Friday - Scummy Bollocks


It's been a while. Let's redress that. Some hysterical tantrumitis from those beacons at IHY. I don't know Jim personally, though I'm sure I've bumped into him in some smoke filled barn, however, I never had him mentally coralled into the blackheartedscum pen. Whichever way he dresses, however, I failed to spot anything other than a sane and comprehensive 'wanted' ad. Apparently I was wrong:

God, that's such a typical Boykin thing...he even keyword stuffed a freakin' JOB AD.

That is pathetic.That's also typical for search engine spammers.

But of course; ya know the guy is asked to speak at all SES CONFERENCES. He's a blackhat spammer.

Another example of the crap in OUR industry.

And it ain't YOUR industry, ya twat.

Scummy Bollocks Thread


My thoughts about that

My thoughts about that particular forum owner are well documented but let me simply say that I believe Mr Boykin runs a bloody good shop and anyone who spends their time reading IHY when they could be working for Jim doesn't understand the value in being paid to learn the business from one of the better guys in the game!

Learn nothing and earn nothing at IHY -v- Getting paid to work & learn with Jim

Not really a contest is it?

c'mon guys

thats pretty spammy - I mean you do a search on that site for 'xml' or C+ and that ad comes up, and what on earth does that programming job have to do with those things? How is that helping people looking for those types of jobs? Geeze, next he'll be ranking Tech sites for pink fluffy handcuff queries and that's going to seriously disturb some very innocent minds, I can tell ya.

Anyway - he's not a very good spammer. That keyword density is crap.


Wherever it will help expose scum the most is the place it should be moved to.

Is he gunning to be school prefect or something?

Yeah, you've got to watch

Yeah, you've got to watch job offers. You never know when they might come back to haunt you. For example, Doug sent me one recently. Let's see, got it around here somewhere....

By merging our views, I believe it would be a great help to our industry as a whole. Let's face facts; if you continue on with another group, or even with your own group, you will always have that "pesky" IHY group who will be pretty much against many speakers, etc. I have a great way to get rid of all of that, and even keeping your own core people intact in some way.

It impressed me in so many ways.

First, all those years of having those so-called blackhat speakers at SES you think would put me in the never could work together camp for Doug. (Jim doesn't speak at ALL SES events, by the way -- I don't think he did Italy, China, London, but why look for accuracy?).

Second, there's the assumption that he somehow controls everyone at IHY. Interesting point here. A number of IHY folks have emailed me privately that they don't subscribe to the general attacks he's often made. And I respect that. IHY is a community, like the many communities we have on the web. Folks might have some similar views there, but I also think they have their own minds.

Third, fair to say that IHY has hardly been a hindrance to me. I suspect this is because I've tried to keep some balance and discussion in the overall community, which I think is self-evident, versus the burn 'em at the stake approach. Pitchforks!!!

Fourth, the implied threat that I either partner with Doug or he keeps on attacking. Point three covers that's a threat I'm not worried about. But I find it interesting that apparently all my wrongs (and some of those of others) can get dismissed if only Doug's going to make money off of it.

I think Jim should simply look to partner with Doug. That should magically get rid of any further problems with want ads at IHY, as best I can tell.

Oh Dear, Oh Dear, Oh Dear

Thank you for that Danny, wearing both my puerile hat and my professional hat.

Just give in man, you know you want to. Everyone would understand. Old age, conservatism, eyesight failing, it comes to us all. Mind you, in his case, his eyesight may have failed due to his head being so far up his own arse that heavy machinery will be required if he ever wants to update his profile shot ever again.

That was great, Danny

Thanks for that, Danny. That was the most hilarious thing I've heard in awhile, and after a rough week it was just what I needed to perk me up.

Too funny!


Scummy Bollocks is true. I remember D and his crew of moderators - unhelpful, arrogant bunch of wankers.... IMO ;)

For over a decade now I've

For over a decade now I've made it a point to seek out and familiarize myself with just about anyone that has ever said anything remotely intelligent regarding internet marketing or search engines.

I'm sorry but I'm not familiar with this IHY doug person. Is that the guy who won the fantomaster software at last year's SEO Roadshow?

