-----Original Message----- From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 10:34 AM To: SURBL Discuss Subject: Re: [SPAM-TAG] [SURBL-Discuss] Spammer threatening to suesingle4y ou.net
On Monday, September 27, 2004, 7:25:40 AM, Chris Santerre wrote:
The domain is brand new, sends spam, and screams about
getting listed! How
the hell can he be legit! Did you guys read the NANAS
listings that showed
his wonderful emails?
These are just the ones reported. He 'purchased' a list. So
none of these
were opt in.
And are those the only emails that ever have or ever will mention the domain?
How can you say that of ANY domain we have listed?????????
Do we know that the domain has no legitimate uses or users? If not should we block all legitimate messages that do mention the domain?
Or any legit message talking about any domain we have listed already??
These are difficult questions which we attempted to answer.
It's much easier to list them, but is that fair to people who actually use or mention the site in hams?
Show me one freaking legit ham from him!!
Where the hell do we draw the line??? I can literaly argue that ANY, and I mean ANY of the domains we have listed have the potential to be used in ham.
But the fact that this brand new domain, not even a month old, sent spam, and has been removed because it POTENTIALY might be used in ham worries me beyond belief for this project.
I need more then, "He might be used for legitin the future." as a reason to remove a blatant spam fool like this.
You're obviously not going to add him back in. So I'm going to wath this guy closer then his proctologist! I'll be all over this guy in every way. When he trips up, I will be there. I be he is relisted in under 3 months.
Am I pissed he got removed, yes. Am I pissed at Jeff, no. He is still my schmoopie! :-) Do I think Jeff might have fallen on his head this weekend........
....it crossed my mind ;)
--Chris
On Monday, September 27, 2004, 7:53:41 AM, Chris Santerre wrote:
From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org]
And are those the only emails that ever have or ever will mention the domain?
How can you say that of ANY domain we have listed?????????
Sure. I really doubt if the last ten thousand pill or mortgage or warez spammers we listed had any legitimate mentions. Their volume of mail generated is probably several orders of magnitude larger than this lamer's also.
Jeff C. -- "If it appears in hams, then don't list it."
On Monday, September 27, 2004, 7:53:41 AM, Chris Santerre wrote:
But the fact that this brand new domain, not even a month old, sent spam, and has been removed because it POTENTIALY might be used in ham worries me beyond belief for this project.
I need more then, "He might be used for legitin the future." as a reason to remove a blatant spam fool like this.
This guy is a tiny flea on the rump of the stampeding herd of mad bulls who are the real spammers. Whatever he's doing is insignificant compared to the spam gangs.
Jeff C. -- "If it appears in hams, then don't list it."
-
Chris Santerre -
Jeff Chan