Comments on: Our resident spammer http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/ Just another WordPress weblog Tue, 07 Oct 2008 14:03:02 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: Administrator http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2421 Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:19:55 +0000 http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2421 Ballpoint Wren blogged this post as well. Her trackback didn't make it, so here's the link: http://www.bonniewren.com/2006/?p=91 Ballpoint Wren blogged this post as well. Her trackback didn’t make it, so here’s the link:
http://www.bonniewren.com/2006/?p=91

]]> by: seo black & white http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2419 Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:24:23 +0000 http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2419 About legal vs. illegal. I've got nothing against death of linkspam. I personaly like ideas like openid, captcha, comment moderation etc, etc. The issue I care about is not juridical status by itself. I have already stated that it is not problem to me been completely illegal (if it fits in my personal view on ethic - the good example is illegal drugs). All I care is yet another possible area controlable by the law which (law) has already proven (to me) to fail on much simple issues. My interest on civil rights didn't born due to any of my job. It is all due to my personal experience and doesn't related to any well known writings. Please be more close to reality and don't think that any libertarian smelling phraces in any linkspam belong to me. About legal vs. illegal. I’ve got nothing against death of linkspam. I personaly like ideas like openid, captcha, comment moderation etc, etc. The issue I care about is not juridical status by itself. I have already stated that it is not problem to me been completely illegal (if it fits in my personal view on ethic - the good example is illegal drugs). All I care is yet another possible area controlable by the law which (law) has already proven (to me) to fail on much simple issues.

My interest on civil rights didn’t born due to any of my job. It is all due to my personal experience and doesn’t related to any well known writings. Please be more close to reality and don’t think that any libertarian smelling phraces in any linkspam belong to me.

]]> by: seo black & white http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2418 Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:56:17 +0000 http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2418 I had not heard about SEO before june 2005. Period. I had not heard about SEO before june 2005. Period.

]]> by: Administrator http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2417 Mon, 16 Jan 2006 12:53:08 +0000 http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2417 Heh, I noted you didn't specifically admit to the Tigerspice campaign. But it's not a prerequisite for a linkspammer to know about the SEO industry in the beginning of his spamming career. If this isn't typical of you, I don't know what is: http://aslowerpace.com/serendipity/archives/318-Waiting-for-a-Christmas-sale......html That quote is attributed to Noam Chomsky - http://www.chomsky.info/ I found that quote used by a linkspammer as early as December 2004. I found another quote, attributed to Friederich Hayek, from The Constitution of Liberty, here: http://www.inthesetimes.com/comments.php?id=87_0_2_0_C I don't know of any other linkspammer with an outspoken interest in civil rights? In fact, most of the hits in Google for "as contrasted with their clumsy totalitarian" is probably your spam. And the e-mail address is also interesting. Nonsense. Which has been mentioned in connection with you before, Sergey. Heh, I noted you didn’t specifically admit to the Tigerspice campaign. But it’s not a prerequisite for a linkspammer to know about the SEO industry in the beginning of his spamming career.

If this isn’t typical of you, I don’t know what is:
http://aslowerpace.com/serendipity/archives/318-Waiting-for-a-Christmas-sale……html

That quote is attributed to Noam Chomsky - http://www.chomsky.info/

I found that quote used by a linkspammer as early as December 2004.

I found another quote, attributed to Friederich Hayek, from The Constitution of Liberty, here:

http://www.inthesetimes.com/comments.php?id=87_0_2_0_C

I don’t know of any other linkspammer with an outspoken interest in civil rights?

In fact, most of the hits in Google for “as contrasted
with their clumsy totalitarian” is probably your spam.

And the e-mail address is also interesting. Nonsense. Which has been mentioned in connection with you before, Sergey.

]]> by: Administrator http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2414 Mon, 16 Jan 2006 11:03:26 +0000 http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2414 The opposing views is exactly why I wasn't looking to chase you off the site, Sergey. Remember though that I have no control over what other people write about you on their sites. There were a lot of feelings stirred up over that Tigerspice spam campaign. And yes, I see what you mean about the ethical and the legal issues. There are a lot of people who get lost on that issue. Even if linkspam per definition is not illegal the same way e-mail spam is, you spammers are not as squeaky clean as you want to make people think, legally. I'll get back to that later. The opposing views is exactly why I wasn’t looking to chase you off the site, Sergey. Remember though that I have no control over what other people write about you on their sites. There were a lot of feelings stirred up over that Tigerspice spam campaign.

And yes, I see what you mean about the ethical and the legal issues. There are a lot of people who get lost on that issue.

Even if linkspam per definition is not illegal the same way e-mail spam is, you spammers are not as squeaky clean as you want to make people think, legally. I’ll get back to that later.

