Question Posted June 26, 2004 Share Posted June 26, 2004 I signed up a free account back in early March and recall at the time it mentioning one might want to choose to send spam using a mole account. On a whim today I was looking through the site and notice it mentions something about any spam reported via this method doesn't have the same impact. Can someone kindly explain what that means assuming I don't know a lot about all of this? Is there any reason for me to continue to report spam or is it not helpful to anyone any more? Also, when did this change occur as I don't recall ever being notified and have been reporting all of them the whole time thinking it was helping. I report via email and just forwarding my spam to the email address it gave me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted June 26, 2004 Share Posted June 26, 2004 http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/373.html is the FAQ on mole-reporting. When it changed, I have no idea, but this web-page shows a "changed date" of early June, about the same time I pointed out the change over in the newsgroups and noted that the page mentioned nothing about when it occurred. I suggest that it was sometime in May, but ...???? Allegedly, the bug has been removed such that a "free" account user can re-register the same address (remove old and receive the new cookie) and can now un-mole themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
art0l0 Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 Since the time frame is about right, is there any speculation regarding weather this change is reflected in the significant change in the statistical graphs?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 Ouch .. that's a set of points I wouldn't have connected. I hope not. Note kicked out to Deputies asking about this ... also a query as to whether it's time to actually notify those still reporting away under mole status without the knowledge that things have changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 Since the time frame is about right, is there any speculation regarding weather this change is reflected in the significant change in the statistical graphs?? Answer back from Deputy Richard ... no, there is little connection between the current status of mole-reporting and the statistics. There are other factors involved that impact the quantitative amassing of numbers, some changes that have been and will be made .. but these are the kinds of changes that aren't openly discussed ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Question Posted June 27, 2004 Author Share Posted June 27, 2004 Allegedly, the bug has been removed such that a "free" account user can re-register the same address (remove old and receive the new cookie) and can now un-mole themselves. Can you explain to me what all the mole thing means and if there is any point in continuing reporting spam via this method? When I signed up in March I can recall it saying something about it was recommended in order not to be retaliated against for reporting spammers. From the FAQ linked it sounds like reporting as mole now serves little or no purpose but I don't understand this very well so would appreciate clarification. Basically, does reporting spam as mole decrease ones future spam, punish spammers, and/or help others by reporting my spam? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 Let me ask you this .. what is in the current FAQ that isn't clear? I offered the link in my first repsonse in this Topic ... it sounds like you did read it ... Basically, the answer to your query is the simple answer of "no" .. but I'd still like to know what needs to be changed in that FAQ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
art0l0 Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 After nearly 12,000 practice runs I suspect that I submitted my first report that was transmitted to a system administrator very early this morning. I signed up for the free reporting service in late December '03. At that time, and as late as March according to Question, the FAQ indicated that mole reporting was the recommended approach. I had always seen the line about the check boxes, but had never seen a check box until I reregistered last evening. I had never seen a report ID before that time. (That might indicate that the actual change took place quite some time before the FAQ change that has been noted.) Thank you to Question for paying attention and for calling this to my attention. I was unclear as to how to go about the reregistration process, but finally decided, after trudging about the site in search of clear instructions, to just fill in the blanks on the registration form and see what happened. My new authorization code arrived and when I went to my reporting page my average reporting time was unchanged, even through I had not submitted any spam under the new authorization. I would like to see a line of clear instructions as to the mechanics of reregistration either in the mole FAQ or a new FAQ dealing with this. Also, a notice posted on the reporting page might draw attention to this to those that are really interested in having their complaints heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 After nearly 12,000 practice runs I suspect that I submitted my first report that was transmitted to a system administrator very early this morning. Noting that having one of your reports transmitted to a sysadmin is a bad thing .... so I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you are probably meaning that you had complaint/reports actually leave SpamCop. (That might indicate that the actual change took place quite some time before the FAQ change that has been noted.) I have conjectured this also, but should also note a previous postings content .. "openly discussed" my reporting page my average reporting time was unchanged, even through I had not submitted any spam under the new authorization. If you re-registered with the same e-mail address, then the account is still "you" .. just a new code/cookie/mole status involved. I would like to see a line of clear instructions as to the mechanics of reregistration either in the mole FAQ or a new FAQ dealing with this. Sign up instructions already exist .. what is missing? Also, a notice posted on the reporting page might draw attention to this to those that are really interested in having their complaints heard. The problem .. it was ... for a couple of weeks, as it turns out. However, only those that logged into the page would have seen it, and of course, out of those, only those that scrolled down a bit would have actually seen the words. Once again, the change was done low key, for various reasons. Now you've got me targeted for putting something out that was not to be openly discussed .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
