[SpamCop-List] Re: Subject: Want to make EASY Money? TeamAaronShara will show you how!

[Philippe Verdy (n.o-s.p.a.m+abuse)]

"Steven Maesslein" <nobody at nowhere.invalid> a écrit dans le message de news: 
slrndp86rl.upd.nobody at 127.0.0.1...
> On Mon, 5 Dec 2005 01:18:26 +0100, Philippe Verdy coughed into spamcop
> and left this in <dn011t$mvp$1 at news.spamcop.net>:
>
>>> There's no such thing as a "reasonably intelligent" life form in the
>>> whole organisation of his ISP: Wanadoo.fr.
>>
>> Stop ranting. This is clearly not the purpose of my report and you are 
>> out
>> of topic.
>>
>> There are MUCH MUCH more worse ISPs than Wanadoo in the world.
>
> And your point is?  FWIW they get blocked, too. Just because wanadoo is
> the lesser of two evils doesn't mean that everything's peachy again.
>
>> Wanadoo is acting reasonnably well given its size, and acts quite fast
>> to spam reports, although it's not perfect.
>
> Doesn't look like it from here. Until I blocked them outright I was
> being spammed by the same spammer THROUGH WANADOO'S OFFICIAL SMTP
> CHANNEL (not trojanned windows machines) for months on end. From
> spamcop's POV, abuse at wanadoo.fr is wired to /dev/null and postmaster
> bounces.
>
>> I have still never received any spam from Wanadoo customers,
>
> 90% of the mail I used to see from wanadoo customers was spam.
>
>> Today, most Wanadoo customers use a external device (named "LiveBox") 
>> that
>> is acting as a NAT router, a basic firewall that blocks outgoing SMTP
>> connections, offers a VoIP decoder, a digital TV router over ATM
>> connections, and so on. The effective spams that remain from Wanadoo
>> customers is constantly going down. Also the spam/mail ratio is extremely
>> low.
>
> This is inaccurate. I happen to live in France and use a FreeBox myself.

And Free hasa much longer history of inaction against spam. Look at the 
various logs on the Internet and you'll see that Wanadoo is VERY FAR WAY at 
the bottom of the spam sources, after hundreds of ISPs of various sizes.

On the opposite, Iliad/Online.net/Free.fr are listed in the top 30 spam 
sources, and often within the weekly top 10 ones. Free.fr isnot expensive 
foronegood reason: insufficient humane resources working to monitor their 
network activity, little proactive actions to enforce usage policies, 
nothing invested in research to help improve the efficiency of this 
activity. Free is better known as a commercial only company very interested 
only in advertizing, putting lots of pressure on its workers, and with many 
of its most competent workers leaving this company which has very antisocial 
behavior.

Don't be surprised if Free.fr is wellknown for its very poor customer 
support, for its expensive and lengthy support phone number. Free.fr is 
really a unmanned company that makes huges profits for the benefit of a few 
share holders. Free.fr used to be agood service provider. Now that they have 
enough clients, they really neglect them, have a long history of legal 
actions against them (probably the longest one in France, with so many 
unsolved problems, and abusive contracts with customers that can't even get 
any connection with them for months, despite they are paying for it, and 
when they want to leave it, they have to support very expensive fees, and 
must even continue to pay a full year after their contract is canceled; 
Free.fr isalso using expensive bill recovery services against these 
unsatisfied clients,despite Free.fr has failed to provide any service for 
these customers).

I won't trust Free.fr at any time now. Lookat the statistics on spamcop.net: 
Free.fr is almost constantly listed in the top worldwide sources, and the 
volume of spams coming from it is constantly increasing: Free has not 
invested any euro to support the growth of their existing customer base. For 
most cases, either you are lucky when your connection works, else you'll 
have a lot of difficulties to make it work or just to leave this non-working 
service. Free.fr is constantly using illegal arguments trying to convince 
their clients that they are not responsible for the defects of a service 
they are fully selling themselves. (WhenFree.fr invokes repsonsability of 
FranceTelecom, most often it is completely false, and anyway, even if 
thiswas the case, under French law, they are responsible for their customer, 
andcustomers don't need to know the details that links Free to FranceTelecom 
for providing the connection to the local loop.

Free clearly ignores all check procedures that are needed when they accept a 
newsubscription. all they want is a subscription, and they absolutely don't 
care about the quality of their service, and constantly report their own 
reponsability to the customers (illegal: Free has been condamned many times 
with the help of consumer associations. Look at the UFC/Que Choisir web site 
for the long bad history of Free whose abusive contractual claused are 
cancelled by justice, but still applied. Free equals AOL under this 
perspective, with false advertizing).