[Scspamcop] Re: Held mail item 1,000,000

[Twayne aka Pop]

Mike Easter <MikeE at ster.invalid> wrote:
> posted to spamcop & spamcop.spam, f/ups to spamcop.
>
> Father Daniel wrote:
>> Yes, I have gotten many of these.
>
> You are posting to a group which isn't used for discussion, as it is a
> group whose original purpose was for posting of spam, which spam
> posting isn't allowed in the discussion groups.  Nowadays there are
> better ways to post the spam and then to have the discussion in the
> discussion group, such as spamcop.
>
> You are replying to a spam example that was posted simply because it
> was representative of the OP Kenneth Brody's onemillionth spam.  IMO
> In my opinion, it isn't useful to say 'many of these' because 'these'
> is too vague.  The item is a spam -- perhaps you mean that you have
> gotten many spams.  The item was sourced from a dynamic IP not yet
> listed as a proxy, perhaps you mean you have gotten dynamic sourced
> items;  the item was a simple 'penis enlargement' spam - perhaps you
> mean you have received many of those.
>
>> The problem I ran into is that I
>> tried to report them to SpamCop and EVERY ONE of them is returned to
>> me, saying, that SpamCop "cannot find the spam message" in the
>> letter.
>
> That means that you didn't submit the spam correctly and you should
> re-read the instructions for spam submission and/or discuss your
> problem in the newsgroups or the forum.
>
>> These recent emails (the ones I am getting anyway) are written in
>> such a way as to fool the automatic spam checkers (with other random
>> words that do not print on the screen but fool the autochecking into
>> thinking it is a normal letter.  They do a wonderful job confusing
>> SpamCop's automatic checking program, rendering SpamCop totally
>> useless in my opinion.
>
> The parser doesn't determine if something is spam.  The parser
> determines the source of the item which is properly submitted and if
> there is a spamvertised url which resolves.
>
>> Basically I have no choice but to stop using SpamCop altogether until
>> they get their act back together, and I don't see a way other than
>> posting here to leave them any sort of feedback to explain that they
>> are totally missing the boat on a lot of the spam out there.
>
> Here is a suggestion for you to resolve your dilemma.
>
> Reread the SC instructions for how to submit a spam.  Then submit a
> spam to the webparser and get its tracking URL and post the tracker
> in the discussion group news.spamcop.net/spamcop.
>
> How to make a tracker:
>
> 1 select and obtain the complete spam
> 2 privatize the header&body content
> 3 webparse it & copy the tracking URL
> 4 cancel the report & paste the tracker in here
>
>
> 1  ... in the manner described by the SC faq
> http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/19.html  How do I get my email
> program to reveal the full, unmodified email?
>
> 2 ... by modestly and unambiguously mungeing any private information
> you don't want to expose, such as your name or email address which
> might appear anywhere in the header or body.  Avoid excessive or
> confusing mungeing.
>
> 3 login to the SC webparser, paste in the spam, and click Process Spam
> button;  then copy the tracking URL from the top 'Here is your
> TRACKING URL' of the appearance
> http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z1505491930z5db2559eebcde98291b8e783c95d61cez
>
> 4 ... after parsing, the report is 'live' until the cancel button is
> used.  After cancelling the tracker disappears;  the munged spam
> report should be cancelled because it has been materially changed and
> because you don't want to leave a tracker live.

Why shouldn't I leave a tracker "live"?