[SpamCop-List] Re: Why will not SC report http://uk.geocities.com/ ?

[JG]

On 8/21/2005 3:06 PM Ant scribbled:


> 
> I also find the parser quirk irritating. There may be good reason for
> the behaviour, and if so, I think the parser should display a message.
> It doesn't need to give a reason if that would be giving away secrets,
> but it should make it clear that the non-resolution is intentional.
> 
> 

Don't feel like the lone ranger here, but Mike E. has often replied to
my whines with the simple fact that SC is interested in reporting the
/source/ only - not the spamverts.  I cannot fathom why the
non-resolution would be intentional.  I don't see the logic - nowadays
most of the sources have been identified ad nausem (doubt thats in spell
check).  I'd like to add my complaint to the thread FWIW and suggest
that SC move on to exploring something a little more proactive.
I mean, how many more times do we need to note that kornet, chinietong,
cnnoc, rr, everything .br, etc are sources?
Since everyone out there /knows/ this, why isn't /anything/ happening?
Actually, I know that answer to that last question but wanted to vent
anyway...