I think I can say with an even greater degree of certainty that my
suggestion, if implemented properly, would not allow any mindless SPAM
reporting. A statement like that only leads me to believe you do not
understand my suggestion completely. Perhaps this requires some more
discussion instead of simple objections. Please explain why you think this
would allow mindless SPAM reporting, and perhaps I can explain how it
wouldn't. I truly believe you all are opposing this from prejudice and not
facts. I think we need to come up with a way to make this work.
Paul Coleman
"Argyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Paul Coleman wrote:
> > It should never pre-check a recipient of a report that
> > is either my domain or my provider on behalf of my domain period.
Unless
> > you all can give me a reasonable example of why anyone would want to do
> > that, I am offering my new proposal.
>
> I put your request into the suggestion box.
>
> I think I can say with a reasonable degree of certainty that Julian will
> take a dim view of the idea because, as Dollface said, it will foster
> even more mindless spam reporting.
>
> We already have trouble enough with users who check every box in sight,
> including the appeals boxes, without a second thought about what they're
> doing. While some Murphy-proofing routines are useful, there's a limit
> to how easy Julian is willing to make reporting because it reduces
> flexibility.
>
> - Don D'Minion -
_______________________________________________
SpamCop-Help mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.spamcop.net/mailman/listinfo/spamcop-help
