Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tooangry

  1. So you have half a dozen or more email accounts. How much wasted time and trouble is that? Personally I would rather push delete a few times to get rid of spam than have to manage that number of accounts. I realise that I'm in a minority here, of course. Given that basically no-one here has come up with a suggestion for a reliable email service, I have to wonder about the frequent advice given to posters here complaining about their emails being blocked to change their ISPs to ones less friendly to spam. It will make no difference - they will still get blocked.
  2. I tried a while ago to get any suggestions from the people here about a reliable mail service that was unlikely to get listed by SpamCop. I received no help. Your saying that you use Gmail and Yahoo - both of which are regularly listed as we know - and SpamCop's own service. If that is the best that you, as a regular and experienced poster here, can do? If so, can I basically assume that the only way to be sure of not being listed by SpamCop is to use the SpamCop email service? There is something a bit unpleasant about that idea.
  3. My question was addressed to dbiel, a Spamcop moderator, who expressed the opinion that this type of foreign language support is unlikely. I was just asking him why he thought that - given how relatively trivial the work and expense involved would be.
  4. Why is it so unlikely to occur? Since most of the IP addresses on the block list are presuambly from non-US, and indeed non-English-speaking locations it seems an excellent idea to try to communicate in their own language. How many standard messages are there? Half a dozen, I guess. To be translated into: Traditional Chinese Simplified Chinese Spanish Korean Japanese Russian My guess is that would deal with 95% of listed IP addresses. Can anyone confirm? Have I underestimated central/eastern Europe? A professional translation agency could deal with all those in a day or two for a cost of a few thousand dollars. What's the problem?
  5. Can I second that please? IE may not be the perfect browser, but it is used by a huge number of people, many of whom have no choice (corporate IT policy), or accept the minor limitations because most sites ARE optimised for IE. Personally I prefer Mozilla, but can't use it because some sites I have to use professionally don't work with it. I agree that this sort of comment looks very unprofessional. If you want Spamcop to be more widely used then it needs to become more, not less professional.
  6. Since 90% of the spam I receive (in Hong Kong) is advertising US companies, perhaps it would be more useful if the rest of the world stopped doing business with the USA.
  7. Sorry, I was too busy to give everything the time it needs immediately - I just replied about one thing that I noticed and that I felt strongly about. I try and post some more later, but in the meantime I do think that the structure for the FAQ is looking a lot better. I think that there it should add a section on "what is Spamcop and how does it work?". I know most of the information is available elsewhere on the site, but I think that the aim should be to use the FAQ to make life easy for those coming to this site for the first time. That means including some basic information about what a blocklist is and how is is (or should be) used, how it is compiled, and about what an IP address is. Then the questions need to be divided into two main groups (as you have in the draft): 1. for those who are accused of spamming themselves, with the technical information about the likely hacks, advice on running a secure server, a responsible mailing list etc. This should include "what is a spamtrap?", with the deputies email address. 2. for those who are the "innocent bystanders", explaining why they are blocked even though it is other users of their ISP that are causing the problems. There should be a "what can I do?" section with advice on using webmail as an immediate way of communicating, and on complaining to your ISP. Somewhere there needs to be some guidance on reading your bounce report, and on using the IP address to find out what the story is about your problem. I'll have another look through later.
  8. The Help forum has more threads than all the other forums put together, so it's hardly surprising that newcomers find it hard to locate the information they need. I agree strongly (and have proposed in the past) that there needs to be a seperate Help forum for people who have been blocked. If the feeling is that there are too many forums then merge the two email forums and/or the two testing forums. The general forum confusion will anyway be greatly reduced if the number of pinned topics is reduced through a better FAQ.
  9. I think that Ozziegiraffe's posts have highlighted two issues that need careful consideration. I have started a new thread in order not to distract attention in his original thread away from ways to deal with his immediate problems. First, there are many places where there are a very limited choice of ISPs. The Solomon Islands may be an extreme, with one ISP with a legal monopoly, but many places have, for reasons of government policy, geography or local economic conditions, far fewer choices than the USA. The choice may be even more limited in practice if you need a high quality broadband service. The usual advice given on these boards to people whose ISPs are having their IP addresses listed by Spamcop is to try to persuade the ISP to change its ways (clearly proposed by those who have never had to deal with a government-run telecoms company) or to change their ISP (something which in many parts of the world is a complicated, expensive, and time-consuming activity even if it is possible). When it comes to the Solomons ISP the first of these suggestions is likely to be pointless, the second not possible. Can I suggest that in this instance the perminant removal of the Soloman Islands IP adddress from the blocklist is unlikely to damage materially the fight against spam. Secondly, we have again had the situation where a new arrival is given a very hard time by regulars on the boards. As I have said many times before, this is not an approach that will win Spamcop friends. I am aware that you are volunteers, and I know that there is a lot of information provided on the site that in an ideal world people would read and digest before posting. In practice, however, you have to understand that many people coming to this site are not experts in Internet computing. Also the site is very hard to navigate, and newcomers can easily miss much of the available information. When this happens brief, polite posts providing the relevent links are the most useful approach.
  10. Now how about some helpful advice given that he has already said that there is only one ISP providing service in his area, so changing is not an option. If you don't have any useful advice, then you might at least try to show some sympathy for his situation.
