Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About craigd

  • Rank
  1. craigd

    Help please

    Unfortunately it is not their problem it is my problem. I am the one who's mailserver is blocked. Both the IP range owners and spamcop are causing me problems. Neither have any incentive at all to help me fix the problem. In both cases all I can do is ask as nicely as I know how for assistance. So far the results have been: spamcop not interested in changing their system to stop it punishing legitimate people but have provided some assistance through the forum (thanks); IP range owners not interested in wading through the spam they get and passing on spam reports and have provided zero assistance. Unfortunately I see no prospect for any change to the above situation.
  2. craigd

    Help please

    You bet, that would be great. Unfortunately neither of the bouncing email addresses are ours, they are the owners of the IP range which we are on so we do not have control of them. Who would have thought that when paying for an IP address one should find out whether the owners of the range would forward abuse emails? Connect.com.au won't forward emails even if they get them. I have higher hopes that netspeed can be convinced to accept emails to their postmaster address and forward the relevant ones to us, but I would be entirely relying on their generosity I have no ability to force the issue. Unfortunately we're not important enough for any emails to be sent direct to us, we're just the owners of the relevant domains (accurate reverse dns, working contact emails) : (
  3. craigd

    Help please

    Thanks Richard for providing additional information by email. This has enabled us to find the particular domain which has generated the incorrect bounce messages [edit]I forgot to say that this email support is absolutely essential, because it does not seem possible to get the information we needed in any other way.[/edit]
  4. craigd

