> <td width="400"><font face="Verdana" size="2" color="#000000">Welcome webmasters, to your > new favorite sponsorship program. MaleManual.com is the original penis enlargement > affiliate program, with over 50,000 members, and you're losing a great opportunity to earn > revenue if you haven't tested out this site. We will GUARANTEE to outperform any other > website in this niche ... we have the best website, by far the most researched and > comprehensive members area, best stats interface, most available staff, and the highest > payouts!</font></td>
and
> <td><font face="Verdana" size="2" color="#000000">You will be earning <strong>$30+ per > signup</strong>, and you will convert at a ratio that is sure to have you scrambling to > send more hits. To get the higher payout you just need to send an average of 1 sale per > day, which isn't hard to accomplish if you can convert better than 1:100 as many of our > over 3000 enrolled webmasters are doing. Payments are made biweekly, on time as they have > been for the past year and a half. There are NO deductions in our affiliate program, > that's right, we pay for all chargebacks, refunds, and returned checks.</font></td>
Notice the "past year and a half" statement above...
"glgxg" wrote: > Larted he.net regarding 64.71.152.19/malemanual.com and received the > following reply from he.net today: <...> > Site is still up and happily promoting penis enlargement affiliate > programs:
See "He.net is lying like a rug". They told me it was actually down, not just being "corrected".
> "glgxg" wrote: > > Larted he.net regarding 64.71.152.19/malemanual.com and received the > > following reply from he.net today: > <...> > > Site is still up and happily promoting penis enlargement affiliate > > programs:
> See "He.net is lying like a rug". They told me it was actually down, not > just being "corrected".
> <...>
Thanks -- missed that thread previously.
So, here is yet another confirmation that he.net is indeed lying as usual.
Note that he.net, surrealhost.com, and malemanual.com (albeit with false registry info for the last two) are all purport to be California companies (surrealhost.com is not a valid CA registered company, nor is malemanual.com):
================ Hurricane Electric (HE2-DOM) 760 Mission Court Fremont, CA 94539 US
Domain Name: HE.NET
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact: Hurricane Electric Hostmaster (HE468-ORG) hostmas...@HE.NET Hurricane Electric 760 Mission Court Fremont, CA 94539 US 510 580 4100 Fax- 510 580 4151
Record expires on 07-Aug-2010. Record created on 31-Jul-1995. Database last updated on 17-Oct-2002 17:17:52 EDT.
=========== SURREAL SERVICES 1072 S DE ANZA BLVD SUITE A107 SAN JOSE, CA 95129 US
Domain Name: SURREALHOST.COM
Administrative Contact: KOY, TONY MRXG...@YAHOO.COM 1072 S DE ANZA BLVD SUITE A107 SAN JOSE, CA 95129 US 000-000-0000
Technical Contact: KOY, TONY MRXG...@YAHOO.COM 1072 S DE ANZA BLVD SUITE A107 SAN JOSE, CA 95129 US 000-000-0000
Interesting... This address is located in a complex that also has a Ninja martial arts dojo (Bujinkan Seiryu Dojo) maybe we should ask them to pay a "polite" visit to Mr. Tony Koy...
