a whilelist rule in the webmail interface). If you POP, IMAP or forward SC mail, only the blocking list rules apply. If mail is picked up through webmail, the user defined filter rules also are applied and are applied first. (Deputy) Richard

Can't argue the logic <g> .. just wish there was a better way to handle this .. already looking for the complaints of the "way too many Pinned" items to come up again. And just to refresh some memories, JT is the only one with the powers to make additional Sections ... and this would be one of the items that should end up in whatever the FAQ thing that has been "being worked on" for quite a while ends up to be. That said, consider it Pinned <g> and now "Moved" to the Lounge ... reference the many "too many Pinned Topics in Help" and this isn't a "direct" Help thing ....

and in reference to your "Please post any problems with mailhosts in the already started topics" .... this posting was not made in http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=723 In conjunction with previous complaints / suggestions about the Pinned items, this post had already slid off the first page of this particular Forum. Would you (as I haven't seen Julian posting much lately) then respond to my last post on that above referenced Topic (and admitting that due to the above, I had not seen that you had in fact posted this info here.)

Well, it seems that there are still new variants being created, so the virus scanning database is still behind the powercurve. Just reporting the obvious to move this back up towrds the front of the list.

Well, there's actually several "new" nasties running around, that's the reason for this Topic ... that folks were receiving e-mail allegedly from SpamCop specifically, but as said in my last, it's happening all over the world, lowlife scum taking advantage of what once was a nice thing, letting the sender know that their e-mail didn't make it through .. so not only the scanning engines are needing updates, they're causing more ISPs to add to the list of banned file type/name attachments, and causing more issues to those that used to rely on e-mail in general ....

no updates yet as to whether or not the anti-virus updates have been written / supplied / installed ... just a lot more complaints about the increasing flow of these damn things from all around the world.

Now that we have your attention <g> From Ellen - as posted over in the newsgroups We do *not* send mail as staff[at]spamcop.net -- if you get mail from that address in your SpamCop account, it a new variant of a virus mailing. Please just delete it, do not execute it. The mail system is on automatic AV dat updates and will have new updates as soon as the AV company posts them *but* there is always a gap between the release of a new virus and the AV dat file updates so stay vigilant everyone! OTOH I am sure that our users are smart enough not to fall for this -- but I thought I would mention it for those of us who sometimes read our email with most of brain engaged elsewhere :-) Ellen And as evidenced by other reports, the address doesn't have to be "staff" .. it's showing up as all sorts of "official" titles now ...