At 06/09/2002 11:39, David T-G wrote:
>That's one good thing about spamcop, though; yes, it's possible to screw
>up (even I have accidentally submitted and sent reports for non-spam),
>but at least the addresses that get pulled out are for the right places.
>If I were an ISP I'd be inclined to ignore lots of the mail to abuse@ but
>I'd at least look at the spamcop mails.
>
>Or am I lost in my own little utopia again?
Probably not. Stuff like spamcop is great if it all the info is verified as best as
possible rather than relying on everybody knowing how to properly read email headers.
(Lest it's not apparent, I'm not disparaging people who can't read headers - it isn't
their job to do so.)
I've never actually seen any sort of report from spamcop in my own postmaster
capacity. All the reports I see come to abuse or postmaster or root or some such, and
that's invariably from somebody misreading the headers.
Pete `-_-'
A jury consists of 12 persons chosen to decide
who has the better lawyer.
-- Robert Frost
_______________________________________________________________
Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
August 25-28 in Las Vegas -
http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm?source=osdntextlink
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