Also a LinuxCertified.com, Silicon Software Coalition, Mail Boxes Etc,
===============
whois -h whois.register.com malemanual.com ... Organization: Male Manual Domain Owner Address City, CA 92454 US Phone: 888-566-1425 Email: bria...@cox.net
glgxg <gl...@attglobal.net> wrote: > Larted he.net regarding 64.71.152.19/malemanual.com and received the > following reply from he.net today: >> Received: from he.net ([216.218.186.2]) by prserv.net (in1) with ESMTP >> id <20021017200655101026k80qe>; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 20:06:57 +0000 >> Received: from he.net (he.net [216.218.186.2]) by he.net (8.8.6/8.8.2) with ESMTP id NAA11794 for <gl...@attglobal.net>; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 13:06:54 -0700 >> Delivered-To: <glgxg @ attglobal.net> >> X-Envelope-From: ab...@he.net >> X-Envelope-To: <glgxg @ attglobal.net> >> Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 13:06:54 -0700 (PDT) >> From: "Hurricane Electric Abuse Dept." <ab...@he.net> >> To: glgxg <glgxg @ attglobal.net> >> Subject: Re: Unsolicited E-Mail SUBJECT: "Get Large" >> In-Reply-To: <3DAE5B3D.40B20...@attglobal.net> >> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10210171306530.28001-100...@he.net> >> MIME-Version: 1.0 >> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII >> X-Mozilla-Status: 8013 >> X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 >> X-UIDL: 20021017200655101026k80qe0006ii
>> Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We take mail abuse very >> seriously.
>> Corrective action is being taken with the responsible party. Please let >> me know if you continue to receive unwanted email.
>> +-----------------------------------------+ >> | Hurricane Electric Abuse Department | >> | ab...@he.net http://he.net/webtos.html | >> +-----------------------------------------+ > Site is still up and happily promoting penis enlargement affiliate > programs: >> Query: 64.71.152.19 >> Registry: whois.arin.net >> Results: >> Hurricane Electric HURRICANE-2 (NET-64-71-128-0-1) >> 64.71.128.0 - 64.71.191.255 >> Surreal Host / Surreal Services HURRICANE-CE0423-267 (NET-64-71-152-0-1) >> 64.71.152.0 - 64.71.152.255
Try it now. I have reliable information that the two HE.net malemanual.com DNS servers have been blackholed on HE.net's side. Of course, who knows how long it'll take before the spammer finds new DNS servers, but at least it appears that HE.net is no longer involved with this particular spammer.
> glgxg <gl...@attglobal.net> wrote: > > Larted he.net regarding 64.71.152.19/malemanual.com and received the
[snip]
> Try it now. I have reliable information that the two > HE.net malemanual.com DNS servers have been blackholed > on HE.net's side. Of course, who knows how long it'll > take before the spammer finds new DNS servers, but at > least it appears that HE.net is no longer involved > with this particular spammer.
glgxg <gl...@attglobal.net> wrote: > Graham Freeman wrote:
>> glgxg <gl...@attglobal.net> wrote: >> > Larted he.net regarding 64.71.152.19/malemanual.com and received the > [snip]
>> Try it now. I have reliable information that the two >> HE.net malemanual.com DNS servers have been blackholed >> on HE.net's side. Of course, who knows how long it'll >> take before the spammer finds new DNS servers, but at >> least it appears that HE.net is no longer involved >> with this particular spammer.
A certain HE.net representative who gets trashed here in NANAE all the time was the one who blackholed this spammer's HE.net-connected DNS servers, thanks in part to the fact that I took the time to conduct a polite, constructive conversation with him, as opposed to flaming him and calling him a liar like some regulars in this group tend to do.
In this case at least, the continued operation of the HE.net-connected malemanual.com DNS servers was in fact an honest mistake on the part of HE.
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002 23:21:30 GMT, Graham Freeman <gra...@calteg.org> wrote: >A certain HE.net representative who gets trashed here in >NANAE all the time was the one who blackholed this >spammer's HE.net-connected DNS servers, thanks in part >to the fact that I took the time to conduct a polite, >constructive conversation with him, as opposed to flaming >him and calling him a liar like some regulars in this >group tend to do.
> glgxg <gl...@attglobal.net> wrote: > > Graham Freeman wrote:
> >> glgxg <gl...@attglobal.net> wrote: > >> > Larted he.net regarding 64.71.152.19/malemanual.com and received the
> > [snip]
> >> Try it now. I have reliable information that the two > >> HE.net malemanual.com DNS servers have been blackholed > >> on HE.net's side. Of course, who knows how long it'll > >> take before the spammer finds new DNS servers, but at > >> least it appears that HE.net is no longer involved > >> with this particular spammer.
