[SpamCop-List] Re: Statistics

[Berny]

"Mike Easter" <MikeE at ster.invalid> wrote in message
news:cj66l2$kq$1 at news.spamcop.net...
> Tim wrote:
> > Mike Easter wrote:
> >> SNIPPED
>
> I wonder just how, not *exactly* - but /roughly/, an undercover tweak has
> such an impact on those two values for any given second, hour, or week.

It has a lot of us wondering, it also renders the stats useless as a kind of
bellweather or indicator. Previously (before this summer) my spam amount
qualitatively behaved like the stats, ie up when the stats were up, and down
when they were down. Now there is no correlation whatsoever. What's so
secret about the method of counting stats anyway? Surely that information
cannot be helpful to spammers in any way.