Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

No longer Express delisting ?

108 views
Skip to first unread message

Norprotex

unread,
Nov 15, 2009, 7:03:23 AM11/15/09
to
IP 86.66.1.158
We have payed last monday (9/11) to "expressdeslisting" (Nº de reçu :
1049-8946-1579-6072) but we corrected the problem in our exchange
server only this day (friday 13/11).
We know that we have not worked in the good order but now we can't do
a new "express delisting" because the system say "Expedited
expressdelisting is no longer available for this IP, because the owner
has declared to dislike that option". WE NEVER CHOOSE THIS OPTION !

How can we do ??


--
Comments posted to news.admin.net-abuse.blocklisting
are solely the responsibility of their author. Please
read the news.admin.net-abuse.blocklisting FAQ at
http://www.blocklisting.com/faq.html before posting.

Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz

unread,
Nov 16, 2009, 2:59:31 PM11/16/09
to
In <cbc1fafd-e7e3-4324...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, on
11/15/2009
at 12:03 PM, Norprotex <ch.lam...@gmail.com> said:

>We have payed last monday (9/11) to "expressdeslisting" (Nß de reáu :


>1049-8946-1579-6072) but we corrected the problem in our exchange server
>only this day (friday 13/11).

Why?

>We know that we have not worked in the good order but now we can't do a
>new "express delisting" because the system say "Expedited
>expressdelisting is no longer available for this IP, because the owner
>has declared to dislike that option".

I agree with you that the wording of the message is wrong, but IMHO it was
appropriate to remove the option. Were it my list I would probably have
had an escalating[1] express delisting fee, an escalating processing delay
on express delisting and an escalating[1] TTL on the listing. However,
since it's not my list[2], Claus has no obligation to pay attention to
that, and he's probably done more analysis of his options than I have.

>How can we do ??

Well, if he lets you back in I suggest that you fix the problems first.

[1] Definitely superlinear, possibly subexponential.

[2] If it were, times would be in UTC and I would try to find a way
to provide more details without compromising my sources.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, truly insane Spews puppet
<http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive
E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact
me. Do not reply to spam...@library.lspace.org

DevilsPGD

unread,
Nov 16, 2009, 3:04:30 PM11/16/09
to
In message
<cbc1fafd-e7e3-4324...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
Norprotex <ch.lam...@gmail.com> was claimed to have wrote:

>IP 86.66.1.158

I'm going to assume you're talking about UCEPROTECT or their family of
lists? -- You really should mention which blocklist you're talking about
though, assumptions aren't always good.

>We have payed last monday (9/11) to "expressdeslisting" (Nº de reçu :
>1049-8946-1579-6072) but we corrected the problem in our exchange
>server only this day (friday 13/11).

There's your first mistake.

>We know that we have not worked in the good order but now we can't do
>a new "express delisting" because the system say "Expedited
>expressdelisting is no longer available for this IP, because the owner
>has declared to dislike that option". WE NEVER CHOOSE THIS OPTION !

My guess is that you (or someone else reviewing the same situation)
clicked on the "I feel like this is extortion" option at some point.

However, it's possible that the option disappears automatically after
paying for an express delisting without resolving the underlying
problem.

At this point your best bet is likely to wait out the listing's expiry.

D. Stussy

unread,
Nov 16, 2009, 3:05:14 PM11/16/09
to
"Norprotex" <ch.lam...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cbc1fafd-e7e3-4324...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...

> IP 86.66.1.158
> We have payed last monday (9/11) to "expressdeslisting" (Nº de reçu :
> 1049-8946-1579-6072) but we corrected the problem in our exchange
> server only this day (friday 13/11).
> We know that we have not worked in the good order but now we can't do
> a new "express delisting" because the system say "Expedited
> expressdelisting is no longer available for this IP, because the owner
> has declared to dislike that option". WE NEVER CHOOSE THIS OPTION !

Although personally I consider the whole thing as extortion, didn't you
read where it says [paraphrased]:

You should fix the problem BEFORE requesting de-listing.

Claus v. Wolfhausen

unread,
Nov 17, 2009, 6:10:15 AM11/17/09
to
In article <cbc1fafd-e7e3-4324...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
ch.lam...@gmail.com says...

>
>IP 86.66.1.158
>We have payed last monday (9/11) to "expressdeslisting" (Nº de reçu :
>1049-8946-1579-6072) but we corrected the problem in our exchange
>server only this day (friday 13/11).
>We know that we have not worked in the good order but now we can't do
>a new "express delisting" because the system say "Expedited
>expressdelisting is no longer available for this IP, because the owner
>has declared to dislike that option". WE NEVER CHOOSE THIS OPTION !

First you should not pay for expedited delisting as long as your problems are
not fixed. Our website tells you that it is nothing than a waste of money to
pay without fixing in first place.

Clicking the "I feel extorted" button is a 100% safe methodics to get proof
that we at UCEPROTECT-Network do NOT extort listees and also that we DO NOT
want them to pay for removal.

As soon as you or anyone which is using your IP clicks that button, expedited
expressdelisting is no longer offered to you.
You or anyone which has access to your IP *HAS* clicked that button.

>How can we do ??

Normally you would now have to wait for automatic and free expiration.
Since you claim you wouldn't have chosen that option i did exceptionally remove
the extortionscreamer flag.

--
Claus von Wolfhausen
Technical Director
UCEPROTECT-Network
http://www.uceprotect.net

0 new messages