> A certain HE.net representative who gets trashed here in > NANAE all the time was the one who blackholed this > spammer's HE.net-connected DNS servers, thanks in part > to the fact that I took the time to conduct a polite, > constructive conversation with him, as opposed to flaming > him and calling him a liar like some regulars in this > group tend to do.
> In this case at least, the continued operation of the > HE.net-connected malemanual.com DNS servers was in fact > an honest mistake on the part of HE.
Oh please... he.net have a very long history of supporting spammers, and in this case he.net were notified (politely) by me that they were hosting & providing services for the malemanual spammers on Sept 5th.
Want to see a copy of their info from the Sept 5 lart (note the 09/05/02 18:29:43 timestamp)?
> Query: webmasters.malemanual.com > Registry: whois.register.com > Organization: > Male Manual > Domain Owner > Address > City, CA 92454 > US > Phone: 888-566-1425 > Email: bria...@cox.net > Registrar Name....: Register.com > Registrar Whois...: whois.register.com > Registrar Homepage: http://www.register.com > Domain Name: MALEMANUAL.COM > Created on..............: Fri, Dec 15, 2000 > Expires on..............: Sun, Dec 15, 2002 > Record last updated on..: Sun, Aug 04, 2002 > Administrative Contact: > Male Manual > Domain Owner > Address > City, CA 92454 > US > Phone: 888-566-1425 > Email: bria...@cox.net > Technical Contact: > Male Manual > Domain Owner > Address > City, CA 92454 > US > Phone: 888-566-1425 > Email: bria...@cox.net > Zone Contact: > Male Manual > Domain Owner > Address > City, CA 92454 > US > Phone: 888-566-1425 > Email: bria...@cox.net > Domain servers in listed order: > DNS1.MALEMANUAL.COM 64.71.152.17 > DNS2.MALEMANUAL.COM 64.71.152.18
> Query: 64.71.152.19 > Registry: whois.arin.net > Results: > Hurricane Electric HURRICANE-2 (NET-64-71-128-0-1) > 64.71.128.0 - 64.71.191.255 > Surreal Host / Surreal Services HURRICANE-CE0423-267 (NET-64-71-152-0-1) > 64.71.152.0 - 64.71.152.255 > Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 18:40:18 -0700 > From: glgxg <glgxg @ attglobal.net> > Reply-To: glgxg @ attglobal.net > X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) > X-Accept-Language: en,pdf > MIME-Version: 1.0 > To: ab...@btopenworld.com, ab...@bt.net, ab...@hotmail.com, > ab...@register.com, ab...@he.net, ab...@bigmailbox.com > CC: u...@ftc.gov > > I have an incredible offer for you. My boyfriend was unsatisfied with > > his penis size, he tried everything to enlarge his penis but nothing > > was working. Finally he found <a > > href="http://webmasters.malemanual.com/in/m3ghr/">this website </a>. > > In less then 2 weeks he was seeing noticable results of 2 inches, and > > said it was very easy, all natural, and effective. Believe me its > > worth it! > > <p> > > <a href="http://webmasters.malemanual.com/in/m3ghr/">click here for
Give me a break Greg -- you appear intelligent enough (at least from your website) to be able to perform a Google or other search regarding he.net's spamming history. He.net only killed the spammer's services because the heat was getting a little too hot for them to handle.
