Re: New SCAM "Sham vs. Wham: The Health Insider"

On May 1, 12:02 pm, "Paul T. Holland" <pholl...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
now now david - do you really think we are so naive and/or stupid?

everybody here knows rule number one:

spammers lie - and your lie isn't a very good one

of course there are click thrus

but, to be fair, you don't get a small ad payment -

because the click goes to 'your' website selling the artic root...and
that makes you a liar...

just because you registered proactivebio.com anonymously thru domains by
proxy doesn't mean we don't know who runs it...sheeesh you are the
company president after all

it's at the same address as your careertrax business, which has been
around the net a very long time

and golly gee, you put it out on the wire just last week:
SEDONA, AZ -- (MARKET WIRE) -- April 20, 2007...
ProActive BioProducts, Inc...
Just ask Dave Jensen, President of ProActive BioProducts, Inc...

and linda jenson is co-founder and customer relations... she the wife?

actually, don't bother to answer - just go away

djense...@xxxxxxx wrote:

On Apr 30, 4:21 pm, "lightlady" <l...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
yup, click-thrus and 'impressions' is how they make money... just going to
the site, the advertisers get the 'impression' you've seen their ad. LOL

--
lampy

"Paul T. Holland" <pholl...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in messagenews:463665F4.CEF99FB1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

such an innocent!

it's about the 'click thru' advertising payments. google places ads, as
well as any the 'blogger' can get on their own. in some cases, each time
someone visits the site itself - it's counts 'as an ad view', other
contracts call for you to actually click on the ad for the site to get
credit

couple pennies each time adds up...

Carol J wrote:

What is the big deal with blogs these days? I've been in groups for ten
years now, I just can't see the thrill of having a blog, then sending
the
link out to everybody and their brother to read it? Am I missing
something
with this?

Carol J

You guys are a bunch of tough critics . . . the kind who don't even
look at something they "review"!

The website Sham vs. Wham is not an advertising driven commentary.
It's free of "click through's" and everything else you guys accuse it
of!

In the olden days, before people grew weary of trying to figure out
goofy usenet programs like Google Groups, you'd see "Sham vs. Wham" as
a usenet discussion. Now, people are gravitating to web based
discussions. Check out the commentary about Icelandic "Angelica
archangelica," a product that many Icelanders use for fibromyalgia.

Let's face it -- even the moderator here says the group has been slow.
That's just true of the usenet in general. Its old-fashioned, and too
few people know how to use and read it. That's why there is such a web-
based discussion forum and "blog" growth right now.

D.

http://shamvswham.blogspot.com

Paul, what are you, some kind of newsgroup groupie? You want to
impress all your friends with your detective work? Read the author's
biosketch on the page. I'm a business owner, duh. My profile is quite
complete, unlike your mystery man credentials.

In the past issues of http://shamvswham.blogspot.com/ there have been
discussions of:

- Most recent research on Pistachios and good health (WHAM)
- Most recent research on Green Tea, which failed as a diet aid (SHAM)
- The science of "Borrowing" Research (SHAM)
- Icelandic herbs and remedies for energy, prostate conditions, throat
(WHAM).

Please note that NONE of those have anything to do with my business.
However, as I write, I will certainly make it a point to talk about
cliical trials and research done by our company, just as I would any
other supplier of health products. You must be an older, retired
gentleman (my guess) to have all that time on your hands for
"research." I guess you don't have any web pages yourself, because the
number one thing you need to do to prevent spam is to register through
a proxy. That's not a "trick." And, my name and credentials are up top
on every business or website that I run. The definition of a click-
through, in my opinion, is something paid for by a company, or in
other words, an ad. Each product or article referenced on the site
gets a link -- so far, that includes research from the California
Pistachio Commission, the American Botanical Council (both of those
are non-profits), Medicine Hunter (Chris Kilham, a consultant),
SagaMedica (a non-paying company with a good product in Iceland), and
Arctic Root (a product of Swedish Herbal Institute, which one of my
companies distributes). There may be a couple of other links that I
can't remember, but they aren't Google ads or anything stuck in there
out of context of the articles.

Paul, just stick to fishing or bird watching, please. Avoid
"research'" -- it doesn't suit you.

D.

.

Quantcast