It sounds like someone who is so desparate for attention they will go to great lengths to get people he actually respects to simply pay attention to him. That's so sad. :(

Bob let me introduce you to

Bob let me introduce you to the man with a plan...

He's a man with a plan...

..... he's mistra know it all by Stevie Wonder


Doug's links wear berka's to remain modest and spam free.


...that Holier Than Thou attitude is far more insidious and destructive than kw stuffing. ;-)

I wish I had an 1/8th of the

I wish I had an 1/8th of the written grace of Danny. That was a fabulous post.


>>>Is that the guy who won the fantomaster software at last year's SEO Roadshow?


My mate Paul won the

My mate Paul won the software. Mr H, are you about mate ?

The interesting thing...

...about what Danny said, is how so many of the moderators at IHY see fit to email Danny privately to make sure he knows that they don't agree with ole Dougie boy. But if that's the case, what kind of weirdo stays there and lets Doug speak for them publicly while espousing something else privately?

Any decent moderator with any self respect that was ever a part of IHY left long ago when Doug got off his meds. In fact, my buddy Scottie has a theory about this. She thinks that Doug actually has all the mods there wrapped up tightly in his freezer, and this way he does all the talking for them on the forum. At first I thought she was kidding...but with that email he sent to Danny...I'm not so sure anymore...

I wish I had an 1/8th of the

I wish I had an 1/8th of the written grace of Danny.

Yeah, pure class.

And I'm laughing my ass off this morning, didn't know I missed these Dougie threads so much. Great fun on a Friday.

And just picturing DH at a roadshow? Priceless.


Keep your "needs" short

Be as specific as you can about your needs and qualifications. Try to keep this concise. No more than two sentences. A long needs list can discourage even the most qualified candidates.

Use keywords

Since about 60% of the job seekers search for ads using one or two word phrases, make sure words that are typical for the job are in the ad.

Frankly I think sites who publish guidelines for content which might be construed as opposing Googles guidelines should be banned or something.

the law of unintended consequences

what should really burn doug's ass is that he's just succeeded in getting that ad about 100x as much visibility as it would've gotten otherwise. keep on fighting that "wanted ad spam", jackass!

jim ought to get some good employee prospects out of this.

@grasshopper: Perhaps it

@grasshopper: Perhaps it wasn't unintentional and Jim and Doug have an secret alliance. I wonder who's going to get voted off SEO Island next.

I think IHY misread why he added those terms

I don't think Boykin added those terms to spam the search engines. I think he did it to work with how the site works.

The site has a "find by keyword" feature. They kind of need that feature, because if you are trying to find anything on the site any other way it's not all that easy.

So, to get found by someone on the site and looking for ads involving their skill set, you need to add a bunch of relevant keywords so that you come up in the site search keyword results.

It doesn't show to me that Boykin was an evil spammer. It shows that he was thinking about the limitations of the local search board's interface and working to get his ad some visibility on that board.

Me, I would want someone with that kind of perceptiveness optimizing my site, and not someone so quick to throw rocks that they completely fail to stop and think about what actually might be going on here.

Either way, who the heck is this Doug Heil guy at IHY and what is his problem in life? I'm guessing it started with the inevitable Sieg Heil teasing on the school yard playground. In one thread he goes off on several different people personally, and gratuitously, and on Threadwatch as an entity. It's not good to be carrying around that much anger.

I say this out of compassion

I say this out of compassion not criticism, Mr Hiel would almost certainly benefit from the services of a mental health professional.

keywords: loon, mad, crazy, check up from the neck up, narcissistic personality disorder, twat.

Outed SearchGuild

A few months ago.. when they outed SearchGuild it drew the line for me...

IHY is equal to SEO as The Onion is equal to Political news

I can't believe any of y'all

I can't believe any of y'all even look at that forum. Why waste the time?

>even look at that forum

>even look at that forum<

Here here grnidone!

Fun to check back in on IHY after so long....

Man, they been in-breeding over there or something? Finally left the rational world behind and devolved into a bunch of self-congratulating, Guideline thumping, banjo-playing, Googleshine swilling, buck-toothed Heil-minions?

It's a freaking job listing - get back to work you layabouts.