Tell your bud at he.net that they wouldn't be called liars if they would have taken action then:
> Received: from he.net ([216.218.186.2]) by prserv.net (in5) with ESMTP > id <200209061834501050744kqne>; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 18:34:51 +0000 > Received: from he.net (he.net [216.218.186.2]) by he.net (8.8.6/8.8.2) with ESMTP id LAA30008 for <attglobal.net>; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 11:34:49 -0700 > Delivered-To: <attglobal.net> > X-Envelope-From: ab...@he.net > X-Envelope-To: <attglobal.net> > Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 11:34:49 -0700 (PDT) > From: "Hurricane Electric Abuse Dept." <ab...@he.net> > To: glgxg <attglobal.net> > Subject: Re: Unsolicited E-Mail SUBJECT: " > In-Reply-To: <3D780782.2DC10...@attglobal.net> > Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10209061134480.22817-100...@he.net> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 > X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 > X-UIDL: 200209061834501050744kqne0004ud
> Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We take mail abuse very > seriously.
> Corrective action is being taken with the responsible party. Please let > me know if you continue to receive unwanted email.
> +-----------------------------------------+ > | Hurricane Electric Abuse Department | > | ab...@he.net http://he.net/webtos.html | > +-----------------------------------------+
So, you tell me Greg... do you still want to defend he.net merely because they are your hosting service and/or your bud is now possibly working for he.net?
Reasonable people reach limits in "polite" requests when their responses to such requests are a lie, their kids e-mail accounts are continued to be spammed for illegal and unsubstantiated big dick products, and the ISP providing the services knowingly allows spammers with the following marketing advise to their affiliates:
> > >"Non-adult traffic is another potential goldmine, provided that the > > >enlargement ads are placed well and discreetly.
My guess is that your bud finally killed malemanual because he.net were publicly exposed and risk both prosecution by the FTC as well as the California Attorney General.
Jerry Bookter <book...@spamblocked.com> wrote: > On Fri, 25 Oct 2002 23:21:30 GMT, Graham Freeman <gra...@calteg.org> wrote: > Remember the story of The Boy Who Cried Wolf?
I'm sorry, but you're going to have to be a little less opaque if you want me to know what you're talking about.
glgxg <gl...@attglobal.net> wrote: >> A certain HE.net representative who gets trashed here in >> NANAE all the time was the one who blackholed this >> spammer's HE.net-connected DNS servers, thanks in part >> to the fact that I took the time to conduct a polite, >> constructive conversation with him, as opposed to flaming >> him and calling him a liar like some regulars in this >> group tend to do.
>> In this case at least, the continued operation of the >> HE.net-connected malemanual.com DNS servers was in fact >> an honest mistake on the part of HE.
> Oh please... he.net have a very long history of supporting spammers, and > in this case he.net were notified (politely) by me that they were > hosting & providing services for the malemanual spammers on Sept 5th.
I'm not making any assertions as to SPEWS S322 or any other previous spam problems. I'm saying in this case their failure to completely solve the problem in a timely manner appears to me to be an honest mistake.
> Want to see a copy of their info from the Sept 5 lart (note the 09/05/02 > 18:29:43 timestamp)?
I saw it. HE caused 'malemanual.com' to resolve to 10.0.0.something, but did not follow through sufficiently by blackholing the rogue DNS servers until I pointed out that 'webmasters.malemanual.com' still resolved to a live (non-HE) IP. Once my HE contact was notified of the situation, he *immediately* blackholed the DNS servers in question. He also sent me a screen capture of his efforts to as evidence of his good faith.
>> Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 18:40:18 -0700 >> From: glgxg <glgxg @ attglobal.net> >> Reply-To: glgxg @ attglobal.net >> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) >> X-Accept-Language: en,pdf >> MIME-Version: 1.0 >> To: ab...@btopenworld.com, ab...@bt.net, ab...@hotmail.com, >> ab...@register.com, ab...@he.net, ab...@bigmailbox.com >> CC: u...@ftc.gov >> > I have an incredible offer for you. My boyfriend was unsatisfied with >> > his penis size, he tried everything to enlarge his penis but nothing >> > was working. Finally he found <a >> > href="http://webmasters.malemanual.com/in/m3ghr/">this website </a>. >> > In less then 2 weeks he was seeing noticable results of 2 inches, and >> > said it was very easy, all natural, and effective. Believe me its >> > worth it! >> > <p> >> > <a href="http://webmasters.malemanual.com/in/m3ghr/">click here for
I see no rude comments here, but I don't see anything particularly helpful either. Certainly nothing that indicates to me that HE did anything but make a simple mistake.
