I've been banned from Squeak-dev!

Ned Konz ned at bike-nomad.com
Sat Feb 15 17:29:25 UTC 2003

On Saturday 15 February 2003 03:03 am, cg at cdegroot.com wrote:

> Spamcop is quite good because its records have short time-to-live
> values. The address you mentioned has been removed already from
> Spamcop. The correct action here is to study the two reports and
> check a) why they were sent through the same mailserver as you are
> relying on, and b) what to do about it. In case of doubt, report it
> to your ISP.

But in this case there were no spam reports or relaying reports. There 
were (apparently) some spamtrap addresses that ended up on someone's 
mailing list, but in the absence of any information about what those 
addresses were, it's going to be hard to ask the mailers not to send 
to those addresses.

I have reported it to my ISP, and I've sent an explanatory email to 
the people who sent the mail that ended up in the spamtrap boxes.

Their list sign-up process apparently doesn't require a confirmation 
email; anyone could have entered the spamtrap addresses on their 
form. Clearly, they need to change their policies.

However, I suspect that most people would rather get some spam from 
time to time than to have their email not get through.

The 48 hours time-to-live that the spamcop records have may be long 
enough to cause some mail servers to give up.

Ned Konz

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list