From discuss-bounces@lists.surbl.org Wed Apr 6 01:34:26 2005 Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 01:26:12 -0700 From: Jeff Chan jeffc@surbl.org X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62q) Personal Organization: SURBL X-Priority: 3 (Normal) To: Raymond Dijkxhoorn raymond@surbl.org Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] More spams with Zdnet redirector ... Cc: SURBL Discussion list discuss@lists.surbl.org ...
Raymond, Paul and others, please LART them.
We're not going to blacklist zdnet.
Jeff C.
Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.surbl.org http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
I spent over an hour today trying to speak to anyone on the editorial staff. I managed to leave two messages, and spoke to two people who were to "much" too busy to talk (they had been expecting other calls). The "Editor", Jeff Pelline, said if I sent him an email, he would "try" to get to it tomorrow; After, well over an hour - I gave up. They had moved buildings and disconnected their old telephone numbers about a year ago, so ten minutes later I "wdprs"'d and "rfci.whois"'d about 8 of their domains - that only took about 7 minutes of my time - now they can spend a few hours cleaning up and maybe then they will "have time" to talk (Note: they already had some listings for bouncing abuse@ & postmaster@ emails - seem they have a history of an overly aggressive "spam" filter" that bounces what appear to be innocuous messages - so I doubt you can discuss "spam" with them by email; And while they have cleared a few entries, they just ignore some of the others).
I seriously doubt there is anyone to send a LART to (most of their domains bounce either abuse@, postmaster@ or both or even worse, show the accounts as being over-quota - i.e. nobody reads them).
We'll see if the people I left messages for actually return my calls. I've given up on them - they are of the general apparent belief "my time is more valuable than yours". Someone else can burn a few hours on it. I like Raymond's rule - maybe I'll just block them outright - I don't get anything from them commonly, certainly not often (it has been many years since I found the news.com digests to have any value).
Paul Shupak track@plectere.com
P.S. The telephone numbers are "hidden", but anyone who wants to try is welcome: http://news.com.com/2040-1096_3-0.html?tag=ne.ft.si.con All their listed registration contact data is invalid (this is an Internet company)!?
P.P.S. The sales department answered consistantly, but them transfered me into an endless hold pattern which seems to hang up after about ten minutes.
P.P.P.S. The "Editor-at-large", Michael Kanellos, is the person who writes most often and most recently about spam, but his voice mailbox was full!
Guys,
I just figured out we should stop all our complaining. There's a BIG positive to this redirector.
The more spammers use this redirector the easier its to catch all-that-jazz with just one single simple SA rule. FPs? whaddat?
Hope they keep it as is for many months...
:-)))))
Alex
On Thursday, April 7, 2005, 2:35:10 AM, Alex Broens wrote:
Guys,
I just figured out we should stop all our complaining. There's a BIG positive to this redirector.
The more spammers use this redirector the easier its to catch all-that-jazz with just one single simple SA rule. FPs? whaddat?
Yeah, many people have already written a rule to block messages that contain the zdnet redirector.
Anything spammers do that has a pattern or that is predictable makes their messages easily blockable.
Jeff C. -- "If it appears in hams, then don't list it."