From: Joe Jared Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email Subject: Re: Facts on PBI spamming Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 12:47:29 -0700 Organization: OsiruSoft Lines: 65 Message-ID: <3BC497C1.443B5D26@osirusoft.com> References: <9p2nh402095@drn.newsguy.com> <9p5ugg$f1g$1@la-mail4.digilink.net> <9q0i4801klm@drn.newsguy.com> <3BC3D884.E30F963C@NOSPAMpacbell.net> <3BC3DCF1.2EC43A21@osirusoft.com> <9q1sdq01c26@drn.newsguy.com> Reply-To: joejared@relays.osirusoft.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.168.0.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ns.osirusoft.com 1002743542 3217 192.168.0.5 (10 Oct 2001 19:52:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@news.osirusoft.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Oct 2001 19:52:22 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en Don Doumakes wrote: > > In article <3BC3DCF1.2EC43A21@osirusoft.com>, Joe says... > >Is there factual data that shows cc-inc.com to be spammers? > > Jesus Christ man. Have you paid attention to anything I've been saying? Actually, yes. I've seen you complain. However, I for one have not seen their activities. That's why I asked. > The pinkbell.net site lists the dates of the spams I've received, the 86 SpamCop > complaint numbers, and the PBI ticket numbers issued in response. That > information has been public for quite some time, and I've specifically pointed > it out to you more than once. Have you proposed the listings to spews, spamsites, or spamhaus? > In the one human response I've received (officially) from PBI, they admit > cc-inc.com is a spammer and promise to disconnect them if the spamming > continues. That was in January. Perhaps the abuse guy was being sincere, and > just didn't realize he would be made a liar by his bosses. > I had the same experience as the other Don in attempting to contact PBI by > phone. I also had the same experience he had with my own RBL nomination, > mouldering in MAPS' bit-bucket now for, oh, must be 8 months. > > There is no possibility that PBI is unaware they are harboring a spammer. There is a strong possibility that you could be seen as crying wolf however, especially since you well, host pinkbell.net, which is a considered by some to be a defamatory site against pacbell. It may also cloud their opinion, making it nearly impossible for an actual problem to be seen properly. The best analogy I can come up with is: You say, "Company A is an Asshole" You then tell company A that Company B is also an asshole. Company A ignores you, and you act surprised. This is why I was asking for the recent spam activity so that those who supply data for my site have an objective and outside view. > I realize you don't represent or speak for Pacbell, even though you do business > with them, so I don't mean to sound like I think you're responsible for their As an sbc customer, yes, I do business with them. I also have found that they do in fact respond to abuse issues. > pro-spam behavior. But you've said more than once that I should change my > opinion that they're a spam-friendly ISP. I ask again: on what basis would I > change my opinion? > > -- > Don Doumakes Spammers love Pacbell! > http://pinkbell.net On the basis that eventually that increadibly thick cranium of yours would actually be willing to consider a different paradigm? -- http://relays.osirusoft.com http://www.osirusoft.com _______________________________________________________________________________ From: Joe Jared Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email Subject: Re: Facts on PBI spamming Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 14:04:42 -0700 Organization: OsiruSoft Lines: 110 Message-ID: <3BC4A9DA.288E8F79@osirusoft.com> References: <9p2nh402095@drn.newsguy.com> <9p5ugg$f1g$1@la-mail4.digilink.net> <9q0i4801klm@drn.newsguy.com> <3BC3D884.E30F963C@NOSPAMpacbell.net> <3BC3DCF1.2EC43A21@osirusoft.com> <9q1sdq01c26@drn.newsguy.com> <3BC497C1.443B5D26@osirusoft.com> Reply-To: joejared@relays.osirusoft.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.168.0.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ns.osirusoft.com 1002748218 3601 192.168.0.5 (10 Oct 2001 21:10:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@news.osirusoft.