SpamCop error (was: Re: More Gifts for a CTO who has everything ...)

Oki all,

It appears that I closed the door on this too early. Then again, today is
the first of April. Then again, I write about Iraq (not adulatory of any
of the parties and their delights), and technotrivia, like "can .iq be
operated like .tp was (via an ISP in .ie) while occupied?"

Anyhow, SpamCop V1.3.3 is proud to point out that the following item of
mail, sent to this list (nanog), meets its seal of Spam-Proval. I know
cause my ISP (home) asked me "Eric, what's up with this?"

The originating host ran FreeBSD 5.0 and sendmail 8.12.8 when the mail
was sent (.9 now, obviously).

>From the post to nanog of the 25th, "Gifts for a CTO who has everything ..."
(nmap has side effects)

"Does life get any better than this"

Best humor reply:

        Setup peering with a new provider that PROXY ARPs all your

Second place (tie): LART the sucker, and the perenial foam bat.

Best psychology reply:

        ... find a high-intensity clueino source?
        But clueinos interact very weakly with that sort of matter...

The CTO's actual reply was "Do we have load that high? Were we being
attacked by some script kiddies?? Very, very weak interaction.

Would someone with spmacop clue look at the following and drop me a note
of decode? sent
- - SpamCop V1.3.3 -
This message is brief for your comfort. Please follow links for details. - Abuse report response center
Email from / Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:21:31 -0500 (EST)

Am I the only nanog'er so blessed?

My ISP is now happy, so there only remains SpamBlop brain-death, or a
non-gruntled nanog reader using SpamBlop to effect source-quench.