> Give me a break Greg -- you appear intelligent enough (at least from > your website) to be able to perform a Google or other search regarding > he.net's spamming history. He.net only killed the spammer's services > because the heat was getting a little too hot for them to handle.
Who's Greg?
I know all about the various assertions made in this group and elsewhere regarding HE's spam history. I readily agree that their spam-fighting efforts have been lacking for quite some time. However, I don't believe that they're intentionally or willfully supporting spammers.
> Tell your bud at he.net that they wouldn't be called liars if they would > have taken action then:
Why is someone automatically assumed to be a liar if there's a possibility that they made an honest mistake? Particularly in the case of front-line support techs, you can't assume that they even know how to fully investigate the issue. Sure, that's their job, but reality is such that sometimes these folks need a hand to resolve a problem which affects everyone.
> So, you tell me Greg... do you still want to defend he.net merely > because they are your hosting service and/or your bud is now possibly > working for he.net?
Who's Greg?
I'm interested in seeing HE succeed because I'm a customer of theirs who believes in their honest intentions and is otherwise very pleased with the service. It's more cost-effective for me to help them resolve these issues than it would be to find another colocation provider.
> Reasonable people reach limits in "polite" requests when their responses > to such requests are a lie, their kids e-mail accounts are continued to > be spammed for illegal and unsubstantiated big dick products, and the > ISP providing the services knowingly allows spammers with the following > marketing advise to their affiliates:
Perhaps I'm missing it in the sea of hundreds of daily posts to NANAE, but I see no evidence of anyone being truly *polite* to HE - just outright rude and sometimes (as in your case) neither rude nor polite.
> My guess is that your bud finally killed malemanual because he.net were > publicly exposed and risk both prosecution by the FTC as well as the > California Attorney General.
> I know all about the various assertions made in this group and elsewhere > regarding HE's spam history. I readily agree that their spam-fighting > efforts have been lacking for quite some time. However, I don't believe > that they're intentionally or willfully supporting spammers.
Graham; if the ISP tells you in early September that they are taking action against the spammer, and the spammer is still spamming, hosted and supported by that ISP at the end of October would you still call this a mistake? This is not the first time that he.net have been under the spotlight, they have a similar history with someonelikesyou.com, and many, many others.
I would be more than happy to see he.net succeed IF they clean up their network -- unfortunately, their past and present actions do not indicate that this will happen anytime soon.
[snip]
> Perhaps I'm missing it in the sea of hundreds of daily posts to NANAE, but > I see no evidence of anyone being truly *polite* to HE - just outright rude > and sometimes (as in your case) neither rude nor polite.
So what is polite about about continuing to allow spam to eminate from your network? I'd consider that both rude and a reason to stay in the SPEWS and other block/black lists until such time he.net demonstrate that they take action on spam complaints.
> > I know all about the various assertions made in this group and elsewhere > > regarding HE's spam history. I readily agree that their spam-fighting > > efforts have been lacking for quite some time. However, I don't believe > > that they're intentionally or willfully supporting spammers.
> Graham; if the ISP tells you in early September that they are taking > action against the spammer, and the spammer is still spamming, hosted > and supported by that ISP at the end of October would you still call > this a mistake? This is not the first time that he.net have been under > the spotlight, they have a similar history with someonelikesyou.com, and > many, many others.
> I would be more than happy to see he.net succeed IF they clean up their > network -- unfortunately, their past and present actions do not indicate > that this will happen anytime soon.
> [snip]
> > Perhaps I'm missing it in the sea of hundreds of daily posts to NANAE, but > > I see no evidence of anyone being truly *polite* to HE - just outright rude > > and sometimes (as in your case) neither rude nor polite.
