cooleremail.com is apparently on WS and asking to be whitelisted. Does anyone know anything about them or why they are on WS?
They seem to have reasonable antispam policies:
http://www.cooleremail.com/aboutus_spam.shtml
Jeff C.
Hi!
cooleremail.com is apparently on WS and asking to be whitelisted. Does anyone know anything about them or why they are on WS?
They seem to have reasonable antispam policies:
David can look it up i guess, its added via the MS list.
ms-porn-master:cooleremail.net
Bye, Raymond.
On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 00:23:31 +0200 (CEST), Raymond Dijkxhoorn raymond@prolocation.net wrote:
Hi!
cooleremail.com is apparently on WS and asking to be whitelisted. Does anyone know anything about them or why they are on WS?
They seem to have reasonable antispam policies:
David can look it up i guess, its added via the MS list.
ms-porn-master:cooleremail.net
It appeared on the 10th of July 2004 advertising online casino's. I will remove the domain for now, but the mailing address they sent to is a spamtrap which has no uses other than to recieve spam like this.
On Friday, September 3, 2004, 6:00:25 PM, David Hooton wrote:
On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 00:23:31 +0200 (CEST), Raymond Dijkxhoorn raymond@prolocation.net wrote:
Hi!
cooleremail.com is apparently on WS and asking to be whitelisted. Does anyone know anything about them or why they are on WS?
They seem to have reasonable antispam policies:
David can look it up i guess, its added via the MS list.
ms-porn-master:cooleremail.net
It appeared on the 10th of July 2004 advertising online casino's. I will remove the domain for now, but the mailing address they sent to is a spamtrap which has no uses other than to recieve spam like this.
Thanks.
We need more than trap hits before adding someone. There are a lot of FPs that appear on traps due to forwards, abusers, etc.
I sincerely hope you guys are hand reviewing your trap data.
I'd argue strongly that human checking of the domains and circumstances of sending is required to prevent FPs.
Also if you forward your trap message it's quite possible the abuser will be punished:
http://www.cooleremail.com/aboutus_spam.shtml
Jeff C.
On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 18:19:26 -0700, Jeff Chan jeffc@surbl.org wrote:
We need more than trap hits before adding someone. There are a lot of FPs that appear on traps due to forwards, abusers, etc.
I sincerely hope you guys are hand reviewing your trap data.
Indeed, no domain gets onto our lists without being hand reviewed, we've deliberately not automated these processes for the reasons you outline.
It's generally quite rare that something hits our traps which is not followed by at least one or two customer complaints which for us will generally result in a listing.
I'd argue strongly that human checking of the domains and circumstances of sending is required to prevent FPs.
I would also agree.
Also if you forward your trap message it's quite possible the abuser will be punished:
I have read this, and understand that they know they have to publish this information as a matter of PR
On Friday, September 3, 2004, 6:29:52 PM, David Hooton wrote:
On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 18:19:26 -0700, Jeff Chan jeffc@surbl.org wrote:
We need more than trap hits before adding someone. There are a lot of FPs that appear on traps due to forwards, abusers, etc.
I sincerely hope you guys are hand reviewing your trap data.
Indeed, no domain gets onto our lists without being hand reviewed, we've deliberately not automated these processes for the reasons you outline.
It's generally quite rare that something hits our traps which is not followed by at least one or two customer complaints which for us will generally result in a listing.
I'd argue strongly that human checking of the domains and circumstances of sending is required to prevent FPs.
I would also agree.
Thanks.
Also if you forward your trap message it's quite possible the abuser will be punished:
I have read this, and understand that they know they have to publish this information as a matter of PR
Indeed. It's also possible for spammers to put out such pages as camoflauge.
This company claims to be a member of Bonded Sender, which perhaps helps somewhat if true.
Jeff C.
On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 18:39:02 -0700, Jeff Chan jeffc@surbl.org wrote:
I have read this, and understand that they know they have to publish this information as a matter of PR
Indeed. It's also possible for spammers to put out such pages as camoflauge.
Kind of hat I was saying :)
This company claims to be a member of Bonded Sender, which perhaps helps somewhat if true.
Well I guess only time will tell how responsible they are, I've unlisted them, if they wind up back in our traps I think we should retain the option to re-list
We have no record of any of their mail in our HAM corpus (over a gig of text) so I'm still slightly sceptical of their hat colour.
-
David Hooton -
Jeff Chan -
Raymond Dijkxhoorn