Yup, I'm a keyword stuffer

Yea, I add keywords on the bottom of my ads because I don't think about optimization in my ads themselves...and yea, people searching on that site wouldn't find my ad w/o them.

So long as we're looking at ads, here my other ad:
and yea, I tossed keywords as the end of that ad too.

As far ad Doug don't have anything good to say, so I won't say anything (same as I'll stay away from politics). Maybe some day Doug and I can pass around a peace pipe together ;)

Black Hat 12 Step Plan: Step 1 (Honesty)

Hi my name is Job Ad Spammer. My favorite person in the industry is no one, I just love reading their posts. Especially when they are on Forums are dumb. Previous to this I was involved in Linux Administrator stuff, but then I discovered seo and its so exciting. I can't wait to learn more. Some more about me... well I also love my pet Penguins , I think I'd be lost with out my pets. Also my favorite color is Black. As far as that hat type of seo I perform, my approach is more along the lines of black hat. I look forward to reading and learning more here every day.

Thanks so much

Job Ad Spammer

insane or retarded?

Its really hard to say which one Doug is.

Yet, I marvel at how he has managed to get AND maintain a community over all these years. To me its proof that if someone is persistent, no matter how much crap he spews, he will eventually get a following. Truly amazing. Doug is like the Forest Gump of the SEO world, but without the charm.

Logo alt tag

If I was a white hat the alt tag on my logo would be alt="Company Name - Logo" or similar, so that those that don't display images, or are using screen readers know that this is my logo.

Some sites, that claim to be white hat, have an alt tag of alt="Search Engine Optimization Home" on their company logo.

Looks a bit spammy black hat to me.

Ya Know . . . . .

anyone posting here is a nasty, black-hatted spammer purely by association . . . . . or at least that's what I read over there at I Hate Youall . . . .

the I Hate You joke continues...

c'mon guys. I've seen this chatter about this mythical guy Doug Heel and the I Hate You forums for years. Yeah, at first I fell for it. But c'mon, it's really getting old, isn't it?


insane or retarded?
Its really hard to say which one Doug is.

For those of you who don't know Littleman, he's not saying that as a joke. He's dead serious. And that's what makes that statement *so* funny.

Not to mention...

...that Dougie eats this stuff up. This thread just plays into his delusions of granduer, unfortunately.

If this were my forum, I'd be putting this thread behind closed doors about now so as not to provide Dougie with any more glee...'re joking're joking right? my alt tag on the homepage say...gasp "Search engine optimization home"...shocking!

oh...I just looked at the site in your profile...and gasp, your logo has the alt text of "keyword-keyword"...if it's spammy for me...then it's spammy black hat for you too....

oh...and I'm not all white...I've got some grey around the edges ;)

Tough Crowd

Gee Jim, I thought Chuck wrote those ad's, you'd better teach him about keyword stuffing one more time. Hey, maybe he wasn't cut out for ad writing after all.....Let him try his hand at link building instead. Whatever you do DON'T let him blog, you already have that covered.

Just bust'n ya, Hope all is well at WBP, tell the guy's hi for me :)

Damn, Jill, you're right

it totally fits into the martyr mentallity.

BTW, kudos for not falling for his "Jill is evil" song and dance. Same to danny for highlighting his blackmail. It cracked me up to see someone call him on it. For some reason it reminded me of the Zimmerman Note.


What a hoot. The real insult Jim should be taking away from this isn't that he's a nefarious black hat, but that if he was doing black hat it would be at the level of keyword stuffing. If Jim's doing black hat there's no way these folks are going to discover it. Reminds me of Crocodile Dundee; That's not black hat, THIS is black hat.

I'm a bit surprised that someone would criticise someone like Jim. It makes the accuser look bad, not him. I'm not looking to have a group hug with him or anything, but I'd be hard pressed to find an all around nicer guy in this industry than Jim.

Uh oh...

BTW, kudos for not falling for his "Jill is evil" song and dance.

See...I purposely didn't click through to that thread, cuz again, it's what he wants. But now you're really tempting me here...damn you!

Well . . . .

. . . he didn't use the word "evil", but you probably get the drift. Maybe I should have put it as "Jill is mean". lol

Jim - not joking..

But I was talking about where such practices would be so evil that they should not even be mentioned. Doug would not do anything that is for search engines, but not visitors, oh, except spam his alt tags on his main logo...


