Well the server is long gone ,so I can't prove it, but I think i tested it with telnet . It would 550 *during* the initial stmp connection. I was certain that to bounce email to the honeypot address ,the spammer needed to be using an open relay .

That's exactly what it did. The script exited with the above message triggering the 550 message from postfix. To have sent mail to the Honeypot address, it would have taken an open relay to redirect the message. I wanted legitimate senders to see the error message.

Yes it is a problem. But these are messages from a SPF domain. I suspect it's because the messages are short and mostly a url with a long hash in it.

It's not looks-legit.some.bogus.domain.ru. It's samedomainthatsentthemail.com/reset.php?code=longhash

Years ago I was running an email server, (Very low output 3 to 5 users personal email only, no lists) and we had some inbound addresses that were overloaded with spam, so we abandoned them. But rather than just discarding email sent to those addresses ( for fear that someone didn't get the new address) I set them up so (via a piped script in the aliases file ) to fail on receipt with the message "your message to abandoned@email can not be delivered, please use the webform here to send your message"

So we got blacklisted, and checking the logs we had *NO* outgoing email at the time of the accursed spam message(s). The blacklist service didn't give me the whole message, but it contained enough for me to find reference to it in my log.

Near as I can figure, some spammer sent email to us through an open relay, using a honeypot (you get classed as a spammer if you send email to this address ) as his spoofed 'from: address'. My mailer refused to accept the email to the abandoned address, so the relay returned the 'undelivered' message to the honeypot address.

Now I had several problems with this. First, to avoid blacklisting, I had to remove this helpful service. Now those messages go to /dev/null. second, I didn't actually send the email, but we got blacklisted simply because our IP adress was in the chain of Received headers in the email header.

More recently, I had newsletter messages sent to a members of a private club bounced by their local ISP. The sending IP address was not listed in any blacklist I could find. The ISP was just refusing connection, No message, nothing. (I could send email to that ISP from other services like gmail) They wouldn't take my call ( I'm not their customer) so I had some of their customers call and ask "Why am I not getting these newsletter messages?" . I wasn't on the call, but it sounded like they just played dumb. A few of the list members gave us non-local-isp addresses (gmail , yahoo) and now they get the newsletter there.

Again, legitimate email loses out.

And finally, Just about every time, my "password reset" messages end up in people's spam folder. This is one of my most common support calls. (this even after the page where they request the password reset says right on it "check your spam folder" ) There are lots of false positives on spam.

If it really was the issue that the cost to Comcast of the largest users was the outside network limitations, then they would love P2P protocalls like Bittorrent. ( swarms will adapt to get data from fastest peers, which could logically be other users of the Comcast network. )

But It's a lie.

The choke point for cable providers is the last mile. Trying to optimize the network by punishing those that use it, continues to be offensive.

But it would clearly be wasted effort. it is very clear that these petitions have no effect on policy.

Only acceptable solution: Only vote for politicians that support rights online. Make sure they know your position.

Now that they have "responded" to it, no more signatures can be counted. My guess, they had to hurry up and close it before it reached 100k. I

Can you post the image links here?

Rail gun instead of cannon
Start way out at sea

I wasn't complaining about the petition in itself, just a crappy website. What really steamed me was getting stuck in this "signed in" and also "not signed in" state. ( felt like a Douglas Adams book) I got it to work, but how many people would have given up sooner. The validation link should have *also* signed the petition. And if they are going to email a https link they should have wrapped it as html so my email client would see it as a link. ( I didn't know until now that my email clients wouldn't see https in the text and make it hot-link. ) I suspect , not enough testing was done.

and how is it worded, if we get 5000, they will consider responding to it.

It's a small step, in a big fight.

OMFG what a terrible website experience ... no wonder only 11 signatures at the moment.
requires sigin to vote.. ok
pop up form incompatible with android touch kybd. ( click text area , lose kybd focus)
use slide out kybd
Sends validation mail.... ok
It's not a link, I have to copy and paste
Drops me to 404 page
Move to laptop, try again
Still, not a link, but copy paste better on laptop, whitehouse.gov says :Validation already used.
Please login, requests email and password... ( I didn't ever get prompted for a password )
request lost password
New validation link, ( still not hot, copy paste) ... OK validated, but link valid only once, please set password.
OK, logged in .. but *lost* is the link to the page I was on... where is that petition ?
back to /. re-click link page comes up, .. but "Sign Petition" is still greyed-out
click "signin" and my choices are "Sign out" and "Forgot Password"
Now I will try logout and log back in.. will see if that works

I get the feeling they don't actually want people to sign these things.

I'll bet the launch g-forces are way to high. ( the B in ICBM is balistic which I believe describes most of the flight ) plus, the thing probably doesn't nearly approach safety standards for human flight.