[SC-Help] Re: confused
aukword666 at attglobal.net
Mon Jul 5 06:57:23 EDT 2004
"Mike Easter" wrote in message:
> Well, as far as I'm concerned we are still on the mark of whatall SI is
> up to.
> > You were taking
> > exception to the OP's wanting the SC code for
> > use with SI, suggesting he might be confused.
> I don't know about 'exception' - I considered that he might need the
> submit information /and/ that he might be confused.
I was not taking exception to what you were saying but
to what I thought you might be saying (suggesting):
I accept all responsibility for the meaning I give your message.
I am after all pathologically personalized and privatized in
my thought process... you have nothing to do with that!
> > And
> > I am taking exception to that: the OP is not confused,
> > SI makes it appear that reports will be sent to SC,
> > where experience suggests things may not be as
> > they appear to be...
> While I consider SI to be full of badness, it might be that the failure
> to successfully submit to SC might simply be a poor implementation. If
> we really wanted to help them out, which I don't, an SI user could send
> themselves a spam report so that we could look at its structure for
> acceptability to SC. I suspect they screwed that up.
Great f/ups. Thanks much for clearing me up. Now, if
OP is taking in what we are sharing by way of experience
he may be rewarded with much more than he sought.
Have a Most Excellent day!,
More information about the SpamCop-Help