That's my comment - bloody nob hounds

I am going to invoke Godwins

I am going to invoke Godwins Law so we can all move on with our lives.

IHY are a bunch of Fundamentalist NAZI's.

there we're done


I fell for

Jill is evil....

Sorry Jill


>It is considered poor form to arbitrarily raise such a comparison with the motive of ending the thread. There is a widely recognized codicil that any such ulterior-motive invocation of Godwin's Law (in the above sense) will be unsuccessful.

I know but I had to try :-(

I know but I had to try :-(

I really have to wonder why

I really have to wonder why a post at IHY which was not started by Doug has caused so much comment?

Personally I do not think Danny S revealed the full story of his email from Doug. Danny if your going to post comments from a personal email, I think you should post the entire email. It is very easy to take a paragraph out of context. I think that is what you did.

You took an attempt by Doug to heal the breach. to widen it further.

I thought you were making an attempt to blurry the hatchet when you mentioned IHY as a resource for new webmasters in your blog. I guess not based on this post.

I guess not since you posted part of a personal email in a blog.

Jill I could care less what you think of me. In all likely hood you may be correct.

Your blanket statement about all IHY moderators is not correct.

It is not anymore correct than If I made a blanket statement about all your moderators. I can't make such a blanket statement, because I respect several of your moderators.

At least one of your moderators, is a moderator in both forums at this time. Is that moderator in "Doug's Freezer"?


....and Charlie Brown picks up the phone and hears "Gwaa Gwaa...Gwaa Gwaa Gwaa Gwaa...Gwaa Gwaa Gwaa Gwaa"

Bloody Hell!

Whats wrong with you petty bunch?
Stop worrying about the little things and start thinking about the big things...stop squawking and get a life.


Black hat, white hat, ass hat who really cares. Anyone reading that thread can pretty quickly work out who the professionals are.

really have to wonder why a

really have to wonder why a post at IHY which was not started by Doug has caused so much comment?

That is ironic, given that IHY is the most outwardly looking forum there is! Y'all obsess all the time about what everyone else is doing. Heck, it is actually the IHY raison d'etre, the mission if you will, to keep tabs on everyone else and report back.

Personally I do not think Danny S revealed the full story of his email from Doug. Danny if your going to post comments from a personal email, I think you should post the entire email

So posting MORE of a personal email is better???!?!?? Strange! Why not just ask Doug to forward the email to you Connie? He is, after all, your mate, and I am sure that would clarrify your concerns. You could then post as much, or as little, as you like, wherever and whenever you like.

Besides, I am sure you havce internet access in the freezer (joke!)


It's a weird thread I have to say and a tad over the top reaction to the ad. Most job postings want keywords in the post to help prospective job applicants find the ad easier. It helps not only the employer but potential employee. If I'm wrong, half the ads on Monster and Career Builder are put up by black hat spammers.

As for his comment on Jim and WeBuildPages ability, he is wrong. I've seen some of their work, and they were ranking very well for an extremely competitive industry. That is not a fluke, and I've learned a lot about link building from Jim's blog and postings.

I guess I'm just confused with what the forum is about. It seems most of the posts are about witch hunts for this spammer or that spammer. I understand that it may fill some feeling of insecurity or self-worth, but I don't feel it improves their forums in any way. Most of the attacks are based purely on speculation and simply guilt by association. I'd be labeled as a spammer for simply posting here, yet no one there has seen a single site I own or operate.

Maybe I just have a different philosophy in not really caring what other people do with their sites. I tend to worry about my own sites, my own money, and my own ethics. The forums are not nearly as active as they once were and there are few people posting regularly over there. It is clear that perhaps some of their practices have hurt the forums. But if name calling, witch hunts, and defamation fill the void in their life, more power to them. Just seems all too parallel to the religous groups that seem more worried about pushing their moral views on others than their own lives.

All the time you ain't talking ..

.. a schizo who waves a machete down your street - you are talking about someone who is inherently decent.

We might have our differences - but....

... if you been through what I've been through the last few days you'd understand.

Just to clear things up

For the record: I never said all moderators at IHY were anything.

