Re: UUNET (Anti-spam Working Group)

[Xander Jansen <]

Gunnar,

In your message of Mon, 7 Sep 1998 18:36:29 +0200 (MET DST) you wrote:

+ I guess noone really has an interest in putting someone else against
+ the wall, but please understand that UUNET Europe will have no better
+ reputation than UUNET US unless you take more action than they do.
+ 
+ Sometime in the future the zillion of *.uu.net dialup spammers that
+ are allowed to continue regardless of the amount of protest mail to
+ spam-complaint@localhost will lead to some kind of blockade that will
+ affekt *.uu.net world wide. To date I've received a lot of nice auto-
+ generated replies from UUNET <spam-complaint> but still I have not
+ heard of one single case where a UUNET spammer's account has closed.

I actually received a 'status update' a few times stating: 

"This is a follow-up message from the UUNET Internet Abuse Investigation
 Department to let you know the massmail/SPAM complaint referenced in the
 subject line above was researched and is being handled according to UUNET`s
 Service Agreement with its customers."

That of course can mean anything but at least it was more than the standard 
auto-reply. As far as my memory goes all the 'status updates' came on 
spam-complaints that I sent either on a busy 'complain to UUnet' day or 
when more users at our site sent a complaint about the same spam.

Furthermore I used the fraud@localhost address or as UUnet sais:

"If you receive additional massmail/SPAM you believe orginates from a
 UUNET customer, please send that as a separate e-mail to:
 
 fraud@localhost:   Massmail Complaints
 spam-complaint@localhost:  Spamming Complaints (News Related)"

Perhaps it matters where you send your complaint to ?

Xander