[SC-Help] Re: disinformation newsletter that i subscribe to is suddently getting flagged by spamcop

[Rev. Guido S. DeLuxe, DD, LDD, OGG, OHS, ST, MI, MSU]

On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 07:16:03 -0800, Mike Easter, an eminent manifestation
of Tina Chopp, wrote:

> Rev. Guido
> 
> www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z730077084zf01b5c5b0e8415125bb1bcee1184e3a7z
> 
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=7.5 required=5.0
> tests=DRUGS_DEPRESSION,HTML_30_40,
>  HTML_MESSAGE,J_CHICKENPOX_16,PORN_DISGUISED autolearn=disabled
>  version=3.0.1
> X-Spam-Report:
>  *  0.6 J_CHICKENPOX_16 BODY: 1alpha-pock-6alpha *  0.9 HTML_30_40 BODY:
>  Message is 30% to 40% HTML *  0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in
>  message *  6.0 PORN_DISGUISED RAW: Disguised PORN *  0.0 DRUGS_DEPRESSION
>  Contains a reference to a prescription
> antidepressant
> X-UIDL: 5/&!!<(9"!=G]!!QCn!!
> 
> The SA 'disguised porn' rule was the killer all by itself.  I don't know
> what the rule does, ie what it looks for, it is listed here
> http://spamassassin.apache.org/tests_3_0_x.html but not described - but
> you don't have control over the SA rules I don't think, so the way to
> handle it would be to simply whitelist the newsletter.  'Arguing' that the
> newsletter isn't 'pornish' is a waste of time.  If you were configuring
> your own SA, maybe you wouldn't choose that rule or give it that value.
> 
> If that From is consistent, I would use it.
> 
> From: "disinfo" <alex at disinfo.com>

that's great... except that i whitelisted alex at disinfo dot com at
spamcop webmail, and that didn't make any difference. is there somewhere
else that i can whitelist addresses that affects spamcop?

not only that, but why is it an issue now, and it wasn't a month ago? the
content of the newsletter hasn't gotten _that_ pornographic... is this
another case of "demons"?

thanks
GSDL