]]> by: seo black & white http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2410 Mon, 16 Jan 2006 08:38:11 +0000 http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2410 Thank for a good and polite review. Two notes: 1) I don't like freebsd (or other bsds). 2) I had not heard about SEO before june 2005. About your direct questions to me: 1) I feel rather good to live in dangerous situation. 2) Current situation is not dangerous at all. Black hat SEO is mostly legal no matter what any peoples think about it (including you and me). I have to say that I personally was involved in some illegal activities in the past (mostly illegal drugs and illegal immigration but there are some others) so I think I know the difference. I also was indirectly involved in im and smtp spam in the ancient days (before their wide criminalisation in many countries). Coexistence of black/white persons was rather common in my smtp/im spam days (though allmost all blacks were not openly black). From my experience both sides are biased. I personally found that smtp anti-spam activity is much harmful (for me) than smtp spam itself. As ordinary person (not as professional) of any kind I really don't like that to happen for black hat seo. As I already said I'm quite familiar with some illegal activities. From my angle of view the harm of state corruption is much heavy for that activities than harm from all that activities by itself (at least in Moscow, Russia). I just don't want that to happen for black hat seo case. To me you just a great opponent who clearly can separate out ethical and legal issues. The fact that I in many cases doesn't follow the ethic doesn't prevent me from understanding ethical issues. And I clearly prefer the dialog rather than any fight. SEO is almost certainly not my last professional activity. Even if I clearly biased (because of my position) I'm always trying to understand the other side. You are smart and open to discussion at the same time so that is exactly what I need. Thank you. Thank for a good and polite review.
Two notes:
1) I don’t like freebsd (or other bsds).
2) I had not heard about SEO before june 2005.

About your direct questions to me:
1) I feel rather good to live in dangerous situation.
2) Current situation is not dangerous at all.

Black hat SEO is mostly legal no matter what any peoples think about it (including you and me). I have to say that I personally was involved in some illegal activities in the past (mostly illegal drugs and illegal immigration but there are some others) so I think I know the difference. I also was indirectly involved in im and smtp spam in the ancient days (before their wide criminalisation in many countries). Coexistence of black/white persons was rather common in my smtp/im spam days (though allmost all blacks were not openly black).

From my experience both sides are biased. I personally found that smtp anti-spam activity is much harmful (for me) than smtp spam itself. As ordinary person (not as professional) of any kind I really don’t like that to happen for black hat seo.

As I already said I’m quite familiar with some illegal activities. From my angle of view the harm of state corruption is much heavy for that activities than harm from all that activities by itself (at least in Moscow, Russia). I just don’t want that to happen for black hat seo case.

To me you just a great opponent who clearly can separate out ethical and legal issues. The fact that I in many cases doesn’t follow the ethic doesn’t prevent me from understanding ethical issues. And I clearly prefer the dialog rather than any fight. SEO is almost certainly not my last professional activity. Even if I clearly biased (because of my position) I’m always trying to understand the other side. You are smart and open to discussion at the same time so that is exactly what I need.

Thank you.

]]> by: Administrator http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2385 Sat, 14 Jan 2006 21:50:00 +0000 http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2385 Gpshewan blogged about my post, but I didn't get a trackback, so here it is: http://gpshewan.com/articles/2006/01/14/remember-the-tigerspice-spammer Gpshewan blogged about my post, but I didn’t get a trackback, so here it is:
http://gpshewan.com/articles/2006/01/14/remember-the-tigerspice-spammer

]]> by: Administrator http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2382 Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:41:01 +0000 http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2382 Olliver: That's a very good idea. I often wish I had that. I've got some notations here and there, but it's a matter of finding it. And frankly, this would be a good idea for a collaborative effort. Anyone up for it? Oh, and it should contain more than Adsense. It should contain other affiliate ID's as well. Olliver:
That’s a very good idea. I often wish I had that. I’ve got some notations here and there, but it’s a matter of finding it. And frankly, this would be a good idea for a collaborative effort. Anyone up for it?

Oh, and it should contain more than Adsense. It should contain other affiliate ID’s as well.

]]> by: Olliver http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2381 Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:21:46 +0000 http://spamhuntress.com/2006/01/14/our-resident-spammer/#comment-2381 <i>Since Olliver already figured it out, I better post this now instead of waiting until tomorrow</i> I didn't mean to spoil your party :-). Seriously, since you've already announced a larger document, there would have been no reason not to wait for it ;-). But how about an Adsense id blacklist in your Wiki? I think this could be at least as valuable as the ip listing there. Olliver Since Olliver already figured it out, I better post this now instead of waiting until tomorrow

I didn’t mean to spoil your party :-) . Seriously, since you’ve already announced a larger document, there would have been no reason not to wait for it ;-) . But how about an Adsense id blacklist in your Wiki? I think this could be at least as valuable as the ip listing there.

Olliver

]]>