art0l0 Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 Why not just remove the option if the experiment has failed?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Question Posted June 28, 2004 Author Share Posted June 28, 2004 Let me ask you this .. what is in the current FAQ that isn't clear? I offered the link in my first repsonse in this Topic ... it sounds like you did read it ... Basically, the answer to your query is the simple answer of "no" .. but I'd still like to know what needs to be changed in that FAQ. The only thing that was unclear was that I had no idea of the change and atleast to me the FAQ assumed a basic understanding and background with the site. My entire interaction with the site has been limited solely to when I signed up and recall it recommending one to report spam using this mole option in order not to be retaliated against and then forwarding all my spam daily to spamcop. I have no idea how or why but the other day after I sent my spam as usual I clicked on something that lead me to that FAQ page you linked. That is when I got confused and posted my question. It sounded like everything I had believed up until that point was no longer happening but since I was never notified and my understanding and comprehension of the whole process is limited I wasn't going to assume anything. It wasn't until you confirmed it that it sunk in. If there is absolutely no point in those that have mole accounts to send spam any longer why haven't those people been notified or the accounts closed so as not to have them spend their time sending reports that accomplish nothing? If the process is automated in that when one forwards spam and they get emailed back with the link to report can't there be an opening line or two notifying everyone of the change? Since nothing happens with these reports any longer it would have been nice to know that there was no reason in spending time forwarding and then confirming all of them this whole time. If I inferred you correctly, the only way one would have known on their own was if they frequent the site/forums. Regarding re-signing up to get a non-mole account. Before I think about doing so, does reporting spam as a non-mole decrease ones future spam, punish spammers, and/or help others by reporting my spam? Also, what are the chances of retaliation or is it best to just ignore all of it and delete them since I presume that is basically what I have been doing for awhile now? Thanks for your time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted June 28, 2004 Share Posted June 28, 2004 Why not just remove the option if the experiment has failed?? That would be a Julian thing, thus no one here can answer this one. It might be a programming thing, say a reminder that code is still in place, so it's not time yet to pull it. It might be that expectations were that all mole reporters would no longer be mole reporters, and that hasn't happened yet. It might be that mole reporting may rise from the ashes ...??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted June 28, 2004 Share Posted June 28, 2004 The only thing that was unclear was that I had no idea of the change And I can only repeat (maybe not here, but ..) that I only became aware of it while researching something for another poster ... and finding that when I posted a "correction" to someone else's post over in the newsgroups, there were a number of people that were surprised. If there is absolutely no point in those that have mole accounts to send spam any longer why haven't those people been notified or the accounts closed so as not to have them spend their time sending reports that accomplish nothing? A post here has all the data that I can offer. I'm not in the decision process at all. If I inferred you correctly, the only way one would have known on their own was if they frequent the site/forums. Again, I was told that there was a window of time that the announcement was available on a web page, but so many people seem to be submitting via e-mail, they wouldn't have seen it. I don't use e-mail and never went mole, so the only reason I found it was as above ... just doing research on someone else's query ... and again, please see above about certain things not discussed openly before I get hammered on again <g> Regarding re-signing up to get a non-mole account. Before I think about doing so, does reporting spam as a non-mole decrease ones future spam, punish spammers, and/or help others by reporting my spam? Also, what are the chances of retaliation or is it best to just ignore all of it and delete them since I presume that is basically what I have been doing for awhile now? There are plenty of other posts that cover some of this ground, and the answers are all over the place. decrease future spam? - possibly, but there are so many other factors involved in trying to answer that. Software in use, configuration, handling, reporting addresses involved, what spammers have your address already, on and on .. see the Topic at http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1868 punish spammers? - depends on the ISP involved actually .. some ISPs take immediate and actual action, other ISPs don't give a damn ... help others? - in addition to the above possible real action taken, reporting also feeds the SpamCopDNSbl which can assist in the filtering, managing, and/or blocking of incoming spew to those that use the SpamCopDNSbl. retaliation? - I recently posted that I haven't had this occur in a couple of years, someone else countered with an implied recent event .... though it seems that everyone is now an easy victim of the forged From: lines these days. ignore spam? - hard to answer, actually .. spam is continually rising, recently in a massive proportion usually attributed to attempting to get around all the distribution of filters and blocking tools, so one could suggest that fighting spam has contributed to the downside of the situation, yet ... if no one had made the attempt to throttle the spew all these years, can you imagine that e-mail would still be working at all these days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Question Posted July 9, 2004 Author Share Posted July 9, 2004 Is mole reporting back now as I noticed the FAQ is back to what it said when I signed up back in March? