Caller ID Superfecta

We aren't using whocalled.us as a SPAM source and their data probably shouldn't be used as a SPAM source, thus the SPAM threshold isn't used.

Ok - so we are changing this source from a SPAM source to a CID source?
I'm uncomfortable with removing a previous feature without notice. How much does it cost to put it back?

Could it be coded so that if the user specifies zero, then it is used ONLY for caller id and ignore it as a spam source? Give the user the choice to go on using it as a SPAM source if they wish -

Yeah - I just went back and reread the first ticket on this - and what the requester asked for is us to return the caller ID along with the SPAM rating. We have instead converted this to a Caller ID source.

I agree that this is a POOR site on which to base SPAM judgment - but my taste is not everyones taste. If possible, we should let this source do both. There are other sources out there just like this which well be seeing come up as sources. We might as well get used to being able to do both.

Using this site as a SPAM source is counter productive to its purpose.

Jeremy Jacobs Said:

If 3 asterisk boxes report back automatically, valid CID information, and a forth box is looking at a count for SPAM they will really be getting incorrect information. And as more and more people repot back, the ammount of incorrectly reported SPAM will increase. In other words, the report back funcionality dimishes the value of SPAM data on an exponential scale as time passes.

I do not like depreciating functionality without notice, but in this case, the sites value is clearly as a potential caller ID source, not as a spam flag. The counter they return is for the number of reports, and really have nothing to do with SPAM. I'm sure well upset somebody, but the decision is that whocalled.us is no longer a SPAM data source.