"LISTSERV list owners' forum" <[log in to unmask]> wrote on
03/30/2004 01:42:08 PM:

> And, while on the subject, is anyone else getting fed up with bogus
> problems brought on by SpamCop?  The individuals there are certainly
> cooperative and competent, but I'm beginning to think there's something
> fundamentally wrong about their procedures that lead to so many errors
> and misunderstandings.  In Maelstrom's case we have no real control over
> our owners and a very tiny percentage have accidentally (or out of
> ignorance despite repeated warnings) reported us for spam sent via the
> *-request mechanism, and spamcop has been very understanding.  None the
> less, I've spent too much time tracking down weird stuff (Curly gets a
> virus that sends itself to Listserv with a forged "from" from Moe who
> gets the rejection and promptly reports Maelstrom as a spammer) which
> I'm somehow obligated to explain to the net-cops.  Apparently none of
> this caused us to get blocked, while yesterdays block happened with no
> warning and no explanation either before or after the fact.

I think part of the problem is they are being fed bull**t information. Our
netadmin is constantly receiving spamcop reports because a virus was
received from one of the more than 100 school districts hte get internet
connectivity from our network (a class B net).  Just because they can
spell "spamcop" doesn't mean they have a clue what spma is.  And
blacklisting a workstation isn't going to help the war on spam much.  And
if they blaclikst the whole netblock, they've cut off 100 real mail
servers.

My job has moved to implementing spam filtering, and I've seen the ugly
underbelly of the beast, and this sort of stuff drives me crazy.  These
experiences have led me to not implement any RBL checks on my filtering.