Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote:
On 12 Apr 2010, at 11:02, Frank Gadegast wrote:
<snip>
HELLO MICHELE,
And this should be completely free for the member, how he categorizes the complaint. He should be able to select "has nothing to do with us", "out of scope", "no real complaint" up to "server was hacked here", "we are investigating this currently" to "problem fixed" or whatever else category we like to include.
Are you going to pay my staff to waste their time with spurious complaints?
Is RIPE?
What is more likely. That you get more reports about real abuse or more reports about funny things or things that dont have anything to do with you ? And what is more likely: that you receive more reports about something that has nothing to do with you than you get already on your normal info email address ? You will have to deal with them too. I dont think that the new system will create more work on false reports for you that much.
And now the point: RIPE NCC could then easily track, wich member is doing nothing ! And thats what we need to find out.
No - it's what you in your little world would like to find out
Sure Michele, a spammer does not want to be identified. An ISP thats lazy and does not care, what he lazyness is causing others, does not like to get identified either.
And maybe some bad members find a trick to give feedback in an automatic way, with real comments, that look like, if they are really doing something, maybe to fool us all.
And again - are you going to pay my staff to waste their time dealing with thousands of spurious complaints? Because that's basically what you're expecting us to do
See above.
Not at all. We cannot reach consensus about what spam or abuse is.
So lets forget it, lets talk about complaints and resulting abuse reports.
You cannot simply "forget it"
You need to define clearly the boundaries of what your idea is meant to cover.
Why, my system does not like to "cover" abuse. It likes to deliver abuse reports more easily, more standarized and likes to find out, what member is handling abuse reports and who doesnt.
if you cannot do that then it should be rejected immediately
Again, the next version will clearly state, that its not about abuse, its about complaints.
And thats excatly what is the background idea of a spam report delivery system. Let the recipient decide, what he think hes abuse about. So, are you talking about abuse, or are you talking about spam? Im taking about abuse reports and complaints.
Provide proper definitions of these or at least boundaries
That what all spammers want, to define abuse, what we can do. And that the main reason I hear here for year and that "need to define abuse" is the old criteria, the lazy members repeated here constantly to block all effort from the others, that are handling complaints and that like to get rid of all these criminal attacks (my opinion). Now the spammers can be afraid, because we can finally jump over that hurdle ;o) Kind regards, Frank
Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection ICANN Accredited Registrar http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://mneylon.tel Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 US: 213-233-1612 UK: 0844 484 9361 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845
-- Mit freundlichen Gruessen, -- PHADE Software - PowerWeb http://www.powerweb.de Inh. Dipl.-Inform. Frank Gadegast mailto:frank@powerweb.de Schinkelstrasse 17 fon: +49 33200 52920 14558 Nuthetal OT Rehbruecke, Germany fax: +49 33200 52921 ====================================================================== Public PGP Key available for frank@powerweb.de