Sheila,
I believe that you have a point.
I claimed five months, others, eleven weeks. Julian seems to have finally taken my
advice of two years ago to retain an attorney.
To quote the responses here, "Please be patient," "Sit down," and "SHUT UP."
That said, we should soon find the keeper of the rings. MeThinks the lawyers have
bitch-slapped him back to the twenty-first century.
Bob
Sheila King wrote:
> Recently I submitted a cgi script that I authored to one of those CGI Directory type
>of websites. When filling out their submission form, I used my spamcop.net email
>address.
> Today, I received the following rejection notice:
> >Your link:
> > http://www.thinkspot.net/sheila/computers/software/gypsymail.html
> >that was submitted on 22-Apr-2001 has been rejected for one of the following
>reasons:
> > 1. We do not accept emails on spamcop. Please supply a different
> > email address. Thanks
> > 2....
> >If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask.>
> So, I wrote back:
> >Yes, I have a question:
> >Why would you not accept my link simply because I submit it to you with an email
>address from a particular domain? The e-mail address is valid, and I respond to you.
>What other domains, aside from spamcop.net, do you also not accept?
> This is the reply I received:
> >The reason I refuse emails from spamcop, is because of a problem that
> >happened to me not too long ago. I run about 6 websites, some of these
> >sites provide services to webmasters. When a webmaster, uses one of
> >these services, he is sent an email from our server to confirm, or to
> >thank him for using the service. We never used emails to advertise
> >anything, we do not even have an email news letter. However, one of spam cop users
>who used our service reported us to spam cop by mistake. Spam Cop junk software which
>is not monitored, sent me and My ISP a warning. My ISP shut down my site for three
>days pending a spam investigation. I took action on the same day, emailed the user,
>Spam Cop, and my ISP. The user admitted his mistake, and that the email was ligit,
>with no advertising attached. Our ISP was slower to respond, they put the site back
>after they seen the evidence that our site was not involved in any spam.
>> However, Spam cop took no such action, they never verified if the email was a spam,
>the junk software they use was to blame, but they never apologized for the mistake.
>And to make things worse the domain was put on a black list of spammers, causing all
>emails to bounce back. It took me more than ten days to fix the problem. I know spam
>is bad but the methods used by spam cop are worse. I did change MY ISP since then,
>and filtered all spamcop emails out of my websites. I hope you understand. The same
>way you like to protect yourself from spam, I would like to protect my websites from
>junk software.
>>You might say spam cop has a section where you can report false accusations, that is
>true. But do you think spam cop has a 24/7 support for websites that has been shut
>down based on the emails they send to ISP's. When spam cop starts monitoring these
>emails and to investigate before the fact, I will gladly accept the emails. But
>untill then I will not risk another shut down. It is " Innocent untill proven guilty,
>not the other way around ".
> >If you disagree with me , please send me another email. And let me know what you
>think. I do not mind any fruitful arguments, and I am not stone headed. I will change
>my mind if you convince me otherwise.
> Do I have a point? Hmm. Dunno. I'm just sharing, I guess, and interested in other's
>reactions to this situation. I did respond to him again, but don't think that is
>relevant. I'm not really trying hard to "convince" him that he should accept Spamcop
>addresses.
> Sheila King
> http://www.thinkspot.net/sheila/
> http://www.k12groups.org/
_______________________________________________
SpamCop-List mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.spamcop.net/mailman/listinfo/spamcop-list
