I strongly recommend to block Habeas entirely. They are a yet another garbage email company.
i On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 03:10:54PM +0000, Anthony Peacock wrote: > Hi, > > Following up to myself... > > Anthony Peacock wrote: >> Hi Justin, >> >> Justin Mason wrote: >>> Jason Haar writes: >>>> Anthony Peacock wrote: >>>>> I have had a look around the http://www.habeas.com/ website and can't >>>>> really see how to check the company in question, or make a complaint. >>>>> There is a form for asking them to ask the company to remove these >>>>> addresses from their mailing list, but I don't want to have to do that, >>>>> I want to complain about the company. >>>> This is a "me too". I had the same problem and came to exactly the same >>>> conclusion: there's no way I could find to notify them that one of their >>>> supposedly squeaky-clean customers is sending spam. I'm pushing their >>>> score down to 0 too. >>> >>> No way you could find? look harder guys ;) >>> >>> at the top of www.habeas.com, 'Support', then 'Give Feedback on Habeas >>> Certified Senders' brings you to this page: >>> >>> http://www.habeas.com/en-US/Company_Feedback.php >>> >>> That page says you can also just forward it to complaints /at/ >>> habeas.com. >> >> I did find that page, but got hung up on the bit that says, "Please ask >> the Sender to unsubscribe me from this email list. I understand Habeas >> cannot guarantee I will be unsubscribed." Which, in my hurry to get to a >> meetig this morning, made me assume that this was just another mechanism >> to implement unsubscribing, and not a proper complaint procedure. >> >> I will actually report the emails that I have got. But I think I am going >> to disable all the HABEAS rules anyway. > > Looking into this more, I have disabled the HABEAS checks altogether > (setting score to 0). I did consider the suggestions about lowering the > impact by setting the score to -0.5 or similar, but actually I don't like > the concept of this service, and I would rather save the bandwidth and not > do the checks altogether. > > Thanks to everyone for their comments. >
