Comments on: My Life as a Spammer… or so says Yahoo! http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/ Discussion of Online Advertising, CPA, SEO, Affiliate and Next Generation Marketing Sat, 20 Mar 2010 04:05:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Eric Yang http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/comment-page-2/#comment-19724 Eric Yang Wed, 17 Dec 2008 21:48:35 +0000 http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/#comment-19724 I just came across this post, but my experience has pretty much been the same as everyone else here. Just without the resolution. It's been unresolved for a few months after McAfee mistakenly marked one of our downloads as invalid. I've contacted them multiple times in every way possible and only received one arrogant return letter almost taunting us to sue them. It seems to me that McAfee would do better to remove the service rather than provide blatant misinformation to users who trust them. Thanks for the insight into McAfee's and Yahoo's business practices. Funny, I trusted McAfee before. I just came across this post, but my experience has pretty much been the same as everyone else here. Just without the resolution. It’s been unresolved for a few months after McAfee mistakenly marked one of our downloads as invalid. I’ve contacted them multiple times in every way possible and only received one arrogant return letter almost taunting us to sue them.

It seems to me that McAfee would do better to remove the service rather than provide blatant misinformation to users who trust them. Thanks for the insight into McAfee’s and Yahoo’s business practices. Funny, I trusted McAfee before.

]]> By: Trinity http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/comment-page-1/#comment-17513 Trinity Sun, 13 Jul 2008 01:48:43 +0000 http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/#comment-17513 It isn't like we have a choice about showing up on Yahoo search results.It would be better to NOT show up on their search engine than to have the warning. My site snowwowl.com comes up on the first page for many searches, but what good is it to have a good site, that has information, that people have been coming to for 7 years, if the first thing they see is "Potentially harmful websites" and then "warning:unsolicited emails". We have spent years building our status in the search engines, to have Yahoo/Mac Afee tear it down. My site is non-commercial. I don't have the funds to hire a lawyer. Yahoo has marked all 1700+ pages on the search results. Pages that have no email addresses, pages that don't have forms or even links to forms. It isn’t like we have a choice about showing up on Yahoo search results.It would be better to NOT show up on their search engine than to have the warning. My site snowwowl.com comes up on the first page for many searches, but what good is it to have a good site, that has information, that people have been coming to for 7 years, if the first thing they see is “Potentially harmful websites” and then “warning:unsolicited emails”. We have spent years building our status in the search engines, to have Yahoo/Mac Afee tear it down. My site is non-commercial. I don’t have the funds to hire a lawyer.

Yahoo has marked all 1700+ pages on the search results. Pages that have no email addresses, pages that don’t have forms or even links to forms.

]]> By: Angie Vandenbergh http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/comment-page-1/#comment-17507 Angie Vandenbergh Sat, 12 Jul 2008 13:04:19 +0000 http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/#comment-17507 In my mind this feature of mcafee and yahoo is not all that great if it was working properly. I don't see how it helps either one of them make much more money. It just can't lead to much $$$$ on their side. It seems to me to be all political. It's just a shame when companies get too policitical and can't get out of the mess. The system they have is obviously not working. They don't have a way to support it. No one knows what to say. It's a round about. I can't see how they would be able to fix a political problem this big and between two companies. Seems the best thing would be to just take it down. In my mind this feature of mcafee and yahoo is not all that great if it was working properly. I don’t see how it helps either one of them make much more money. It just can’t lead to much $$$$ on their side. It seems to me to be all political. It’s just a shame when companies get too policitical and can’t get out of the mess. The system they have is obviously not working. They don’t have a way to support it. No one knows what to say. It’s a round about. I can’t see how they would be able to fix a political problem this big and between two companies. Seems the best thing would be to just take it down.