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Help me out .... why isn't Announcements showing as having "new" and "unread" stuff in it? Very curious. It was my contention that this is about the only spot at this point in time to put something that had impact on all types of SpamCop accounts. And being at the top of the page, it sure seems like it's be a bit obvious ...???? After the "further dialog" I was going to delete it, but then noticed hiw many times it had been "viewed" .. based on that, was unsure of how many folks might have gone back and re-configured themselves based on the confusion, so I added the next comment to make it "new and unread" once again ... and now you suggest that it was totally unseen??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonbroth Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Help me out .... why isn't Announcements showing as having "new" and "unread" stuff in it? Very curious. It was my contention that this is about the only spot at this point in time to put something that had impact on all types of SpamCop accounts. And being at the top of the page, it sure seems like it's be a bit obvious ...???? After the "further dialog" I was going to delete it, but then noticed hiw many times it had been "viewed" .. based on that, was unsure of how many folks might have gone back and re-configured themselves based on the confusion, so I added the next comment to make it "new and unread" once again ... and now you suggest that it was totally unseen??? "Announcements" is in a terrible place on these boards. Because the entry point to SpamCop Discussions will be a specific board linked from the Help page, I spend most of my time in the individual boards... if I go up one level, that takes me to the group of SpamCop Discussions boards. But "Announcements" has been set up outside that hierarchy, and there's no links that take you directly to the top-level SpamCop Discussion page (which includes Administrative Messages => Announcements as well as SpamCop Discussions => all other forums). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Thanks for that feedback. And based on that, here's what I kicked off to JT; =-=-=-=-=-=- I asked a silly question, got a great answer. However, I'm not sure how it can be addressed. Problem started with a FAQ on the Spamcop.net page being "updated" (?) http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=2030 I thought I'd solve part of that issue with a posting in the Announcements section, but .. now see why it would be "invisible" to some (most?) users. Perhaps Announcements in it's own separate space isn't a good position? =-=-=-=-=- Now having to go back to the Topi I've got going in the Lounge http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1672 and try to figure out the impact of your notes on that whole thing. Thanks <g> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonbroth Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Now having to go back to the Topic I've got going in the Lounge http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1672 and try to figure out the impact of your notes on that whole thing. Thanks <g> You're very welcome. For a minimal change that doesn't impact on the structure of the forums at all, I'd suggest having the most prominent link from the "Help" page on spamcop.net be to the topmost (SpamCop Discussion) page of these forums - rather than the specific/local links to "General Help," "Email Help", etc. That way the Announcements forum (and the date of the most recent announcement) will at least be visible. You can keep those specific links from the Help page (General Help, Email Help...), of course -- and I'd suggest ensuring that (1) the name of the link matches the name of the forum, (2) there's a link from the Help page to every forum, and (3) there's a brief, accurate summary of the forum subject area (e.g. not saying that the "SpamCop Lounge" is only for off-topic posts). I understand that there have been problems getting the forum descriptions updated within the powerboard system, but the SpamCop Help page is presumably easier to adjust. I'd be happy to produce a draft, if this would help... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Well, I can't say that there have been problems .. it's just that access to these pages are limited to but a few .. (dang, I just typed all this up last night in another topic ... (found it - http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...indpost&p=13081 ) and there's that thing called time and its availablity, then add in priorities, kick in some attitude of the moment, and .... <g> The pages here are strictly JT's, the spamcop.net FAQ, Help, and a few others a re "shared" somewhat, and the reporting system is Julian's/IronPort's stuff, spread across the U.S. continent .. so it's also one of those things that to "do it right" needs a bit of coordination between a few people .... Some of those links had been questioned before, based on the various off-topic postings from folks that simply followed "the" link they found .. but having been involved in writing Technical Manuals for the military, it is dang hard to write that perfect description such that there can be no mis-understanding <g> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.