I did come up with a theory to explain why some people who were perfectly nice, reasonable people suddenly underwent a radical personality shift when they became mods at IHY: Doug had kidnapped them and stored them in a freezer in his basement in order to take over their online personas.

The theory occurred to me about the time that UK SEO went missing from the New Orleans conference. That incident made me wonder... how many other crimes and intrigues are being enacted in our little SEO community...?

Just having a little fun, people! Don't take it so seriously. If anyone seriously thinks that Doug has bodies of his moderators stuffed in his freezer so that he can post all day long as different people, my sincere apologies. ;)

(You have to admit, it would make a great premise for a mystery /suspense book...)

Well Jim/Jill should be

Well Jim/Jill should be happy, as Oscar Wilde once said, "The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.” I guess Doug knows that too, that is why he keeps trying to throw out the linkbait...

Never heard of him. Is that

Never heard of him. Is that a forum for retards? Everyone seems to have a "page in Google" there.

Funny to see aaron being less of a statesman over there though ;-)

I am...

innocent. It must have been one of my other accounts ;)

If only Doug could code his

If only Doug could code his client's sites as well as moaning about others' legitimate work.

Doug, when will you learn mate?


that would be an awful read. ;-)


..... is that the Connie that is chick with a --- em beard and Harry Potter hat????

What I think is that someone is pi$$ed off because people like Danny S, Aaron and co actually make money out of this and that other twat just has a forum that one gets to "buy into upgrade" (or whatever) just to get a load of bollocks and some whiny bastard slamming every post or honest question.


Go Chelsea

As the Viennese are so fond of saying:

"Don't even ignore him."

That's certain to hurt the most, just as Nick's Oscar Wilde quote indicates ...

> Personally I do not think

> Personally I do not think Danny S revealed the full story of his email from Doug. Danny if your going to post comments from a personal email, I think you should post the entire email. It is very easy to take a paragraph out of context. I think that is what you did.

Wow -- so let me get this straight. You've got some people at IHY upset because I posted something from a supposedly "private" email sent to me. Then you want me to repost the entire thing? Go have a vote, then let me know which way it goes.

I received two emails from Doug. He's got them both, as he's the one who sent them. Tell him to post the entire emails, if you want to see if I've twisted things out of context.

Of course, I see he says this:

> I have zero problem showing Connie the email, but I highly doubt he's that interested in seeing it.

If he's got zero problems, away you go. Clearly you are interested. Ball's in Doug's court.

FYI, an email I get sent to me out of the blue is not necessarily private. I have no relationship with Doug. I didn't ask him to send me such a jaw-dropping email. I quoted a small portion I found interesting given the heaps of very public scorn and statements he's been happy to make at me. I didn't post the entire thing because there were some plans and dates I figured Doug probably didn't want revealed, nor did I feel necessary to mention. Also, no -- I don't considered he spammed me or sent UCE with the email. I'm not on some list that's coming automatically to me, which is how I tend to define spam.

Email Privacy

Speaking as a lawyer, the notion that you have some privacy interest in an email you have sent out of the blue to someone is laughable. Once they have it, they can do what they want with it - post it on a billboard by the side of the highway, make a website out of it, forward it to their 100,000 closest friends, and so on.

That's why stuff that's supposed to be confidential comes with a little disclaimer at the bottom laying out the terms of use. If you get emails from lawyers, you know the drill - this is a privileged and confidential communication intended only for the eyes of John Recipient, if you get it by mistake you should delete it immediately, and so on. I have doubts as to how enforceable even that is if someone really wanted to push it.

A good rule is one the mother of one of my high school friends used to recite to us as we headed out with the gang on Friday or Saturday nights - even if you think no one is watching, don't do anything that you would be embarrassed to see on the front page of the newspaper the next morning. (Not that I always follow that rule - I've done things, and sent emails, that I regretted the moment the act was done; however, to the extent I got called on it, it was all fair dinkum).

Big raging hypocrites (and yeah, I can be one of those on occasion too) have a problem with being revealed in public for things they do in private. Other folks generally don't.

