Hi Paul, PC> I subscribe to the Langalist, and there was a great article in it today PC> about spamcop. I know this has been talked about on TBUDL some, but I PC> didn't follow it ;) Here is the langalist article for your reading PC> pleasure.
The one point on which I disagree with the article is that DNSable blacklists are somehow actionable in court. That seems like pure nonsense to me. Nobody HAS to use a blacklist. It is the ISP's or individual customer's choice. They are services and nothing more. I use SpamPal and have it set to check almost all DNSable blacklists including SpamCop's. So far, I have only had 2 e-mails that have been trapped that shouldn't have. The rest have all been SPAM. SpamCop does have one serious shortcoming. It does NOT reduce your spam by reporting through it. 90% of the junk mail comes from about 10 major sources in China and a few in Brazil. They could care less who reports them and their upstream feeds to the backbone don't either. I think my ISP has the right approach. They offer 2 types of e-mail accounts. One is spam-filtered and the other isn't. You get 5 e-mail addresses with them and can pick your server for any. So if you're on their unfiltered server, you get everything including potential spam. I have accounts on both. -- Tom G. http://blarp.com <-- Free tech support The Bat 1.61 - Windows 2000 ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
