Jump to content

Stop Processing Usenet Posts


Recommended Posts

Some of us (at least myself) have no idea what Don is talking about when he refers to reporting of Usenet posts.

As such, the proposed change will most likely have no affect on us, so I guess the best thing for us (those who have no idea what he is talking about) to do is simply ignore it.

Thanks Don for posting the information, I am sure that those who are affected will appreciate the advanced warning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I know what he's talking about, but it never occured to me to try to report newsgroup spam here - only e-mail spam.

I hope the people doing it who don't read these forums or the SpamCop newsgroups have another way to be notified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

In a few days, SpamCop will stop processing Usenet posts. Abuse of Usenet reporting has been a LOT of trouble for a long time, and we've had enough. We're not going to deal with it anymore.

- Don D'Minion - SpamCop Admin -

Well this is a sad day for me as protecting the usenet news group I helped to start from spam abuse is half the reason I've been a member of spamcop all these years. Now I'll be forced to try other services I never would have considered and who knows might come to like better. <sigh>

From the Spamcop FAQ

How should I report usenet (newsgroup) spam?

As with email spam, you must use your best judgment. By normal usenet definitions, spam is a message which is either cross-posted excessively or multi-posted excessively. However, other forms of postings are often frowned upon by usenet administrators and ISPs in general even if not strictly defined as spam.

Usenet is much more complicated than email to evaluate. Each group has its own rules (for instance, most groups - but not all - forbid commercial postings). When reporting a usenet message, you should always add some comments of your own to indicate why you are reporting the message as spam. Indicate what local rules the poster is breaking and include a link to the group's charter, if available. Or, indicate that the message has been excessively multi-posted or cross-posted.

Under no circumstances should you report messages which are freedom of speech issues. For instance, if you are reading a pro-choice newsgroup, and you see an objectionable post from a pro-lifer, this should *not* be reported to the ISP using SpamCop or any other method. Simply being off-topic does not make a message spam. Reporting such messages will gain nothing and will only serve to dilute the opinion of administrators for you personally and SpamCop generally. See also the rules FAQ for possible punishment (including banning from SpamCop).

If you object to a certain post, you should also make every effort to educate the poster before you report them to their ISP. Usenet is a place where many people learn about netiquette for the first time. If you think the poster is doing the wrong thing out of ignorance, please try to educate them nicely via email before you cry spam. Don't clutter the newsgroup with these educational messages. Send the poster email. If the person continues to post spam to your group and they are unwilling to be educated, only then should you bring the issue to the attention of their ISP.

Copyright © 1998-2006, IronPort Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. HTML4 / CSS2 Firefox recommended - Policies and Disclaimers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this is a sad day for me as protecting the usenet news group I helped to start from spam abuse is half the reason I've been a member of spamcop all these years. Now I'll be forced to try other services I never would have considered and who knows might come to like better. <sigh>

From the Spamcop FAQ

Wondering why the whole of the FAQ entry needed to be re-posted here, other than pointing out that the "Official" FAQ is behind the times yet again ...???? If you check the alternative versions found "here" .. in the Wiki .. you'll see that this is hardly newsworthy, unfortunately ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wondering why the whole of the FAQ entry needed to be re-posted here, other than pointing out that the "Official" FAQ is behind the times yet again ...???? If you check the alternative versions found "here" .. in the Wiki .. you'll see that this is hardly newsworthy, unfortunately ....

I felt the need due to the second post in the thread. I wasn't trying to point out whether the FAQ is out of date or not, I posted it so the moderator would know what I was complaining about the future lack of capability we previously enjoyed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...