> So what is polite about about continuing to allow spam to eminate from > your network? I'd consider that both rude and a reason to stay in the > SPEWS and other block/black lists until such time he.net demonstrate > that they take action on spam complaints.
> <CENTER><B><FONT FACE="arial" COLOR="#ffffff" SIZE=+4>Welcome To X Rated Teen Sluts</font></b><br>
> <br><table border=0 width=450>
> <tr>
> <td><font size=2 face="arial" color=black>This is an adult website! You must be of legal age in your community to continue inside this website. This website contains explicit adult material and is to only be viewed by those of legal age. By entering you are agreeing and stating that you are at least 18 years old and do not object to this material.</font>
> </td></tr></table><br>
> <p><font face=arial size=+3><b><a href=index1.html>Enter X Rated Teen Sluts</a><br>
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 00:46:14 GMT, Graham Freeman <gra...@calteg.org> wrote: >Why is someone automatically assumed to be a liar if there's a possibility >that they made an honest mistake? Particularly in the case of front-line >support techs, you can't assume that they even know how to fully
glgxg <gl...@attglobal.net> wrote: >> I know all about the various assertions made in this group and elsewhere >> regarding HE's spam history. I readily agree that their spam-fighting >> efforts have been lacking for quite some time. However, I don't believe >> that they're intentionally or willfully supporting spammers. > Graham; if the ISP tells you in early September that they are taking > action against the spammer, and the spammer is still spamming, hosted > and supported by that ISP at the end of October would you still call > this a mistake? This is not the first time that he.net have been under > the spotlight, they have a similar history with someonelikesyou.com, and > many, many others.
Like I said, I readily agree that their spam-fighting efforts have been lacking for quite some time.
I'm also saying that it will help matters for ALL ISPs, including HE.net, if the general tone of discourse turns a bit more civilized and constructive. Are we here to end spam, or just to fight it?
> I would be more than happy to see he.net succeed IF they clean up their > network -- unfortunately, their past and present actions do not indicate > that this will happen anytime soon.
Time will tell.
> Any more mistakes you'd like to point out?
Every ISP of any significant size gets spammers abusing its network at some point. The real issue is how they deal with it. For the third time, I agree that HE's efforts to date have been insufficient. However, based on some recent communications I've had with them, I'm beginning to have hope that HE.net will turn it around. I may be wrong.
In article <cklu9.44182$Ik.1009...@typhoon.sonic.net>, Graham Freeman <gra...@calteg.org> wrote:
>Jerry Bookter <book...@spamblocked.com> wrote: >> On Fri, 25 Oct 2002 23:21:30 GMT, Graham Freeman <gra...@calteg.org> wrote:
>> Remember the story of The Boy Who Cried Wolf?
>I'm sorry, but you're going to have to be a little >less opaque if you want me to know what you're >talking about.
>news:rec.arts.books.childrens is ----> thataway
OK, we can break this down into easy, bite-sized nuggest of information:
1. HE.NET has repeatedly lied. 2. HE.NET has repeatedly been caught at it. 3. Nothing announced by HE.NET is likely to be taken at face value as long as a single NANAEite who has been lied to by HE.NET remains alive.
And due to that, no one who has anything better to do (like, for example, belch) is going to bother having a dialogue with anyone at HE.NET
"Saying an abuse desk doesn't deliver pizza is like a dentist saying he can't grow pizza so he can't help you with your anchovy problems." - Clifto, NANAE, 28 Sep 2002
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002 23:21:30 GMT, Graham Freeman <gra...@calteg.org> wrote:
>A certain HE.net representative who gets trashed here in >NANAE all the time was the one who blackholed this >spammer's HE.net-connected DNS servers, thanks in part >to the fact that I took the time to conduct a polite, >constructive conversation with him, as opposed to flaming >him and calling him a liar like some regulars in this >group tend to do.
