[SpamCop-List] Re: Sending Reports
nospam at glenbodie.com
Sat Mar 20 14:47:12 EST 2004
On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 18:28:29 +0000 (UTC), Marjolein Katsma
<nobody at spamcop.net> wrote:
>The idea is that you overlook SpamCop's parsing process, and make sure
>you don't report:
>- yourself (your own mail server)
>- your mail provider (or access provider whose email services you use)
>- any innocent bystanders (such as websites cited by a spammer to make
>things look official or believable)
>Uncheck any targets such as the above before you submit.
>*That* process cannot be automated - it requires a human to make common-
>If that means you get more spam than you have time to report - do it
>"backwards": latest spams first (to increase the chance of stopping a
>spamrun in its tracks). And just stop when you have no more time.
>Quality of reporting is more important than quantity.
The 3 things you suggest, in my situation, are: not an issue, already
assessed before I send to SpamCop, may be impossible to do accurately
and with confidence.
I don't have to report anything at all, but I kind of feel like
helping the planet, so I try to report. Now I'm trying to minimize my
effort to do that. I think it takes a lot of extra work on my part to
catch the things you're talking about. In fact, I think I've only ever
unchecked a couple of reports. That's too much work for too little
I liked Tim McGraw's add to preferentially report just the ones that
make it through, but I suspect that is a failure of SpamPal's Baysian
filters more than an IP missing from some DNSBL.
Nonetheless, thanks for letting me know I had no unknown alternative.
More information about the SpamCop-List