Re: What's wrong now, Spamcop?

Alan Brown wrote:
> I had problems in the Tue-Thu timeframe.

As long as we are sharing experiences....

I did /not/ have any problems in the Tu-Th time frame.  During that
timeframe I made 17 email submissions, none of which were delayed in
being replied.  Where by 'problem' I mean receiving back my report.
That 'problem' definition does not include such as observing the parser
failing to resolve a spamvertised URL, which is often observed.  This
thread started about email submission replies -- not all generic
'problems' amassed together.

In the past when I used to submit directly to the webparser instead of
by email, I found it much 'simpler' or quicker to use the webparser when
it wasn't busy than when it was.

> I didn't report anything
> because I have grown accustomed to these outages (SC may not call them
> that, but from a user perspective, it IS an outage).

Outages is another term different than generic 'problems'.

A recent post on Wed said this:

John Anderson wrote:
> An error occurred while processing your request.
> Reference #97.bc2c7b3f.1142434241.d14a52


> Databases corrupt, mail servers down, DNS problems, parser errors, you
name it.

I'm not a SC mail client.  My own spams are sent by email.  I use the
webparser often to discuss spams being discussed in the ng/s.  I'm not
seeing 'any' problems, except the occasional ones reported here, such as
Wed above and this thread.

> Spam Cop has a history of technical problems.  I've been a subscriber
> for about four years and a reporter much longer than that.  Denial of
> problems until it FINALLY affects one of the SC admins seems to be
> par for the course.

You are saying you see problems frequently.  I'm saying I rarely see
problems.  I have no explanation for the difference in our observations.


-- 
Mike Easter
kibitzer, not SC admin