Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

This is a public service announcement and a primer for first class spambottery. How do I maximize my spam whilest minimizing my effort you may ask?

[pause while readers ask themselves this question]

Well, I'll tell you:

1. Let others do your work for you. Witness my "+1" commentary in post 79. When someone bothers typing in and cut/paste/copying in all the text, just put a "+1" on your reply. You get to 'say' the same thing as others, but with no additional effort. In this example, after Warspite1 put forward his erudite and sophisticated argument, I merely +1'ed it. Same post count for much less effort.

2. When you're explaining your +1'ing of a conversation, don't do it in the same post as the +1 post. Do it in another. Witness this very post (80) in this thread. Sure, I could have even broken THIS post down into four or five subcomponents, but c'mon-that would be over the top lazy. I'm talking Lecivius-level lazy. That's frowned upon.

3. All good lists have three main salient points. I can't think of one here, but will enumerate it nonetheless. You can bet that if I think of one in short order, it will be posted under separate cover. See rule number 2.

I hope that clears up some things and that you n00bs have found this instructive in your journey to apprentice spambots.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

This is a public service announcement and a primer for first class spambottery. How do I maximize my spam whilest minimizing my effort you may ask?

[pause while readers ask themselves this question]

Well, I'll tell you:

1. Let others do your work for you. Witness my "+1" commentary in post 79. When someone bothers typing in and cut/paste/copying in all the text, just put a "+1" on your reply. You get to 'say' the same thing as others, but with no additional effort. In this example, after Warspite1 put forward his erudite and sophisticated argument, I merely +1'ed it. Same post count for much less effort.

2. When you're explaining your +1'ing of a conversation, don't do it in the same post as the +1 post. Do it in another. Witness this very post (80) in this thread. Sure, I could have even broken THIS post down into four or five subcomponents, but c'mon-that would be over the top lazy. I'm talking Lecivius-level lazy. That's frowned upon.

3. All good lists have three main salient points. I can't think of one here, but will enumerate it nonetheless. You can bet that if I think of one in short order, it will be posted under separate cover. See rule number 2.

I hope that clears up some things and that you n00bs have found this instructive in your journey to apprentice spambots.

warspite1

+1

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

This is a public service announcement and a primer for first class spambottery. How do I maximize my spam whilest minimizing my effort you may ask?

[pause while readers ask themselves this question]

Well, I'll tell you:

1. Let others do your work for you. Witness my "+1" commentary in post 79. When someone bothers typing in and cut/paste/copying in all the text, just put a "+1" on your reply. You get to 'say' the same thing as others, but with no additional effort. In this example, after Warspite1 put forward his erudite and sophisticated argument, I merely +1'ed it. Same post count for much less effort.

2. When you're explaining your +1'ing of a conversation, don't do it in the same post as the +1 post. Do it in another. Witness this very post (80) in this thread. Sure, I could have even broken THIS post down into four or five subcomponents, but c'mon-that would be over the top lazy. I'm talking Lecivius-level lazy. That's frowned upon.

3. All good lists have three main salient points. I can't think of one here, but will enumerate it nonetheless. You can bet that if I think of one in short order, it will be posted under separate cover. See rule number 2.

I hope that clears up some things and that you n00bs have found this instructive in your journey to apprentice spambots.

warspite1

+1

warspite1

In fact, allow me to elucidate. I second this fine piece of writing, the way you've grasped the problem, and formulated your response, with well reasoned commentary - and not being suckered in to mere Hyperbole, thus avoiding the risk of creating a polemical. Superb.

ORIGINAL: Orm

No, Chickenboy, I am not quite sure that I understand your three points. Here is why.

1) What is spambottery?
2) What is the meaning of "+1"?
3) I am still hungry.

ORIGINAL: Zap

ORIGINAL: Orm

No, Chickenboy, I am not quite sure that I understand your three points. Here is why.

1) What is spambottery?
2) What is the meaning of "+1"?
3) I am still hungry.

Chickenboy did not explain the "quote" stacking a most elevated form of spamming

ORIGINAL: Zap

ORIGINAL: Orm

No, Chickenboy, I am not quite sure that I understand your three points. Here is why.

1) What is spambottery?
2) What is the meaning of "+1"?
3) I am still hungry.

Chickenboy did not explain the "quote" stacking a most elevated form of spamming

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

ORIGINAL: Zap

ORIGINAL: Orm

No, Chickenboy, I am not quite sure that I understand your three points. Here is why.

1) What is spambottery?
2) What is the meaning of "+1"?
3) I am still hungry.

Chickenboy did not explain the "quote" stacking a most elevated form of spamming

Oh Gawds, you just invited it.

ORIGINAL: Zap

ORIGINAL: Orm

No, Chickenboy, I am not quite sure that I understand your three points. Here is why.

1) What is spambottery?
2) What is the meaning of "+1"?
3) I am still hungry.

Chickenboy did not explain the "quote" stacking a most elevated form of spamming

ORIGINAL: Zorch

This thread has just passed the Turing Test.

Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

I think Deja Vu was one of the first forms of SPAM.

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

I think Deja Vu was one of the first forms of SPAM.