[Scspamcop] Re: "ISP resolved this issue sometime after Fri Nov 14 07:45:35 2008 -0800"

[Bar0]

"Mike Easter" <MikeE at ster.invalid> wrote in message 
news:gfl0bu$nic$1 at news.spamcop.net...
> Tim McGraw wrote:
> www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2408843925z2a43fe896c1a28984cf1a44f41c850d1z
>.....
>......
> SC has provided an interface, perhaps to mollify the SC reporters, that
> when a provider has communicated in the #3 fashion above, that SC will
> 'present' the issue to the reporter as if the provider _had said_ that
> "spam will cease" -- whereas in reality the provider said "I hear what you
> are saying and I don't want to hear it any more."
>
> That may seem to be a long-winded version of what I think, but it is
> actually the short version.

It's not the lack of notify that irks most, I suspect, It's the implication 
that one's spam sample is from before that time and thus will not be counted 
towards the blocklist , nor will any URL's be parsed and submitted (by 
whatever arcane process) to SCURBL. Personally I agree about notifies, most 
of the heavyweights in NANAE consider SC to be an opt-out spammer because of 
notifies.