Getting really confused here

Reading the thread at IHY, I'm getting really confused. Some questions:

1) Is everyone else at TW really blackhat? I know I'm not, at least as I understand the term (no cloaking, no spamming, no stuffing, no link brokering, no doing anything that would give Matt Cutts dyspepsia). I'm not claiming to be particularly moral; it's more that I recognize that I'm not nimble enough to do that kind of stuff and get away with it.

2) I note that Matt Cutts posts here from time to time. Is he blackhat because he is associated with TW, or just gray hat because he is only a little bit associated with TW? And how about Eric Schmidt - is the CEO of Google blackhat because he shared a stage with Danny Sullivan? And what is it that makes Danny so black hat anyhow? I always kind of viewed him as just reporting what was happening, not as someone evangelizing for the dark side.

3) To be whitehat, do you have to be really, really, really judgmental about everyone else who operates a website or who does a little SEO? If you are content to just do your own thing and not worry too much about what DaveN is up to this week, does that make you a black hat because those who are not with us are against us? If Jill Whalen is not really a white hat, who, other than the folks at at IHY, really are White Hats? Is anyone else reminded of schismatic conflicts among obscure monogenetic anabaptist sects?

4) To be whitehat, do you have to cuss a lot, and call people names on your public website that my mother always told me not to use? If so, I'm going to have to rethink my whitehatishness, because I'm trying to do less of that kind of stuff, not more.

5) What kind of doofus sends an unveiled threat (partner with me or fear me) to someone who is not a friend and then gets surprised when the threat is published? I mean, how totally stupid do you have to be to assume that someone you don't like and sometimes publicly insult might not much care if you would be embarrassed? Aren't privacy expectations based on their being a relationship or a setting which creates reasonable expectations of privacy, rather than your doing something that you really, really had hoped no one would hear about? Isn't objecting to this email being published kind of like the hold up guy complaining that the security cam at the 7-11 should have been kept private?

Raycam. It's the simple difference between...

..."average whitehat" (RAL 9002 or thereabouts) and "pointy whitehat".

Besides, *all* whitehats tend to *generalise* LOL

> Is everyone else at TW really blackhat?

No. The idea is laughable.

> Aren't privacy expectations based on their being a relationship or a setting which creates reasonable expectations of privacy

I hadn't thought of the expectation aspect; thanks.

Wit's got it right

Yes, Wit beat me to it with:

..."average whitehat" (RAL 9002 or thereabouts) and "pointy whitehat".

There are some posts somewhere where I turned in my whitehat since it apparently meant I had to:

1. Never speak to a spammer
2. Never be in the same room or forum with a spammer
3. Out spammers both publicly and privately
4. Burn crosses on spammers lawns
5. Wear a pointy white hat with a hood and eyeholes
6. Believe that certain website design principles were spam (even if they weren't being used deceptively)
7. Worship the Church of Heil
8. Be a hypocrite
9. Only be "ethical" when it comes to search engines and spam, but live the rest of my life without care for morals, principles, values and ethics.

There are probably a few more pointy white hat rules I'm forgetting about, but those cover the most basic.


..... get someone's hard earned $$, entice them into a private forum and get slammed for every reasonable question asked....

Now who was that old sow building a shitty search engine????

Definition of Narcissistic Personality Disorder

[url= ]From Wikipedia[/url]
1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance
2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by other special people
4. requires excessive admiration
5. strong sense of entitlement
6. takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
7. lacks empathy
8. is often envious or believes others are envious of him
9. arrogant affect

Draw your own conclusions.

I also find it creepy that savvy1 enjoys imagining Jill and I in a freezer together... I guess that explains a lot about the way her mind works... ;-)


I don't think I could even make up a more accurate definition/description of Doug.

Too scary...

Make a new Wiki page then...

...and redirect it heheh.

Some people are just phuct

Some people are just phuct in the head, and don't even know it.

Insane combative fundamentalist occultic nazi retard

You forgot his propensity towards loving to argue webprofessor, and trying to get others to drink his kool-aid. The man never ceases to amaze me. I think you have a pretty legit theory their Scottie - and thank you Jill for distinguishing between "white hat" and "pointy white hat" :)

>insane or retarded
Man, I've TRIED to keep my mouth shut on a lot of occassions - mainly because he attempts the worst type of linkbait there is in my opinion (attack hook - and has managed to succeed once again). There's nothing I dislike more than wasting time arguing - but MAN - when someone is this RIDICULOUS and WRONG all the time, you sometimes are drawn into giving your rant at least once.

