[SpamCop-List] Re: I am getting more messages from this .pk server about listserver messages I can do nothing about.

[Mike Easter]

Geoffrey Hyde wrote:
> "Mike Easter"

>> When you report such an item, you list the .pk university server.
>> That isn't what SC wants to be doing.
>
> I've asked you, repeatedly, to point to guidelines - /excluding/ the
> SC website - that say this is what normal mailing list behaviour
> should be, and that these are normal behaviours regarding servers
> which handle mailing list mails.  You haven't provided one shred of
> evidence so far to support your theories.

Let me refresh you about what we agree on and what we disagree on.  We
agree that your posts to a newsserver are going to a webforum and a
mailing list and that those posts contain your unmunged From.  We agree
that the optimal management of the server handling the mailing list's
mail should be to reject it from the sending server which is lugnet or
at the worst belatedly bounce it to the Sender line of the item and not
the From.  We also agree that you have the right to let your From be
unmunged, if you so wish.

What we disagree on is that what you are reporting is called 'spam' and
we disagree on whether or not spamcop reporting it breaks the spamcop
rules and we disagree on how to approach this problem.

The people you should be having this longwinded conversation with is not
me, but the lugnet 'system' which is handling your newsmessage and
turning it into a mail which they are not getting bounces for when
undelivered.  Both you and lugnet agree that they want that mail item
and you don't.  The lugnet system isn't a system which *I* am having a
problem with.  The lugnet system is a system which *you* are having a
problem with.  If anyone should be looking around for something, it
should be you, not me.

>> Naturally the item should be rejected during the transaction or if
>> newmailed, it should be newmailed to the Sender.
>
> Therefore, until such time as you post the requested information
> above, I will be ignoring any further debate or discussion with you
> on this topic. As far as I'm concerned, it's spam and will be fed to
> SC for reporting.

I'm only a kibitzer around here, not any kind of admin.  Generally the
punishment for breaking a rule, especially if the situation is fuzzy,
shouldn't be too harsh.  The way it would unfold is that a provider who
gets spamcop blocklisted and whose mail delivery is interfered with,
such as the .pk university server's admin, takes a look at the reports
of alleged spam which they are receiving copies of.  When that admin
looks at something which is not spam whose report causes their server to
become listed, then they contact the deputy at spamcop and tell them
that a reporter is making false reports of something which is not spam,
but instead is something which was mailed to a mailing list.

Then, the deputy takes a look at the situation based on the reportid or
tracker and determines that it is not spam and that it is something
which was sent to a mailing list by you and then the deputy determines
that it was a bad report and against the rules.

Hopefully all that will happen is that the deputy will 'admonish' you to
not be making those kinds of reports in the future rather than being
more severe because of all of this conversation you and I are having --- 
in which there was plenty of opportunity for you to determine that those
reports weren't really a good idea, all things considered.

So, you could take the attitude that you will continue to report them
until such time as you are admonished by a real admin.

Or, you could try to help out lugnet by letting them know about the
problem and letting lugnet and the .pk server admin talk to each other
on a server admin to server admin level.

> And I don't care what the SC reporting guidelines are,

You should *DEFINITELY* care what the SC reporting guidelines are if we
are talking about you making a SC report.

If we are not talking about making a SC report, then the SC reporting
guidelines don't make any difference for just chatting about here.

> I want to know
> what the internet "RFC" or current equivalent protocol states about
> internet mailing list emails.  Google wasn't of much help ...

The way it works is that there are some major majordomos or listservs
which do things a particular way, and there are some RFCs which are
'integrated' with those softwares and there are some server softwares
which are also configured accordingly so that normally things work the
way they are supposed to -- which is where you don't get the bounce
which is 'soft' or belated and the list server does get a bounce which
is either hard as a rejection or soft as a belated newmail to the Sender
line.

That is the part you and I agree on.  We are debating how to manage the
current problem in the meantime.

-- 
Mike Easter
kibitzer, not SC admin