On 13/Sep/11 17:07, John Levine wrote: > You're missing the point -- you don't get to charge, they just send > you the complaints without asking. I'll forward them as they come in.
I see, they probably think abuse.net is an abuse reporting hub like SpamCop. > At abuse.net, that's handled completely manually, both the evaluation > and the selection of addresses. This is policy stuff that is utterly > outside the scope of a fricking reporting format. I only send abuse reports for a minimal part of the spam I get. This is not a policy, it is because I haven't yet managed to automate spam reporting. By "automate" I mean that clicking the spam button should result in having a report sent out, with minimal manual intervention on the server side. Then, I'll be able to offer the same service to my few users, and possibly contribute to an RFC about that. I don't think I'd be able to manually send reports (and monitor their effect) for a significant part of the spammy messages in my own inbox, let alone doing so for my users, however few. If we conclude that it is not worth/feasible to automate complaining, how would we characterize that minuscule part of abusive messages that deserve being reported? _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
