[Mimedefang] Spam ethics question

[Andrzej Adam Filip]

WBrown at e1b.org wrote:
> Kelson wrote on 01/14/2010 02:43:35 PM:
>
>> It's not the effect that's at issue, it's the process.
>>
>> The whole point of a honeypot is that you have a guarantee that no one
>> has ever requested that mail go to that address, so any mail sent there
>> is unsolicited by definition.
>>
>> If you subscribe an address to a list, then *you* have solicited mail
>> for that address. As a result, your data is no longer reliable, because
>> at least some of that mail coming into that address is mail that you
>> requested.
>
> This is the best argument against what I asked about.  Thanks
>
>> OTOH, if you actively *unsubscribe* an address, then you have
>> specifically requested that mail *not* go there. If they turn around and
>> use that information to put the address on one of their lists, then
>> you've caught them violating your request. It's still unsolicited, so
>> it's valid data.
>
> Other option is to raise hell with the mail outsourcing company but does
> that really work?

Have you tried to report every such spam via spamcop.net (and knujon)?

-- 
[pl>en: Andrew] Andrzej Adam Filip : anfi at onet.eu
Recent research has tended to show that the Abominable No-Man
is being replaced by the Prohibitive Procrastinator.
  -- C. N. Parkinson