Would you like to track your time, speed, distance and miles traveled?
http://gadgetupdates.googlepages.com/trackstick

virig wrote:

> Would you like to track your time, speed, distance and miles traveled?
> http://gadgetupdtes.googlepages.com/tackstick

Is this spam ever going to end? All this person wants is traffic going to
his web site, and most importantly, he wants people clicking on his ad links
so he can make money. He gets paid when people click on them.

The information at this site is nothing more than a brief overview added only
to provide some sort of relevant GPS content.

I'd rather get the info right from the TrackStick manufacturer's home page
rather than from some half baked spamming Googlepages site.

http://www.trackstick.com/

On 8/21/2008, Jim Townsend posted this:
> virig wrote:

>> Would you like to track your time, speed, distance and miles traveled?
>> [Probable spam deleted]

> Is this spam ever going to end? All this person wants is traffic going to
> his web site, and most importantly, he wants people clicking on his ad links
> so he can make money. He gets paid when people click on them.

> The information at this site is nothing more than a brief overview added only
> to provide some sort of relevant GPS content.

> I'd rather get the info right from the TrackStick manufacturer's home page
> rather than from some half baked spamming Googlepages site.

> http://www.trackstick.com/

Some posters recommend suppressing the spam links when you reply to a
spammer, similarly to what I did above, in order not to make it easy
for someone to click on it from a reply :-)

Also, if someone has filtered out his posts but not others' replies to
them, they end up having a copy of the link that they would have
missed.

It may also "improve" (i.e., reduce) the statistics of search engines -
after all, you have doubled the hits on virig's link.

That said, thanks for your discussion of what he's doing, and what the
real link is.

I haven't been reading his posts; pretty early on I created a filter to
mark them as read. I rarely delete posts, or even mark them as in this
case, but I got annoyed ;-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino) letters617blochg3251
(replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom")

Gene E. Bloch wrote:

> Some posters recommend suppressing the spam links when you reply to a
> spammer, similarly to what I did above, in order not to make it easy
> for someone to click on it from a reply :-)

I did suppress the link.. If you compare my reply to the original post,
you'll notice that I took a few random letters out of the original URL so
that if someone did click on the link, it would fail

On 8/21/2008, Jim Townsend posted this:
> Gene E. Bloch wrote:

>> Some posters recommend suppressing the spam links when you reply to a
>> spammer, similarly to what I did above, in order not to make it easy
>> for someone to click on it from a reply :-)

> I did suppress the link.. If you compare my reply to the original post,
> you'll notice that I took a few random letters out of the original URL so
> that if someone did click on the link, it would fail

Jim, you're way too subtle for me!

Well, at least I *did* get a chance to shout from my soapbox ;-)

I'm still laughing ... at myself, I guess ...

--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino) letters617blochg3251
(replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom")

Gene E. Bloch wrote:

> On 8/21/2008, Jim Townsend posted this:
>> Gene E. Bloch wrote:
>
>>> Some posters recommend suppressing the spam links when you reply to a
>>> spammer, similarly to what I did above, in order not to make it easy
>>> for someone to click on it from a reply :-)
>
>> I did suppress the link.. If you compare my reply to the original post,
>> you'll notice that I took a few random letters out of the original URL so
>> that if someone did click on the link, it would fail
>
> Jim, you're way too subtle for me!
>
> Well, at least I *did* get a chance to shout from my soapbox ;-)

I've chastised the odd person myself for including spam links in a reply.
Doing so does help out the spammer by circumventing newsgroup spam filters.
I guess it was hard to see... I should have just left it out, or filled
it with xxx's

On 8/22/2008, Jim Townsend posted this:
> Gene E. Bloch wrote:

>> On 8/21/2008, Jim Townsend posted this:
>>> Gene E. Bloch wrote:
>>
>>>> Some posters recommend suppressing the spam links when you reply to a
>>>> spammer, similarly to what I did above, in order not to make it easy
>>>> for someone to click on it from a reply :-)
>>> I did suppress the link.. If you compare my reply to the original post,
>>> you'll notice that I took a few random letters out of the original URL so
>>> that if someone did click on the link, it would fail
>>
>> Jim, you're way too subtle for me!
>>
>> Well, at least I *did* get a chance to shout from my soapbox ;-)

> I've chastised the odd person myself for including spam links in a reply.
> Doing so does help out the spammer by circumventing newsgroup spam filters.
> I guess it was hard to see... I should have just left it out, or filled
> it with xxx's

Or found a more observant audience :-)

You are, of course, right about making the change more obvious - and
I'll try to remember this exchange of ideas for my own use...

--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino) letters617blochg3251
(replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom")