Re: Wondering about how SpamCop works two or more users]
"Mike Easter" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.spam.spamcop.user |
|---|---|
| Organization | SpamCop |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
WazoO wrote: > "Mike Easter" >> http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t6038-50.html >> >> The forum discussion and question about requiring 2 seems to have >> never been confirmed by anyone, unless you can find it in that forum >> discussions which I don't like to dredge thru' repeatedly looking for >> something. I prefer nice simple plaintext to dig thru' instead of >> html. > > Ummmm ... RW / Richard is one of the Deputies .... And Richard the deputy did *not* answer the question which was asked, but instead stated, enigmatically, "read carefully..." blah blah -- when in fact the question was crystal clear, Is it or is it not necessary for 2 or more reporters to report an IP to become listed. Richard didn't answer that and he had a perfectly good opportunity to say Yes or No. He chose to say neither. > RW did say to "read carefully" Which was non helpful in the context of the question that /Steve/ presented: <SU> "I have sent a request to the deputies to clarify this issue. It has always been my understanding (perhaps back to my usenet days) that it required 2 REPORTERS to list an IP address, but the actual FAQ (http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/297.html) states: The SCBL will not list an IP address with only one report filed." Then, Richard cited that statement and answered 'read carefully'. Big help. >> I only see people 'assuming' it to be the case. I think they are >> confused by the verified one report concept -- melding it into a one >> reporter concept. > > Once again, dialog with the Deputies has them repeatedly advising > that the two-reporter thing is a fact .... Show me where. Richard didn't say that in the link above when asked directly. And you haven't cited anything else. > but even I'll point out > that these folks are not the actual coders of the toolset .... -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin