Re: Who is JT and why this NG won't be used?

"Ilgaz Ocal" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I am at least sure I have questions of the service/companies
> seriousness when it allows 2 "non paid" moderators to mess with their
> paid customers. Also I am sure amazed by Ironport and Spamcop let their
> brands used this way.

I fail to grasp the "messing with paid customers" thing ... you are posting
into an open-to-the-public newsgroup and seeing replies posted by
other SpamCop.net users.  The Forum is set up the same way, user-
to-user help provided.  The FAQ you're describing is something
built by a number of other SpamCop.net users to get around the
complaints and issues of the original / Official FAQ.  A FAQ list is
something created so that folks don't need to re-type all the answers
to repeatedly asked question.  If you have an issue with one of
the FAQ entries seen in the Forum, take the time to post about it,
get it fixed.  Getting the Official FAQ straightened out has been a
losing battle for me, but you're welcome to try yourself.

Interestingly enough, you say you have yet more questions, I believe
you once said you sent an e-mail to someone ... I can tell you that
both Don and JT have been advised of these last threads in this
newsgroup in my e-mails to them, pointing out your confusion
issues, mis-perceptions of the parts of the SpamCop.net toolset,
and your complaint yet again brought up about the lack of SMTP ..
and you'll have to note, no response here from the "Official" staff.

As far as your Forum Account, I'll ask that you offer up a bit of
a clue as to which account I'm supposed to be looking for.
I'll also note that the last three individuals that asked for their
accounts to be closed there for some strange reason later
opened up new ones.  As far as being "three layers deep" ....
try looking at the very top of "every" Forum page and note
the "Forum FAQ" link ... actually existing twice, one to
open a new browser instance, the other to simply open a
new web page .... hardly "buried" at all .....