]]> By: Trinity http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/comment-page-1/#comment-17506 Trinity Sat, 12 Jul 2008 02:48:00 +0000 http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/#comment-17506 I have 2 non-commercial websites that have received false positives. One site was tagged after I began making inquiries about the first site. While I can't prove that an email address wasn't put on the snowwowl.com website, I know none was put on the artmckellips.com site because I manually make the entries. I have written about my ordeal extensively at http://snowwowl.com/flashnewscontents.html#boycott. You can read it there, rather than go through it all again here. I tried going through the proper channels. If one reads the email above from Kimberly Smith, she states that Jim's site will be retested "If no forms are found". So they falsely accuse a site and now he can't have forms or they won't retest it. I was told that I must remove ALL of the email addresses from the sites, as well as removing all of the email fields on all forms. The snowwowl.com site has over 1700+ pages. Every email address on the site is voluntary. We even warn people about including their email address, because it will be made public on the site.We have: writers that don't have websites that want their addresses published; Powwow information with email addresses so people can get more information; email addresses in the GuestBook so people can exchange information; and email addresses in our Flash news section on current Native American issues, so people can contact people for support and write the proper people involved in the situation. To remove these would be to end the site as a place to exchange information. On another blog, I read that two sites had indeed removed all of their email addresses. One was a site where people from a certain Naval ship could reconnect and the other was a site that enabled adult adoptees to connect with their birth parents. This means they have both ended one of the main purposes of their sites. Now the bad news--one was given the "green" rating...the other was not. When this first came to our attention-the Mac Afee details "claimed" that both websites had their email address on it and that once it was on the site they received the same 12 spam emails in a week. How can that be if the address was only on one site? Could it be the email addresses just happened to receive the emails and it had nothing to do with being on any site? As soon as I asked this question, I was told to remove all email addresses on the site before they would retest. I recently went to the details again and the results have changed. How can that be? They refused to retest the site, because they went to the site and "saw "an email address. So how can the results change, unless it is because the same results showed the flaw in their testing? So it comes down to this. We are falsely accused, then Jim can't have forms, and I can't have email addresses and who knows what Mac Afee will come up with next. If we are willing to gut our sites, they will re-test. They didn't test the first time. I did my own test--I opened a new Yahoo email account, and on the first day I had 8 spam emails. So is Yahoo selling email addresses. Is Yahoo a spammer, because they are the only ones who know the address besides myself. I also brought this to their attention. However, every time I make something public on the website, things change. First the "details information". Then last week, three of our writers, who have had their email addresses on the website for at least 2 years received their first spam email about "hooking up", claiming they found their "profile" on snowwowl.com. All the same spam email from a yahoo.ca email address...I have copies. I won't be removing my email addresses, because I refuse to allow Mac Afee to dictate what can or can't be on my site. Especially because they can't prove their claims and all the false positives. I have that luxury, because while Yahoo is damaging the reputation of my site, it is not costing me revenue as it has others. I do have the stats showing that the warning is keeping people from coming to the site from Yahoo searches. And now those people won't get the information, some of which is no where else on the Internet. I will participate in any class action lawsuit and I have started a "Boycott Yahoo and Mac Afee" campaign. They did this to increase their numbers, so let's decrease their numbers. If I were you David, I wouldn't give them one penny from my ad budget. They showed their colors. I have 2 non-commercial websites that have received false positives. One site was tagged after I began making inquiries about the first site. While I can’t prove that an email address wasn’t put on the snowwowl.com website, I know none was put on the artmckellips.com site because I manually make the entries.

I have written about my ordeal extensively at http://snowwowl.com/flashnewscontents.html#boycott. You can read it there, rather than go through it all again here. I tried going through the proper channels.

If one reads the email above from Kimberly Smith, she states that Jim’s site will be retested “If no forms are found”. So they falsely accuse a site and now he can’t have forms or they won’t retest it.

I was told that I must remove ALL of the email addresses from the sites, as well as removing all of the email fields on all forms. The snowwowl.com site has over 1700+ pages. Every email address on the site is voluntary. We even warn people about including their email address, because it will be made public on the site.We have: writers that don’t have websites that want their addresses published; Powwow information with email addresses so people can get more information; email addresses in the GuestBook so people can exchange information; and email addresses in our Flash news section on current Native American issues, so people can contact people for support and write the proper people involved in the situation. To remove these would be to end the site as a place to exchange information.

On another blog, I read that two sites had indeed removed all of their email addresses. One was a site where people from a certain Naval ship could reconnect and the other was a site that enabled adult adoptees to connect with their birth parents. This means they have both ended one of the main purposes of their sites. Now the bad news–one was given the “green” rating…the other was not.

When this first came to our attention-the Mac Afee details “claimed” that both websites had their email address on it and that once it was on the site they received the same 12 spam emails in a week. How can that be if the address was only on one site? Could it be the email addresses just happened to receive the emails and it had nothing to do with being on any site? As soon as I asked this question, I was told to remove all email addresses on the site before they would retest.

I recently went to the details again and the results have changed. How can that be? They refused to retest the site, because they went to the site and “saw “an email address. So how can the results change, unless it is because the same results showed the flaw in their testing?

So it comes down to this. We are falsely accused, then Jim can’t have forms, and I can’t have email addresses and who knows what Mac Afee will come up with next. If we are willing to gut our sites, they will re-test. They didn’t test the first time.

