[SpamCop-List] Re: Spamcop Statistics

[Dorian Gray]

In article <ctr8ha$tmn$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-452397.18592002022005 at news.cesmail.net...
> > In article <ctr2e5$oqi$3 at news.spamcop.net>,
> >  "Ellen" <nobody at spamcop.net> wrote:
> >
> > > There are various reasons why you may see anomolies in the stat graphs.
> I
> > > cannot go into detail about them.
> >
> > Thanks Ellen.
> 
> I'm so confused at this point.  You give me hell for saying
> "not for public discussion" .. wanting to hear from someone
> else .... Deputy Ellen states "cannot go into detail" and you
> offer her thanks. Then strangely enough, continue with the
> asking of the same questions that you started with.

Now don't take this the wrong way WazoO, but it's a matter of getting it 
from the horse's mouth.  You don't know the reasons for the features in 
the statistics or details of their compilation and can only say that it 
can't be discussed.  That is not authoritative, and anyone could say it.  
The difference is that Ellen knows what the answer is, and knows why 
some things can't be discussed, if that is the case (which she has 
confirmed).  She went so far as to rule out my suggested reason for the 
big drop since September, which I must admit leaves it as a big mystery, 
but at least she answered my questions directly and authoritatively.

My problem remains that I use the statistics to see the aggregate 
behaviour of Spamcop reporters - the statistics may also give some (very 
loose) idea of the effect of Spamcop reporters as well as gross spam 
trends - and if these statistics seem inexplicably haywire then I lose 
to some extent my sense of community with other Spamcop reporters 
because there is no way to follow our behaviour over time.  I mean, did 
most reporters just give up in September?  I hope not, but that is one 
thing that could be inferred from the stats.  Without some degree of 
understandable feedback through the statistics, I feel like I could be 
wasting my time, which encourages me to stop reporting.

I understand entirely the need to not give out information which would 
help spammers circumvent Spamcop's techniques.  However published stats 
should be understandable.  Is it really going to tell spammy anything 
useful by explaining the features in the stats?  Restricting all 
information as a matter of policy alienates reporters in the long run.