| Brian {Hamilton Kelly} 2005-04-26, 8:32 pm |
| On Monday, in article
<8e5q61lnq6jgefh13u98b8k9ukghgujd1a@4ax.com>
rault00@earthWEEDSlink.net "Werehatrack" wrote:
quote:
> On 25 Apr 2005 01:21:16 -0700, "treesy" <treesy2@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> To an email address that will not be active for more than a few hours
> after the spam run begins and will be clogged for that short period
> with both spam and irate tirades entreating the spammer to stop...none
> of which the spammer will read? There's no point.
Sigh!
The From address is just as likely to be that of some perfectly innocent
third-party, who has nothing to do with posting the spam; replying to
him/her merely results in mailbombing of that poor innocent. Please
remember that spammers often DO forge identities.
There is only ONE sensible response to this crap; send an abuse report to
the place at which it is injected to Usenet. If you look at the full
headers, you'll see this:
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
so FORWARD the COMPLETE article (including all its headers) to that
mailbox.
(It's unlikely to have any result: Google Groups seem particularly
impervious to gathering clue. However, the sheer volume of such reports
that ought to have been occasioned by this particular, repeated, spam run
just might make them take some notice.)
Ordinarily, I would have restricted this response to the only one of the
cross-posted groups which I read: however, I don't know to which of the
groups you, or the previous poster, "belong", and ISTM that there's far
too many people reading [and responding] to this spam that don't seem to
understand that one doesn't answer it.
--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk
"Je n'ai fait celle-ci plus longue que parce que je n'ai pas eu
le loisir de la faire plus courte."
Blaise Pascal, /Lettres Provinciales/, 1657
|