I did my own test–I opened a new Yahoo email account, and on the first day I had 8 spam emails. So is Yahoo selling email addresses. Is Yahoo a spammer, because they are the only ones who know the address besides myself.

I also brought this to their attention. However, every time I make something public on the website, things change. First the “details information”. Then last week, three of our writers, who have had their email addresses on the website for at least 2 years received their first spam email about “hooking up”, claiming they found their “profile” on snowwowl.com. All the same spam email from a yahoo.ca email address…I have copies.

I won’t be removing my email addresses, because I refuse to allow Mac Afee to dictate what can or can’t be on my site. Especially because they can’t prove their claims and all the false positives. I have that luxury, because while Yahoo is damaging the reputation of my site, it is not costing me revenue as it has others. I do have the stats showing that the warning is keeping people from coming to the site from Yahoo searches. And now those people won’t get the information, some of which is no where else on the Internet.

I will participate in any class action lawsuit and I have started a “Boycott Yahoo and Mac Afee” campaign. They did this to increase their numbers, so let’s decrease their numbers.

If I were you David, I wouldn’t give them one penny from my ad budget. They showed their colors.

]]> By: Jim Buckley http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/comment-page-1/#comment-17505 Jim Buckley Sat, 12 Jul 2008 00:19:01 +0000 http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/#comment-17505 Okay, an hour after "Jim" informed me that rumford.com would be "moved to a 'green' rating upon our next data release" I received the message below from Kimberly, who has been dealing with our Better Business Bureau Complaint against McAfee. Kimberly apparently is not allowed to admit that McAfee made a mistake. She won't deal with the fact that McAfee could not have posted a test email on our website (which is what they say they did) and that the warning they associated with our website had to be a mistake. Kimberly or Jim or Marcus or Edgar or Aaron or Edgar (all members of the "Executive Services Team" who have been passing me around) may have actually gotten the mistake corrected for me but can't admit it so they say we were re-tested. They all seem like nice people. I hope they get jobs with a decent company some day where they are allowed to be honest. I think it's interesting that Kimbely gave me the address of McAfee's legal department, which we already had and is easy enough to find. Probably the legal department will issue us a similar company line about not providing the methods or the basis for their ratings. I think we can get that in court where we will argue that McAfee is guilty of defamation and they will have to present some argument or evidence to show that their statement "we entered our email address on their website" is not a prima facie lie. Thread-Topic: Better Business Bureau Complaint (McAfee) Case#289228(Ref#11-205400-289228-3-201) Thread-Index: Acjjjf5p887XGRuWQAqkhRa/IE61KQAGzFYQ From: To: Mr. Buckley, McAfee's position is has been expressed clearly to you, I'm sorry that you find this unsatisfactory. I'm unsure how else to say that your site was tested and received a rating based on that result. When the site is retested if no forms are found and your site warrants an adjustment, the rating will be changed. There are numerous factors involved in the testing process and McAfee will not provide the criteria or steps involved to you. That could jeopardize the outcome of our tests to your site and other sites as well. As I've indicated to you previously, McAfee's Executive Management and Operations Management teams are aware of your concerns and our responses to you regarding those concerns. Your lawyer can contact McAfee's legal department directly via mail at McAfee, Inc. (Legal Department) 5000 Headquarters Drive, Plano TX 75024. Kind regards, Kimberly R. Smith Executive Services Team Kimberly_Smith@McAfee.com www.mcafee.com 972-987-2119 Okay, an hour after “Jim” informed me that rumford.com would be “moved to a ‘green’ rating upon our next data release” I received the message below from Kimberly, who has been dealing with our Better Business Bureau Complaint against McAfee.

Kimberly apparently is not allowed to admit that McAfee made a mistake. She won’t deal with the fact that McAfee could not have posted a test email on our website (which is what they say they did) and that the warning they associated with our website had to be a mistake.

Kimberly or Jim or Marcus or Edgar or Aaron or Edgar (all members of the “Executive Services Team” who have been passing me around) may have actually gotten the mistake corrected for me but can’t admit it so they say we were re-tested. They all seem like nice people. I hope they get jobs with a decent company some day where they are allowed to be honest.

I think it’s interesting that Kimbely gave me the address of McAfee’s legal department, which we already had and is easy enough to find. Probably the legal department will issue us a similar company line about not providing the methods or the basis for their ratings. I think we can get that in court where we will argue that McAfee is guilty of defamation and they will have to present some argument or evidence to show that their statement “we entered our email address on their website” is not a prima facie lie.

