Re: On the subject of spam, lookie here, Editor-Boy



"Big Bill" <kruse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:rcd4v1lpvl2nqsae3d08f6ob5i42hbkf2t@xxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 11:23:32 -0600, Paul B <lamewolf2004@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 17:23:26 GMT, Big Bill <kruse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Ban a couple of Beamer-type
high-profile sites and all the spammy little sites like
www.rob-james.com will clean their own house out of fear it'll happen
to them.

That's my guess anyway.

Let's hope so.
Spam is spam, not matter who you are, or how you dress it up.
*Any* site that spams like that should be banned IMHO.

plh
Paul

Why? If the site was going to be up there in the serps anyway, what
real harm does the spam on it do? Potentially, the only harm that's
likely to occur is to the site-owner himself in that it might well get
banned eventually, losing him some business and potential engagements
in, um, where were those places again...?

So tell me how do you know that the site will be up there in the SERPs
anyway? It may not. If the site should be high up without it then it doesn't
need the spam period!

Stacey
--
Rustic Lodge Decor- http://crookedcreekcountry.com
Flowers- http://allgiftshop.net/occasion-gifts/gift-baskets-flowers.htm
Home Decor- http://eleganthomedecorandgifts.com/home-decor/
Holiday Spain Rental - http://www.casamedinabahiga.com/


.