Comments on: Spam

By: Donnie-Dumbo

Donnie-Dumbo — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 12:25:52 +0000

New tactics for blog spammers:
- go completely off topic and talk *$h!t, people will feel sorry for you and leave your link up
- hide the fact that you don’t have anything much to contribute to the discussion by pretending you were cut off half wa

By: hypnotoad

hypnotoad — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:29:36 +0000

ima try out the 2nd one on the nxt ppl i spamz0r! XDXDXD
[btw this site pwnz! thanx 4 all da funny shit! XD =D]

By: The headless

The headless — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 14:59:56 +0000

Look! This is SPAM too!… O_o

By: The Pragmatist

The Pragmatist — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:50:40 +0000

Just catching up with these, and I have to say, I prefer Immanent destruction. An E Mail that imprints the philosophical idea of destruciton onto your very self – now THAT sounds like a pretty dangerous pieced of spam !

By: Dan Fish

Dan Fish — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 13:04:24 +0000

Spam is traditionally full of typos anyway – i thought it was deliberate.

By: w_nightsahde

w_nightsahde — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:39:23 +0000

I think misspelling in a spam message adds verisimilitude.

By: Merlin

Merlin — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 08:31:48 +0000

Maybe that’s what I meant? Okay, no, I guess it wasn’t. Will fix later on today – well spotted!

By: Zaratustra

Zaratustra — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 04:39:15 +0000

Hate to be the ass that corrects other people’s spelling, but… ‘imminent’. ‘Immanent’ destruction would be if the message somehow imprinted the philosophical idea of destruction into your very self.