mrmaxx Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 I'm not sure if this is a SpamCop issue or a SpamDeputy issue (I'm leaning towards a SpamCOP issue since I've been using SD for awhile and it just started happening today.) Anyway, the problem is that the "user-defined reports" are defaulting to "checked" despite my preferences that they default to "UN-checked." If I'd wanted them to deafult to "selected" then I would have set my preferences that way! Also, it appears that SC is running slowly today. Typically, unless I'm submitting more than 3 or 4 spam messages at once, SC usually is already parsing them by the time I get the SD reporting window maximized. Today, it's taking 30 seconds to a minute for SC to start parsing the email. Wondering what's going on with these two issues? It just seems like SpamCop is flaking out on us today! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmaxx Posted November 1, 2005 Author Share Posted November 1, 2005 Whoops.. Missed the pinned entry about this. I'm still wondering why SpamCop is going so slow today.... Maybe someone can look into this, please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff G. Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 The SpamCop Parsing and Reporting Service appears to be almost twice as busy as normal, recovering from about 20 minutes of unscheduled downtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff G. Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 It's down to about 20% above average, in the normal range for the EST lunch crowd and the PST just-got-to-work crowd. Please see http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=5247. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmaxx Posted November 1, 2005 Author Share Posted November 1, 2005 The SpamCop Parsing and Reporting Service appears to be almost twice as busy as normal, recovering from about 20 minutes of unscheduled downtime. 35321[/snapback] Ahhh.. I didn't know about the unscheduled downtime. Makes sense... Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btech Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 I jsut noticed today that when I go to report a message, that all my User Defined Recipients are checked and I have to un-check the ones I don't want prior to sending. Is this a cookie error on my comp or something new I'm not aware of? B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 I jsut noticed today that when I go to report a message, that all my User Defined Recipients are checked and I have to un-check the ones I don't want prior to sending. <snip> 35334[/snapback] Hi, B, ...Reported and discussed in thread "Reporting defaults have changed". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 Moved/Merged btech's post from the E-Mail Forum to the Reporting Forum .. isuue isn't directly connected to an E-Mail account issue..... PM sent to advise of the Move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btech Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 Sorry for the post in the wrong area gents. Glad to see I'm not the only one with this error... I thought it might have been my computer here [at] work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btech Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 any idea the problem or a solution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 ...Kind of. Please see thread "Reporting defaults have changed," especially Richard W's contribution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff G. Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 any idea the problem or a solution?35452[/snapback] Simply put, the problem is the new code, which has new defaults, and the solution is to change back to the old defaults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmaxx Posted November 14, 2005 Author Share Posted November 14, 2005 *BUMP* Has anyone heard any more about whether this issue is going to be addressed, and if so, when???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted November 14, 2005 Share Posted November 14, 2005 *BUMP* Has anyone heard any more about whether this issue is going to be addressed, and if so, when???? 36054[/snapback] ...Please see one of my contributions to the thread to which I referred in my earlier reply here 35338[/snapback]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted November 14, 2005 Share Posted November 14, 2005 Has anyone heard any more about whether this issue is going to be addressed, and if so, when???? 36054[/snapback] And any previous experiences with "future programming changes to occur in the SpamCop.net Parsing & Reporting system" would be documented exactly where? Historically, profram code changes and the results are the "documentation" ... problems disappear, things change, something bad happens .... but someone making a clear post on what exactly got modified and on what schedule ...??? Note Don's last notification of a program code change that confused so many people, in that there is eventually a reference to the post/e-mail I sent upstrean on that issue ... maybe factor that into a timeline? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmaxx Posted November 15, 2005 Author Share Posted November 15, 2005 And any previous experiences with "future programming changes to occur in the SpamCop.net Parsing & Reporting system" would be documented exactly where? Historically, profram code changes and the results are the "documentation" ... problems disappear, things change, something bad happens .... but someone making a clear post on what exactly got modified and on what schedule ...??? Note Don's last notification of a program code change that confused so many people, in that there is eventually a reference to the post/e-mail I sent upstrean on that issue ... maybe factor that into a timeline? 36063[/snapback] Yeah... I was hoping that the problem would just "magically" clear up, but so far it hasn't... I don't want to be an annoying pest, but I wonder if maybe a couple times a month someone should send a note "upstream" to Don D'Minion and "refresh" the attention of The Powers That Be to the problem... Squeaky Wheel and all that... kinda why I was "bumping" this thread. I dunno... I'm beginning to wonder if maybe the intent wasn't to convince people not to have stored user-specified reports. That's about what it's going to come down to, I think, if they don't fix this in a reasonable time frame (next few weeks.) I don't want to be reporting drug spam to the Treasury Department or Mortgage spam to the FDA, and that's what's going to end up happening, IMNSHO, the longer this problem goes unresolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted November 15, 2005 Share Posted November 15, 2005 ...Yep, we feel your pain. I like your idea of sending a periodic reminder upstream but I feel it best to leave that to those more clued in to TPTB than I. Other than that, the phrase "preaching to the choir" comes to mind. <g> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmaxx Posted November 15, 2005 Author Share Posted November 15, 2005 ...Yep, we feel your pain. I like your idea of sending a periodic reminder upstream but I feel it best to leave that to those more clued in to TPTB than I. Other than that, the phrase "preaching to the choir" comes to mind. <g> 36096[/snapback] Yeah... that was kinda my thought when I 'bumped' this thread... I thought maybe someone more clueful with TPTB might feel the need to send a reminder upstream... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.