I was doing my quarterly trio of “ego searches” just for fun (Yahoo! shows the largest ‘result count’ this time around for “Walt Crawford” and “Cites & Insights,” Google for “Walt at Random”), and decided to explore the first page or two of Google’s absurdly large “Walt at Random” result set (40,700).
Very informative. It showed me 89 items. Everything else–presumably, more than 40,600–was “very similar” or whatever the term is. (I didn’t redo the search.)
[Yahoo! finds 346 out of its claimed 27,300. That’s more plausible, although a lot of those links make no sense at all. The ways of spam sites are passing strange…]
As I finish this coffee break, one word of advice to the spammers who don’t actually read this stuff anyway:
Telling me how wonderful my blog is and/or what a great grade you’re going to get for finding this blog on (whatever, usually a topic I’ve never commented on, and certainly not in the post it’s attempting to comment) and/or “asking for help” in setting up your blog doesn’t cause me to turn gushing idiot and approve the post. Those posts still get reported as spam based on the domain name and links. As with most spammers, you’re wasting my time and yours–and, when it gets extreme, adding to the list of topics that can’t be commented on because I add absolute word blocks.