On Monday, July 19, 2004, 7:13:33 PM, Frank Ellermann wrote:
But things start to get messy if Jeff defines some SpamCop reports manually as erroneous although the SC users and staff consider them as valid spam reports.
I agree it's not good to override the SpamCop reports, but there will always be a need to have whitelists to prevent Joe Jobs and deliberate poisoning of the data.
I also understand that you would like spamarrest listed, but as we discussed it, it does not seem they are creating the spams by themselves (abusers are initiating it), and they probably have some legitimate uses, so we really can't list them.
As a measure of how good the SpamCop data is, the actual whitelist hit log is commendably sparse:
http://spamcheck.freeapp.net/whitelist-hits.new.log
So the sc.surbl.org thresholding, etc. of the SpamCop data appears to be working pretty well.
P.S. Can anyone read Korean and tell us what the oo.to site is. Are they spammers? Should we list them?
Jeff C.