    Help please

    Help please! My mailserver has been blacklisted again. This time its a 'spamtrap'. What I need to know, is WHY this has happened so I can prevent it happening again. There is a link to an FAQ on autoresponders - as far as I know our mailserver behaves in the correct way. That is, does not reject emails after initially accepting them. I would like to prevent getting blacklisted again, but without any information at all about why we are blacklisted, how can I do it? Please, please do NOT reply to this post if you believe I am an intentional spammer. [edit]please note previous blacklisting problem was due to repeated complaints by a single person and has been resolved by spamcop, so there's no value in mentioning this[/edit]
  5. Nobody here is suggesting I am a spammer, but still I am treated as some sort of evil incarnate because I dare to suggest that double opt in is not a reasonable requirement. Whatever, I will stop wasting my time trying to communicate to you people the problems you're causing me and other legitimate senders of email.
  6. Thanks. I have asked spamcop by email several times to direct emails regarding this IP address to us, but have not had any success. I guess this is just "too hard". I am familiar with Australian legislation and am 100% sure that we comply in every respect. I might add that nowhere in the legislation is double opt-in even mentioned let alone required. Spamcop requirements are MUCH tougher than our legislation, and I do not think the spamcop approach is reasonable! A proper whois on our domain will show valid contact emails. I'm not sure exactly what the report above is showing, certainly not the whois record for our domain. Yes, I'm not surprised that I won't get anywhere asking to get alerts sent to us, we're only the domain owners after all, we just rent the IP address. Again, 'too hard' I suppose. Finally, here's what the spamcop representative said: "While several people have reported mail from your server in the past, the recent reports have all been from a single user. I have written them and am awaiting a response with their explanation of why they are reporting the mail as spam." I think that qualifies as a single user repeatedly blacklisting us over the past 4-5 days. Of course we have to wait for the complainant to respond to their email (why would they respond immediately?) and in the mean time if the person complains again no doubt we'll be blacklisted for another 24 hours. Can anyone reading this see how awful this appears from my point of view?
  7. Hi Petzl, Thanks for the suggestion. I have done this, but will this mean black listing notifications from spamcop will go to that address? If so I will be very keen to do it. At present connect.com.au who own the IP range are supposed to forward any messages regarding my IP address but in practice this hasn't been happening. This goes right back to my initial question beginning this topic, which is how can I get spamcop to contact a working email address with any notifications on my mailserver. I do very much hope that your suggestion will solve this.
  8. Hi Dbiel, Thank you very much for taking the time to help me, I do genuinely appreciate that. I may be wrong but I understand from the spamcop deputy's email that while several complaints had been made, they were all by the same person. It would make a lot of sense to count this as one complaint rather than counting it as many complaints. Especially as we can't find and therefore remove the person who is complaining. You may be interested to know that 99% of the cost to us of operating our email service is due to spam filters. That is, the cost of paying our staff to deal with complaints from subscribers who do not receive our email due to spam filters of various sorts is about 100 times greater than the total of all other costs of running these servers/mailing lists/email services. This is the 'hidden cost' of spam.
  9. So now that we found one mistake it is now OK that one person can repeatedly black list us, including reporting our email on how to unsubscribe! Great system! deputies at admin dot spamcop dot net We did get replies, but very slow. I'm sure Richard is very overworked and doing his best, which is why the system needs to work better. Within an hour on the forum I had a list of complaints which we had not seen after 4 days of waiting for emails (admittedly including a weekend). The fact that we're on a different time zone would not help, although for this emergency we are checking email about 18 hours a day. I don't want to harrass persons who report spam. But it is totally rediculous that we can't remove the complainant from our distribution list and so he/she continues to complain. There must be a way to solve this problem. Unfortunately I am left with the impression that most here do not consider there to BE any problem, the fact that I complain on the forum just makes a good opportunity to evangelise double opt in, rather than indicating any problem. Unfortunately I did find an error we had made, so now I am sure nobody here will pay the slightest bit of attention to our problem.
  10. Hi Petzl, thank you for pointing out this error. I am very embarrassed and you are correct. The folk at crikey changed their website on us (we don't host this site) and either didn't tell us or we didn't pay attention. Either way, our senior developer is fixing this right now. This is a good example of how the spamcop service can help. If only the dialog could be more constructive. Also, it took several days for us to realise that posting on the forum was the only way to get a prompt reply to our questions. [edit] I should mention that I remain convinced that this mistake is NOT the cause of the spam reports which have come from ONE person repeatedly over the last week.[/edit]
  11. No, no, no - can't you just imagine for one second we are professionals here? Every email sent has TWO completely simple and clear ways to unsubscribe in it. In addition the same page you link to is the link where the person subscribed and can unsubscribe any time. There IS a perfectly working unsubscribe process. Correct, and we DO NOT DO THIS. You find me ONE, just ONE person who did not subscribe and I will send you $US100 of my personal money. Just because it is theoretically possible to happen doesn't mean it has happened. So now you're treating me as a spammer again? I can't win with you, can I? If I offer to remove people that don't want to get the newsletter then I'm a spammer listwashing, couldn't possibly be a reasonable person who is perfectly happy to unsubscribe those who no longer (repeat no longer) wish to receive our emails.
  12. This is the link for paid subscribers - several thousand people pay $100 per year to get this newsletter, in case you think we're sending junk. They rarely unsubscribe but do have a clear and well advertised mechanism to do so. The correct link for free subscribers is perfectly well working: http://www.crikey.com.au/articles/2005/03/007-0001-8942.html
  13. No, this is not correct. The confirmation email WAS REPORTED BY spam AND IS ON THE LIST QUOTED ABOVE. No, I disagree strongly, there IS an easy fix. All spamcop has to do is to enable legitimate businesses such as mine a way to get off your black list in a timely and efficient manner. That is, take proper and reasonable steps to enable us to communicate with you and to get the information which would enable us to take the appropriate action - whether this is fixing a security problem, unsubscribing a person who prefers complaining to spamcop to requesting unsubscription, etc.
  14. Hi dbiel, Could you please confirm that you are telling me that spamcop is mandating double opt in otherwise known as 'confirmed opt in' as the only "acceptable fashion" to run a mailing list. Anyone with a grudge against us can subscribe, confirm the email address, and report us as spam. So if we had a double opt in system spamcop would STILL be the mediator in enabling this attack against our business. [edit] This is the problem with a business that is run by unaccountable vigilantes. Just like I might sympathise with the goals of vigilantes hunting for criminals I do not like spam or spammers. However, vigilantism is rightly considered by most societies as incredibly harmful and I think on the internet anti-spam vigilantes are just as harmful.]
  15. 1. The newsletter operator would go out of business if this was required - the spammers would have won. We know through experience that this system, which we call "double opt in" results in very few subscribers. Instead we get a bunch of complaints "why aren't I getting my newsletter I subscribed to". You see this from the point of view of very technically able people but I'm afraid in practice the general public do not find easy that which you would like them to. They do NOT want to double opt in, they want a simple and reliable way to get an interesting and informative newsletter. 2. We did send a message to all subscribers telling them how to unsubscribe and making it clear that all unsubscribe requests would be honoured. This was a separate email as you suggest above. What happened? This email was reported as spam. 3. Our subscribers, when asked, do NOT request a double opt-in system. When we trialled it they complained. 4. Just because YOU think we should have a double opt-in system that means we have to does it? You are holier than us are you? 5. We comply with all laws and regulations, we deal promptly and positively with any complaints, we run our systems in a professional manner. But just one person decides to complain (without contacting us) and without trial, with very limited recourse, with the assumption of "guilt" we have a penalty applied to us. Repeatedly.