[SpamCop-List] Re: New NANAE discussion about SpamCop

[Petzl]

--

Petzl
--
The ONLY email address you will EVER need
<http://www.spamcop.net/ces/individuals.shtml>
SpamCop Emaill service for a spamfree inbox
"Frank Ellermann" <nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de> wrote in message 
news:423FD725.50EF at xyzzy.claranet.de...
> Petzl wrote:
>
>> Propaganda. This is not to say they are clueless just
>> when it comes to SpamCop very artful at deceit.
>
> Same picture for anything that does some good but is not
> theirs like SPF.  Seth and derMouse and some others are
> honest.  It's perfectly possible to dislike e.g. SC for
> honest valid reasons.
>                        Bye, Frank
> -- 
> 1. SpamCop does a lot of good.
> 2. SpamCop does some harm.
> 3. The algorithms used by SpamCop are not the best possible.
> [Seth B. <http://archive.iecc.com/article/spamtools/20031230010>]

SpamCop WORKS and is GOOD/effective as a spam shield

SpamCop is still the best of any anti-spam measure out there or can you 
point to a more accurate one?

As I have said here and in NANAE SpamCop email users are the only ones 
immune from spammers not seen any in NANAE of late. Exception being SpamCop 
users  who are taking the FULL advantage of SpamCop email accounts and 
without fear publish a working email address.

Sort of tells one that for all the NANEA rhetoric against SpamCop the full 
use of SpamCop provides one with a spam proof email address. One that 
effectively attacks spammers by (not only) reporting every spammer that 
tries. But also literally stops the spammers "run before it starts (I know 
this because I look/check the SCBL before and after)