Is anyone else getting blog spam? I've seen two so far, here and the second comment here.
Ah - google reveals all:
- Blog spam
- Club vs. Lojack
- Comment spam alert
- Comment spam problem continued
- and related links
Since folks apparently don't visit Summa minutiae to read the snarky comments, I'll probably just turn off commenting if I get hit much more. Unless Ben and Mena find some nifty solution.
Posted by billw at March 3, 2003 05:41 AMApparently, when an issue is raised by a posted pre-written article, it is easier to call it 'spam' than to deal with it thoughtfully. Superficiality reigns. Your call...
Posted by: Jim Baxter at March 3, 2003 08:57 AMWell, Jim, that's what websites are for. My site has about 600 "pre-written articles" that I don't go posting in other's logs.
Web sites are cheap: get one. :)
Advertising's cheap too, Google has text ads for *real* cheap these days. If you're looking for people to get your site on search terms then that's a good way to go as well.
Posting your content on someone else's personal site just because you can? Nah, that's just wrong.
Posted by: codepoet at March 3, 2003 09:08 AMSorry, Jim, but what does the CHOICEMAKER thing have to do with Saint Gregory's commentary on Ecclesiastes? Granted, I didn't analyse your comment in detail, because there was no indication that it had anything to do with anything. If you want to get my attention and get me to read something, you need to indicate somehow that it has something to do with the original post, perhaps by quoting a bit of the OP then telling me what you think of it or what thoughts it prompts.
Canned screeds are spam around here.
Now, did you have a comment on the original post? I'd be glad to entertain it.
Posted by: Bill White at March 3, 2003 09:19 AMMetaphysics is the finding of bad reasons for what we believe upon instinct, but to find these reasons is no less an instinct.
Posted by: penis enlargement at October 18, 2004 10:30 PM