Re: Unstoppable picture spam.
asterix@no_where.net (Asterix) Thu, 18 May 2006 00:40:04 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.spam.spamcop.help |
|---|---|
| Organization | Gaelian forces |
| Message-ID | <1hfiaky.nauxirx59bvpN%asterix@no_where.net> |
Mike Easter <[email protected]> wrote: > Asterix wrote: > > Mike Easter > >> Asterix wrote: > >> > >>> Please tell me how to report spam without opening it (and make sure > >>> it's spam. > > >> If I want to see why an item > >> was tagged, I can examine its header Xlines by looking at its > >> message properties without opening it. > > > As I a) want full control of what I report and b) always report > > through the web site, there is no way I can avoid opening the spam. > > If you are saying that your software prohibits you from reporting spam > without opening it, I can't very well tell you how to report spam > without opening it. I didn't say my software prohibits me - it's rather Spamcop's web form. Eudora lets me forward the spam to a sumbission address without inspection, but then I completely lose control of where the reports go. Examining the X-lines is of limited or no interest for that purpose. I'm more concerned about not reporting "innocent bystander' - and/or joe-job - web links in the body. And making sure that real spamvertized links get parsed. How can I do *that* without opening and reading the spam? Or just use the web form at all without opening the spam? > > Besides, your reply says abolutely nothing about how to *report* spam, > > which what I asked. > > No, you asked "and make sure it's spam" in addition to not saying what > method you were using to report. The last part was my mistake - I use the web form exclusively. However, I feel you *should* have seen what I meant - i'll try to rephrase it: "How do I report spam without opening it - being sure it is really spam I'm reporting?" > > And you don't say *why* you discourage opening > > spam, though I think I have an idea. > > I think I'll go into that on Nigel's post instead of here. As far as I can tell you didn't. You just repeat *what* you don't recommend - not *why*. As if spam inspection was some kind of black magic that only you can master. And you didn't tell Nigel that the site http://www.thestocktongroup.com/ is alive and kicking (maybe it wasn't yesterday) whether Spamcop resolves the link or not. Actually it does today - to my surprise. I thought it might be on a "bulletproof" domain that block DNS queries from SC. Sometimes I get the feeling that some spamvertized sites are not online - or even in DNS - until a day or two *after* the spam is sent. Quite an elabotate scheme to dodge reports. -- I recommend Macs to my friends, and Windows machines to those whom I don't mind billing by the hour