Thread-Topic: Better Business Bureau Complaint (McAfee) Case#289228(Ref#11-205400-289228-3-201)
Thread-Index: Acjjjf5p887XGRuWQAqkhRa/IE61KQAGzFYQ
From:
To:

Mr. Buckley,

McAfee’s position is has been expressed clearly to you, I’m sorry that you find this unsatisfactory. I’m unsure how else to say that your site was tested and received a rating based on that result. When the site is retested if no forms are found and your site warrants an adjustment, the rating will be changed.

There are numerous factors involved in the testing process and McAfee will not provide the criteria or steps involved to you. That could jeopardize the outcome of our tests to your site and other sites as well.
As I’ve indicated to you previously, McAfee’s Executive Management and Operations Management teams are aware of your concerns and our responses to you regarding those concerns.

Your lawyer can contact McAfee’s legal department directly via mail at McAfee, Inc. (Legal Department) 5000 Headquarters Drive, Plano TX 75024.

Kind regards,

Kimberly R. Smith
Executive Services Team
Kimberly_Smith@McAfee.com
http://www.mcafee.com
972-987-2119

]]> By: David Lewis http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/comment-page-1/#comment-17504 David Lewis Fri, 11 Jul 2008 23:15:09 +0000 http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/#comment-17504 Jim- Yes, I have tried to get on with life but also am still fighting the good fight. AnyCoupons was switched to a yellow warning... maybe we'll get green some day. In the meantime, I will continue to make noise about this. I haven't stopped. There are too many websites still facing this problem and Yahoo hasn't changed its ways yet.. -David Jim-

Yes, I have tried to get on with life but also am still fighting the good fight.

AnyCoupons was switched to a yellow warning… maybe we’ll get green some day.

In the meantime, I will continue to make noise about this. I haven’t stopped. There are too many websites still facing this problem and Yahoo hasn’t changed its ways yet..

-David

]]> By: Jim Buckley http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/comment-page-1/#comment-17503 Jim Buckley Fri, 11 Jul 2008 22:15:01 +0000 http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/#comment-17503 David, Thank you for your blog and for forwarding my comments to McAfee and Yahoo. I just received the message below saying we would be moved to a "green" rating. Perhaps I have you to thank. To: buckley@rumford.com From: McAfee SiteAdvisor Support Subject: Erroneous &#34SapmAssassin score of 10&#34 for www.rumford.com Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:14:56 -0400 Hello, Quick update. Current test data indicates that this site will be moved to a 'green' rating upon our next data release. Sincerely, Jim Avert Services McAfee SiteAdvisor Of course I have no idea who "Jim" is nor if it will really happen. And I'm still angry about the loss of business, all the time it has taken, and my inability to get to anyone at Yahoo or McAfee willing to be responsible. I see that AnyCoupons seems to now be free of the dreaded Yahoo warning. What are you going to do now? Get on with life? Maintain your blog to help the rest of us? Are you interested in a class action suit? Best, Jim Buckley David,

Thank you for your blog and for forwarding my comments to McAfee and Yahoo.

I just received the message below saying we would be moved to a “green” rating. Perhaps I have you to thank.

To: buckley@rumford.com
From: McAfee SiteAdvisor Support
Subject: Erroneous &#34SapmAssassin score of 10&#34 for
http://www.rumford.com
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:14:56 -0400

Hello,

Quick update. Current test data indicates that this site will be moved to a ‘green’ rating upon our next data release.

Sincerely,

Jim
Avert Services
McAfee SiteAdvisor

Of course I have no idea who “Jim” is nor if it will really happen. And I’m still angry about the loss of business, all the time it has taken, and my inability to get to anyone at Yahoo or McAfee willing to be responsible.

I see that AnyCoupons seems to now be free of the dreaded Yahoo warning. What are you going to do now? Get on with life? Maintain your blog to help the rest of us? Are you interested in a class action suit?

Best,
Jim Buckley

]]> By: David Lewis http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/comment-page-1/#comment-17502 David Lewis Fri, 11 Jul 2008 20:51:50 +0000 http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/#comment-17502 Jim- I feel your pain. I forwarded your comment to McAfee and Yahoo. They are following the comments of this post but I wanted to make sure they got it. Someone in my office just had a telling comment about this: Welcome to the Spanish Inquisition! -David Jim-

I feel your pain. I forwarded your comment to McAfee and Yahoo. They are following the comments of this post but I wanted to make sure they got it.

Someone in my office just had a telling comment about this: Welcome to the Spanish Inquisition!