  11. Another spanked spammer speaks more nonsense. They know so little and the know it so fluently. Must be a full moon coming, the trolls are getting restless. Trolls are very dirty creatures, they defecate where they feed so if you feed the troll you must clean up after it. Please do not feed this troll. Is this, or is this not, a moderated forum? What is the reason to abuse someone making their first post just because they disagree with you? I actually disagree with much of what he has to say too, but I can accept that his argument is defensible. I'm glad that there are people prepared to put time and energy into fighting spam. I'm also glad that there are those who have other things at the top of their list of priorities. What I see no reason for is laying into someone just because they don't feel as strongy about this as you do.
  12. That implies the odd person getting fed up. That implies a lot of people, not getting too much spam from this source (an average of two reports each), who just can't be bothered to use the appropriate channels.
  13. If the message was straight spam then, again, it should go to the Yahoo abuse system, which I have always found responsive. Blocking the whole system is a very blunt instrument. I think you just find it hard to accept that there is a situation where Spamcop is not the appropriate tool. And I still think that trying to close down the Yahoo groups system will make you more enemies than friends.
  14. If the Spamcop reporters of Yahoo group messages have not subscribed to the groups sending the messages, then those messages either 1. fall within the 50 per day allowed by Yahoo rules, or 2. represent an abuse by the group moderator. If the first, then a request to be dropped from the list is likely to be honoured. If the second, then use Yahoo's abuse procedures. That is likely to be a far more effective way to deal with the issue than trying to get the whole system blocked by Spamcop for a few days. Faulty unsubscribe links are surely not sufficient for the message to be reported as spam. There is a system in place to deal with that. Even Spamcop has its share of technical glitches. Yes, in a system the size of Yahoo's there will always be the odd person who abuses it, but that's not a reason to try close the system down. Nor is getting it on blocklists the most effective way either of pushing Yahoo to police their system effectively or of winning converts to the Spamcop approach.
  15. Let's make sure I understand this. Spamcop reporters have been reporting as spam messages that they have received through Yahoo groups to which they have opted in. If they feel that the material they are receiving is spam they have the option of reporting it to Yahoo and relying on them to deal with the issue. If that is not sufficient they can unsubscribe from the Yahoo groups generating the dubious messages. Instead, they report them as spam to Spamcop, with the result that even the well-run Yahoo groups are blocked. If this is correct it seems to me to be a drastic over-reaction, and one that is bound to agravate a lot of Yahoo group subscribers. Those people have opted to receive the messages from particular groups. If they object to the content of those messages (whether because of the volume of spam, or because they no longer have interest in the topic) they can unsubscribe (and please don't tell me that Yahoo will not process their unsubscribe requests). This is a clear example of an instance where the peripheral damage done by Spamcop in terms of blocking of messages which are actually wanted is out of all proportion to the benefits, since it is easy enough to cut off the supply of spam from that source by unsubscribing. The Spancop reporting guidelines should prohibit the reporting of any messages from a group to which the reporter has opted in.
  16. The ususal helpful and positive reply newcomers to this board can expect...
  17. That's fine if you're running a blog. It doesn't work if you're running a company that has thousands of users, and which affects millions more.
  18. www.comcast.net maybe? I don't know, I can't get near their website - they're apparently not interested in people with "out of date" browsers and 28.8k modems ;-) If only their "clients" were similarly inclined! But on www.comcast.com they provide you with all the contact information you could ever need.
  19. Just the other day Julian told a US District Judge (as well as anyone who bothers to read the statement) that he ran SpamCop's day-to-day operations. Kinda exposes you as a liar, no? Kinda exposes me as someone who can't understand why, if he'll tell the Judge, he won't own up on the web site?
  20. Technically, yes there are, however not quite openly published. I don't know of any responsible company that provides no phone numbers, no mailing address, and not even a company e-mail address. There is no contact page on the web site. Julian does the coding and reporting sude, JT handles the e-mail side, there are Deputies that handle some of the special issues, Don does many things to include account management, and I (and though not seen for a while) JeffG have volunteered time to handle Moderating duties here in this web-based Forum, and there are many more volunteering souls over in the newsgroups. What more do you need for identification purposes? How about an "About Us" page that identifies who is (not "seems to be") responsible for different issues, and provides contact information for them. As I have said before, I find it frightening that a company that provides a service used by so many ISPs and other businesses has to rely on volunteers, over whose language and approach there seems to be at best limited control. At this point, I believe that most of what the "parent" company does at this point is provide hosting and physical support for the reporting machines on the west coast. JT provides this support for the e-mail systems on the east coast. And once again, Julian is the guy that does the code for the majority of the reporting system. Most parent companies take at least some degree of respobsibility for their subsidiaries. They do, after all, claim their profits. No response, even to refer me to someone in Spamcop itself, is unimpressive. Yep, some of us are doing just fine. And who gives a damn about the rest?
  21. There are no phone numbers. No-one will admit to being in charge. E-mails to the parent company go unanswered. Welcome to Spamcop.
  22. You mean that you don't notify the IP owner? Whyever not? And to think that you get surprised when people show up here angry.
  23. Not always! Although your responses are always clear and courteous, which as you wil gather I value highly. And on this occasion I think you're spot on.
  24. I never thought I'd be saying this, but I agree with nearly all of what Miss Betsy (sorry for getting your name wrong before) has to say. (I favour the web forums, but that is very much a personal preference, rather than anything fundamental.)
  • Create New...