[SpamCop-List] Re: Blacklists don't work
MikeE at ster.invalid
Tue Feb 22 15:54:39 EST 2005
>> Bucky wrote:
>>> SpamCop is providing the data. The data is wrong. As soon as I click
>>> the bl.shtml?IP_Address link, SpamCop reports that the IP address is
>>> not listed.
>> I suspect that if something is stamping your mail 'suspected spam'
>> and the issue IP is not SCbl listed, then the 'suspected spam' label
>> has nothing to do with the SCbl. Whatever is doing that must be
>> providing misinformation by associating its spamlabel with SC.
> By the time I go to look at the blcheck, the IP has been removed from
> Spamcop. It is still listed under the senderbase link.
As far as I'm concerned, if we are going to have a discussion about some
IP being listed or not being listed, we have to talk about the specific
IP - not some 'described' unidentified IP. You say, I saw this, and I
saw that, but we aren't looking at whatever you were looking at, and
your notion that you have it all figured out because there is a
discrepancy between the senderbase listing and the SC webbased listing
isn't a 'comprehensive' picture of the particular IP which seems to be
What is the IP in question? You have brought up mail you have
/received/ and you have brought up mail you have /sent/, but you haven't
named a single IP yet.
>>> There are people on this newsgroup asking why they have been listed
>>> when the report back from SpamCop only shows 2 spam reports.
>> If you have an old specific issue or thread you would like to use as
>> a reference or an example, you will have to name the thread or the
>> date and the poster or something, or else you are just making
>> something up.
> 16/02/2005: Rob: Re: How can I find out why we were black listed?
>> -- SPAM SOURCE REPORT --
>> IP Address Start/Duration Trap User Mole Simp Additional comments
>> 209.251.xx.xx Feb 15 23h/0 0 2 0 0
- I didn't participate in that discussion, mostly because the poster
never named the IP
- Even when trying to show some 'evidence', the IP in question was
- This discussion is going the same way - some bellyaching and no IP
> As far as I can see, no one in the thread disputed that only two
> people had reported it as spam?
As far as I can see, we were never talking about a /real/ issue that
'we' can put a finger on. Until we start talking about an *ACTUAL* IP
instead of some unknown mysterious spectral ghostlike entity which no
one has seen but the complainer, we won't be able to pin anything down.
kibitzer, not SC admin
More information about the SpamCop-List