-David

]]> By: Jim Buckley http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/comment-page-1/#comment-17488 Jim Buckley Thu, 10 Jul 2008 04:55:07 +0000 http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/#comment-17488 I want to chime in with a "me too". Yahoo has posted a false “Unsolicited Emails” warning associated with our website, www.rumford.com, when searching for “Rumford fireplaces”. The warning is generated by Yahoo’s partner, McAfee SiteAdvisor. False because SiteAdvisor says they made that determination by “entering our e-mail address on this site”. Problem is, we have no forms or any other way to automatically enter an email message. I do all the site maintenance manually in html and sweep all the pages onto the Internet myself. Thinking that SiteAdvisor had somehow made a simple mistake, I tried to contact them by phone and email - to no avail. After a month of trying, I have not gotten to anyone who will listen. Rather, I get transferred from one anonymous customer relations person to another. Same so far with McAfee and Yahoo. I even tried to reach "Shane" without success through another blog. So I have complained to the Washington Attorney General and the California and Texas Better Business Bureau and have hired a lawyer - just to try to get someone in charge to talk with me. I have also spent some time surfing the blogs to see what others think about McAfee and Yahoo. I learned that McAfee falsely targets many websites with their faulty but arrogantly defended technology - and then blames their victims. There is plenty of discussion about the websites McAfee has falsely red tagged on several blogs, such as http://ycorpblog.com/2008/05/05/do-you-know-where-you-mouse-has-been/ and http://www.crn.com/security/208401061 and http://groups.google.com/group/Google_Webmaster_Help I also discovered at http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2006-3.htm that McAfee paid a $50 million penalty to settle a lawsuit filed against them by the SEC for fraud. If you have any helpful advice or would like to join us in a lawsuit please contact me. Jim Buckley 360 385 9974 buckley@rumford.com I want to chime in with a “me too”.

Yahoo has posted a false “Unsolicited Emails” warning associated with our website, http://www.rumford.com, when searching for “Rumford fireplaces”. The warning is generated by Yahoo’s partner, McAfee SiteAdvisor. False because SiteAdvisor says they made that determination by “entering our e-mail address on this site”. Problem is, we have no forms or any other way to automatically enter an email message. I do all the site maintenance manually in html and sweep all the pages onto the Internet myself.

Thinking that SiteAdvisor had somehow made a simple mistake, I tried to contact them by phone and email – to no avail. After a month of trying, I have not gotten to anyone who will listen. Rather, I get transferred from one anonymous customer relations person to another. Same so far with McAfee and Yahoo. I even tried to reach “Shane” without success through another blog.

So I have complained to the Washington Attorney General and the California and Texas Better Business Bureau and have hired a lawyer – just to try to get someone in charge to talk with me.

I have also spent some time surfing the blogs to see what others think about McAfee and Yahoo. I learned that McAfee falsely targets many websites with their faulty but arrogantly defended technology – and then blames their victims. There is plenty of discussion about the websites McAfee has falsely red tagged on several blogs, such as http://ycorpblog.com/2008/05/05/do-you-know-where-you-mouse-has-been/ and http://www.crn.com/security/208401061 and http://groups.google.com/group/Google_Webmaster_Help

I also discovered at http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2006-3.htm that McAfee paid a $50 million penalty to settle a lawsuit filed against them by the SEC for fraud.

If you have any helpful advice or would like to join us in a lawsuit please contact me.

Jim Buckley
360 385 9974
buckley@rumford.com

]]> By: Angie Vandenbergh http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/comment-page-1/#comment-17123 Angie Vandenbergh Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:49:12 +0000 http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/my-life-as-a-spammer-or-so-says-yahoo/#comment-17123 Interesting update here.... I posted a comment on Yahoo's blog post about SiteAdvisor integration (http://www.ysearchblog.com/archives/000578.html). My comment did not get posted live....however after the comment was posted more of our pages were removed from the 'harmful' index label. It looks like Yahoo has still not updated all of the pages indexed on our sites. Primiarily looks like all of the pdf files in the search results are still flagged harmful. There are some other subdomains as well. So I'm still not sure of their logic for partially removing some flags, but not others. Still no update on the McAfee side. However I thought I would post the link to Yahoo's blog in case anyone here wants to try sending in a comment over there as well. Interesting update here…. I posted a comment on Yahoo’s blog post about SiteAdvisor integration
(http://www.ysearchblog.com/archives/000578.html). My comment did not get posted live….however after the comment was posted more of our pages were removed from the ‘harmful’ index label.

It looks like Yahoo has still not updated all of the pages indexed on our sites. Primiarily looks like all of the pdf files in the search results are still flagged harmful. There are some other subdomains as well. So I’m still not sure of their logic for partially removing some flags, but not others.

Still no update on the McAfee side. However I thought I would post the link to Yahoo’s blog in case anyone here wants to try sending in a comment over there as well.

]]>