Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

PaulKTF's Achievements


Member (2/6)



  1. Okay, then if it's going to be disabled in the Quick Reporting, it should be disabled in the standard reporting, too, but I think that any obviously-spamvertised websites should be reported.
  2. I just bought fuel and now I see the User Notification field- can anyone tell me wha that's used for? In other words, who else (other than the people hostin gthe spammer) should I send reports to? I've left that field blank so far because I don't know what I should put in there (if anything). Thanks for any help.
  3. As I understand it, reports submited using Quick Reporting don't report the URLs that are in the body of the spam. Why is that the case? If they're reported using standard reporting, shouldn't they also be reported using the Quick Reporting?
  4. The Yahoo! Mail Beta won't let me forward messages with full headers intact. The "classic interface" does let me do it; so I switched back. In the beta; it pops up the full headers in a new window, so I'd have to copy and paste those headers into the SpamCop form, go back to the message, and copy and paste that bellow the already pasted headers in the form... Anyone else angry about this change? I hope Yahoo! changes it before the beta goes final, because not being able to forward with full headers is irritating! :angry:
  5. I forgot to mention that I also report the spams that leak through back to Postini in hopes of improving the already great service.
  6. I use Postini's spam filtering. What I do is I delete any spam that Postini catches (without reporting it via SpamCop) and only report spam through SpamCop that Postini doesn't catch first. Does anyone else who uses Postini do this too? Just wondering.
  7. Yeah that's all you can do now but you have to type in the extra stuff to get it to work which defeats the purpose. Oh well.
  8. When will SpamCop properly report the many spams that do not contain any message bodies without me having to add in "No body" (or some such) so that they will go through the system? This means I can't Forward Verbatim" bodyless spams because they cannot be reported "as is". Very annoying!
  9. A lot of times, I see that SpamCop will devull reports to ISP#domain.com[at]devnull.spamcop.net because that particular ISP's address is bouncing. That's fine and understandable, but what happens if/when the ISP's address stops bouncing and it actualy starts accepting e-mail? How would SpamCop find out when the address works again (and thus stop automaticly devnulling the reports to that address)? Isn't it possible that SpamCop is devnulling reports for address' that actualy stopped bouncing awhille ago? I've always wondered that... Thanks.
  10. Ah.. I"ll have to double-check those options. Thanks.
  11. Yes, I guess I'm just upset at the state of things.... The really annoying thing is that I don't GET any replies to my reports to these countries. None whatsoever. Not even an auto-ack. So I don't know if they've been read, much less acted upon!
  12. So then the point of using my time to report them would be.... what, exactly? :angry:
  13. 99% of my spams come from non-English speaking countries (Korea, Brazil, Japan, China, etc). So why on earth should I send them a SpamCop report that's in English if they aren't going to understand it anyway? The language barrier is probably the reason why the SpamCop reports go on ignored and I sitll get spams from the same old ISPs who refuse to take action. When will SpamCop start translating reports into the language of the country they're going to?
  14. I send on average 40 to 60 SpamCop reports a day. Over the past month or so I don't think I've gotten so much as an auto-acknowledge message from any of the ISPs that I've reported spam and website spamming to. It could be because a lot of the spams I'm getting come from non-U.S sources (Brazil, Korea, China, Japan) but I feel as if I'm wasting my time even bothering to report via SpamCop if ISPs are going to ingore my reports!
  • Create New...