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Oct 2001 21:10:18 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en Don Levey wrote: > >Have you proposed the listings to spews, spamsites, or spamhaus? > > > OK, I'm pretty thick, I admit it. But I've scanned the sites you've > mentioned, and I didn't see any way to submit a proposal. The SPEWS > site specifically says they are not running a nomination-based list. > Have you any suggestions for how I might make such a submission? I believe both spamsites and spamhaus have postmaster accounts and both participate here in nanae. > >> There is no possibility that PBI is unaware they are harboring a spammer. > > > >There is a strong possibility that you could be seen as crying wolf > >however, especially since you well, host pinkbell.net, which is a > >considered by some to be a defamatory site against pacbell. It may also > >cloud their opinion, making it nearly impossible for an actual problem > >to be seen properly. > > > Perhaps I could be seen that way also, as I have publically complained > about cc-inc, PBI, and MAPS' unwillingness to list them in the RBL. > But if this is the case, then by extension, the only ones who are > taken seriously are the ones who don't complain? I am *not* running a > critical website, BTW. MAPS wont listen. PBI wont listen. I know both of the above to be reasonable in some way and have evidenced sbc's policy department shutting down a web hosting company within their netblocks. Perhaps discussing what they were working with at the time will help identify why you're not being heard and no one who does actually list spammers ever makes an entry for cc-inc.com. > >The best analogy I can come up with is: > > > >You say, "Company A is an Asshole" > >You then tell company A that Company B is also an asshole. > >Company A ignores you, and you act surprised. > > I can tell you my timeline: > 1) Company B spams me. > 2) I complain to company B. > 3) Company B ignores me. > 4) Company B continues to spam me. > 5) I complain to Company B, and copy to Company A. > 6) Both A&B ignore me. > 7) Repeat 5&6 for quite a while. > 8) THEN start calling Company A "an asshole." And the cycle repeats. 5..8 where B varys from company to company. > >This is why I was asking for the recent spam activity so that those who > >supply data for my site have an objective and outside view. > > > I can supply you with 116 separate spam messages from the same > spammer, over a 1-year period. Would you like me to forward that to > you? I canalso forward copies of my complaints, my RBL nominations, > and the ignorebot replies, if you like. Absolutely. When you forward/export them, if you'd make sure you have full headers, it would help significantly. You don't need to necessarily send the data to me, but I might be able to identify or help identify who to contact about the problem. > >> I realize you don't represent or speak for Pacbell, even though you do business > >> with them, so I don't mean to sound like I think you're responsible for their > > > >As an sbc customer, yes, I do business with them. I also have found > >that they do in fact respond to abuse issues. > > > Our experiences are different - perhaps it's because you do business > with them, and I don't? At one time no to long ago, they well, suspended my connection. You might say I have a unique form of contact with them. The point is that your submissions aren't being accepted, yet mine, spamsites.org, spamhaus.org, and spews.org is heard. > >> pro-spam behavior. But you've said more than once that I should change my > >> opinion that they're a spam-friendly ISP. I ask again: on what basis would I > >> change my opinion? > >> > >> -- > >> Don Doumakes Spammers love Pacbell! > >> http://pinkbell.net > > > >On the basis that eventually that increadibly thick cranium of yours > >would actually be willing to consider a different paradigm? > > Personally, I'd be HAPPY to consider another paradigm, but I admit > that it will not be trivial to convince me. There's a lot of inertia > behind my current belief set, because of the volume of spam and the > completeness of the silence. But if you can show me why cc-inc, PBI, > and MAPS have all appeared to be completely inactive on this issue > (resulting in the biweekly spam spew), I'd be willing to look at it. > -Don Fair enough. Export your data, forward it, and I'll be happy to help mediate the issue with the people I communicate with, or explain why I disagree and forward it on anyway. As for "Spammers love PacBell", at this point I would have to say that "spammers threaten Pacbell" would be a true statement. -- http://relays.osirusoft.com http://www.osirusoft.com