Amazing what polite, constructive conversation can do.
Graham Freeman <gra...@calteg.org> wrote: >A certain HE.net representative who gets trashed here in >NANAE all the time was the one who blackholed this >spammer's HE.net-connected DNS servers,
Yup, he's done the same for me, from a hotmail account.
inva...@example.com wrote: > Graham Freeman <gra...@calteg.org> wrote: >>A certain HE.net representative who gets trashed here in >>NANAE all the time was the one who blackholed this >>spammer's HE.net-connected DNS servers, > Yup, he's done the same for me, from a hotmail account.
I've been communicating with someone using an @he.net address. The mail headers look authentic as well.
> A certain HE.net representative who gets trashed here in > NANAE all the time was the one who blackholed this > spammer's HE.net-connected DNS servers, thanks in part > to the fact that I took the time to conduct a polite, > constructive conversation with him, as opposed to flaming > him and calling him a liar like some regulars in this > group tend to do.
Graham,
Mike has outright lied to me in e-mail and in this newsgroup. He lied about cleaning up his shithole, about not forwarding reports to spammers and about disconnecting spammers. If lying doesn't make someone a liar any more in your book, you should seek a career in politics.
Frank Breuer <m...@privacy.net> wrote: > "Graham Freeman "wrote: >> A certain HE.net representative who gets trashed here in >> NANAE all the time was the one who blackholed this >> spammer's HE.net-connected DNS servers, thanks in part >> to the fact that I took the time to conduct a polite, >> constructive conversation with him, as opposed to flaming >> him and calling him a liar like some regulars in this >> group tend to do. > Graham, > Mike has outright lied to me in e-mail and in this newsgroup. He > lied about cleaning up his shithole, about not forwarding reports to > spammers and about disconnecting spammers. If lying doesn't make > someone a liar any more in your book, you should seek a career in > politics.
I'm honestly interested in knowing how he lied to you. I've seen SPEWS datafile-like listings which to me indicate that yes, HE was not completely terminating their spam customers, but I've seen nothing so far that convinces me that they're definitely lying.
And, like I said, I've recently had an encouraging e-mail conversation with them, so I'd like to give them a chance.
I'm willing to be convinced by either side - I'm simply trying to help resolve this crap.
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 09:42:46 GMT Graham Freeman <gra...@calteg.org>
wrote in message <qstu9.44241$Ik.1015...@typhoon.sonic.net>:
<SNIP>
> I'm honestly interested in knowing how he lied to you. I've seen > SPEWS datafile-like listings which to me indicate that yes, HE > was not completely terminating their spam customers, but I've seen > nothing so far that convinces me that they're definitely lying.
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 00:46:14 GMT Graham Freeman <gra...@calteg.org>
wrote in message <qBlu9.44185$Ik.1010...@typhoon.sonic.net>:
<SNIP>
> I'm not making any assertions as to SPEWS S322 or any other previous > spam problems. I'm saying in this case their failure to completely > solve the problem in a timely manner appears to me to be an honest > mistake.
How many honest mistakes one might make about the same case in a row? Two?
| > --- "Hurricane Electric Abuse Dept." <ab...@he.net>
| > wrote:
| > > Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We | > > take mail abuse very | > > seriously. | > > | > > Corrective action is being taken with the | > > responsible party. Please let | > > me know if you continue to receive unwanted email. | > <...> | > href="http://tour2.webmasters.malemanual.com/in/hizzo/A"><img | > <...>
And when pointing out on that supposedly honest mistake on HE part:
| > What action would that be? The link below is still | > valid, and the website is still up.
They reply what with? Another mistake?!
| Thank you from bringing this to our attention. We take mail abuse | very | seriously | | The advertised website has been terminated. | | | +-----------------------------------------+ | | Hurricane Electric Abuse Department | | | ab...@he.net http://he.net/webtos.html | | +-----------------------------------------+
|
