[SpamCop-List] Re: FR33 LEADS for live verification ? ... come on Unifiedweb.net

[Mike Easter]

Berny wrote:
> "Mike Easter"

> SNIPPED

Snipped is the part where I was agreeing with you about notifying, even
tho' it looks like a confirmation.

> Well, having worked harder to parse the HTML (Read through the tags),
> I now see that,  I'm not sure I should be forgiving a pure HTML
> message like this, so it was LARTed.

I wasn't citing that to indicate that you shouldn't have notified;  I
was showing the 'elements' which looked like a 'normal' confirmation
mail based on website entry of a request.  I also went to the website
and looked it over and to sightings to see some more of them.

I'm leaning toward thinking their big problem is how they go about their
verification mail.  I even went to MAPS to see if MAPS had any advice on
how to *not* send a confirmation mail -- but it doesn't.  The bad
characteristics of the confirmation mail are that it is confusing, that
it is html, that it is soliciting other signups.  It seems spammish.

The 'good' characteristics are more like good characteristics of a
mailing list which has already been confirmed, in which there are
multiple ways to unsubscribe, by email or website and the fact that the
item *says* that you won't be added if you don't confirm.  The other
good characteristic is that the subscribing IP is provided.

There are abuse addresses in the mail and at the website -- clearly
they've been 'fighting' this problem of their verification business
causing them to get spamreported.  It is possible that they may be
getting jobbed a bit.

> I read messages of dubious origin in the "View entire message"
> feature of SC, when I need to.

Altho' I'm a big 'don't read spam' person, the way I did it was to
examine it in the view entire message first, then I copied it and saved
it as an eml and opened it up and 'read' it.

> Between pure HTML and no obvious "if you ignore theis message you
> won't hear from us again" and serving up a newsletter using spammy
> words like FR33 (Not FREE) and LEADS, I was not inclined to give
> these guys the benefit of the doubt.

I'm supporting your reporting, and that rhymes.

> How do I know that giving my email to the unitedweb to get myself
> blocked isn't something like giving my address to the
> unsubscribenow.org people?

You don't have to unsub from anything you didn't sub to.

> I think I did the right thing by LARTing.

I agree.

-- 
Mike Easter
kibitzer, not SC admin