Re: New SCAM "Sham vs. Wham: The Health Insider"
- From: "Paul T. Holland" <pholland@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 23:22:36 GMT
lol
ok folks, so we see what he's made of...down to the bottom
djensen36@xxxxxxx wrote:
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:
theWhat 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
somethinglink out to everybody and their brother to read it? Am I missing
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?
lolol gosh, that's almost a troll - of course usual netiquette is to
lurk and get to know folks, but as we see quite often here, commercial
touts like yourself don't bother
You want to
impress all your friends with your detective work?
sorry to disillusion you, but i have no need for that, been around way
too long - unlike yourself, folk know me
Read the author's
biosketch on the page.
oh, i had but i also know that many wouldn't have caught the connection
between the 'bio' and the sales pitch
and it's the sales pitch that isn't looked kindly on here.
I'm a business owner, duh.
given your responses so far - 'duh' is very apt...
My profile is quite
complete,
and your retorts are noted...
unlike your mystery man credentials.
lololol if you find me a 'mystery man' then i can only question your
level of effort.
not that it's really pertinent in that it's 'your' purposes that are
under review, not mine...
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.
irrelevant - you are commercial and sales oriented
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.
and touting your entities will surely put you in great disfavor with a
great many folk here
You must be an older, retired
gentleman (my guess) to have all that time on your hands for
"research."
lol - 'guessing' is often the causative agent for misinformation - even
if correct, it fails to take intent into account
I guess you don't have any web pages yourself,
as the above would lead you astray...
because the
number one thing you need to do to prevent spam is to register through
a proxy.
not true - only for those not willing to put the proper safeguards into
play
real pro's wouldn't need to take the cheap and easy way out...
That's not a "trick."
your words not mine - i just call it fast and dirty = cheap
And, my name and credentials are up top
on every business or website that I run.
not the point - commercial entities aren't welcomed, that's all
The definition of a click-
through, in my opinion, is something paid for by a company,
splitting hairs - that is exactly what you are
or in
other words, an ad.
which, even in the context of your 'blog', it was/is
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,
the only relevant issue - is about 'your' commercial endeavors...
but they aren't Google ads or anything stuck in therethe only germane context is that of sales...
out of context of the articles.
Paul, just stick to fishing or bird watching, please.
hmmmmmm...thinking....no, i don't suppose i will
Avoid
"research'" -- it doesn't suit you.
but, it's not yours to dictate, so i think i shall do as i please. and
that includes providing information showing the commercial tie-ins for
such 'blogs' as yours...
.
D.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: New SCAM "Sham vs. Wham: The Health Insider"
- From: robbster
- Re: New SCAM "Sham vs. Wham: The Health Insider"
- From: Carol J
- Re: redux
- From: Paul T. Holland
- Re: New SCAM "Sham vs. Wham: The Health Insider"
- References:
- Re: New blog "Sham vs. Wham: The Health Insider"
- From: Paul T. Holland
- Re: New blog "Sham vs. Wham: The Health Insider"
- From: lightlady
- Re: New blog "Sham vs. Wham: The Health Insider"
- From: djensen36
- Re: New SCAM "Sham vs. Wham: The Health Insider"
- From: Paul T. Holland
- Re: New SCAM "Sham vs. Wham: The Health Insider"
- From: djensen36
- Re: New blog "Sham vs. Wham: The Health Insider"
- Prev by Date: Re: I Figured It Out
- Next by Date: Re: "Wizard of Oz" (Alternate Ending)
- Previous by thread: Re: New SCAM "Sham vs. Wham: The Health Insider"
- Next by thread: Re: redux
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|