[SpamCop-List] Re: Spamcop Statistics

[Dorian Gray]

In article <ctmke6$cqi$1 at news.spamcop.net>,
 "WazoO" <nobody at devnull.spamcop.net> wrote:

> "Dorian Gray" <D.Gray at picture.oscar.wilde> wrote in message
> news:D.Gray-61C9F0.18084531012005 at news.cesmail.net...
> > In article <cte4b1$5q2$1 at news.spamcop.net>,
> >  "WazoO" <nobody at devnull.spamcop.net> wrote:
> >
> > > "Edward D. Thompson" <edt at cyrix.ed-thompson.org> wrote in message
> > > news:pan.2005.01.28.17.36.30.159767 at cyrix.ed-thompson.org...
> > > >
> > > > Does anyone understand the behavior of the Spamcop statistics?
> > > >
> > > > http://mailsc.spamcop.net/spamgraph.shtml?spamyear
> > >
> > > Julian .... those charts track whatever he's got them pointed to,
> > > and what's behind that curtain has been described in the past
> > > as "not for public discussion" ...
> >
> > Been described in the past, by whom?  I only recall WazoO saying such
> > things as "not for public discussion".
> 
> Dialog between Julian, Don, Deputies and myself have included
> facts and conditions described as "not for public discussion" ...

What dialog?  Described by whom?  Show me.

Or do you mean you have off-newsgroup conversations with Julian etc., 
which you cannot tell us about, and that you then like to tell us that 
you can't tell us about?

Frankly, if that's the case, I'd like to hear it from someone from 
Spamcop.  Your unhelpful help is so vague WazoO as to seem implausible.