When you look up "troll" in the dictionary, it oughta have a picture of DH. I'm long past trying to debate logic with crazy, so I'll just resort to some juvenile namecalling and call it a day:)

Seriously, do people BELIEVE anything this crazy person says? I may be a spammer (in the eyes of the fundamentalist extremist white-hat militia right) - but at least I'm not f*ckin' CRAZY.

Ugh...more bytes wasted on this moron.

If he breaks out the kool-aid guys.....RUN!!!

You might be a

You might be a self-admitted, black-hearted spammer, Todd, but I always enjoy your cool, clear-headed take on things.

Break Out The Cool Aid?

Wish someone would and I could drift away from all this bile.
Who really gives a shit anyway?
Danny is, I'm sure, quite capable of fighting his own battles without the divine intervention of the TW posse.

>self admitted

Thanks Jim...though I'm far from a self admitted black hat - I find the concepts of spam fairly fascinating at times, but I don't engage in 99% of the techniques myself. I will only admit that the "pointy white hat" camp thinks of me that way. In my own mind, I'm white hat, or at worst a VERY light shade of grey...though I tend to not give much buy-in to the whole "hats" concept.

...and again, I am sucked into the "hats" debate...grr...back to yardwork:)

Spammy McBlackhatterstein

Thats what we call you behind your back, Todd

Well Todd...

You did work with that evil spammer, Jim, so certainly some had to rub off! ahahahahaa.... ;)

Spam niggers

Isn't that what those "pointed white hats" (great expression, BTW) are fretting about at heart, if not (yet) in as many words?

Of course, in general people will only get worked up about stuff that somehow mirrors what's actually teeming and seeting in the depths of their very own dark souls, heh ...

From the sound of it, maybe

From the sound of it, maybe it's not White hat, but Aryan Hat?

As for using wikipedia to diagnose personality disorders.... sorry, I can't understand that one bit. The DSM is scary enough in it's ridiculousness in assigning diagnoses via allegedly observed behaviors.


Ni..? That's a highly offensive term in the US... you may want to edit that. It may not have the same connotations in the UK but it's extremely offensive in these parts. I don't think you really want to go there...

I'm hardly diagnosing anyone; this isn't a psycologists office! The details are interesting though in how they mesh with observed behavior.

Some more details from the Wikipedia:

Narcissism is a psychological disorder resulting from a person’s belief that he or she is flawed in a way that makes the person fundamentally unacceptable to others [4].

This belief is held below the person’s conscious awareness; such a person would typically deny thinking such a thing if questioned. In order to protect themselves against the intolerably painful rejection and isolation they imagine would follow if others recognized their supposedly defective nature, such people make strong attempts to control others’ view of them and behavior towards them.
People who are narcissistic commonly feel rejected, humiliated and threatened when criticised. To protect themselves from these dangers, they often react with disdain, rage, and/or defiance to any slight, real or imagined.
It is unusual for people suffering from narcissism to seek treatment for their problems, or even to consider that they might have a problem [9]. The fears that narcissistic people have of being inadequate make it very difficult for them to imagine having “something wrong” with them, and they certainly would not feel safe in acknowledging these fears to another person.
Unfortunately, narcissism is a relatively stable condition and tends to remain relatively unchanged over one’s lifetime. Current treatments for psychological disorders have little help to offer narcissistic people.

Not trying to be funny, I really think he can't help it.

What is interesting to me is the people who were once rational and reasonable becoming so angry and judgemental. I think some are suffering from groupthink:

In defining groupthink, it must be explained by its symptoms that describe the effects it causes. Conformity starts with an ideal and a consensus among the people for that ideal. Once that ideal has achieved consensus (all in agreement), people strive to fit that ideal. To go against that ideal would be crossing the line and one would be labeled deviant. This is where a few of the symptoms of groupthink apply.

To avoid deviating from the consensus, one practices self-censorship, disregarding issues they disagree with in order to agree with the consensus. One may also come to believe that everything said and agreed within the group is true and that everyone in the group agrees even if they're silent.

This symptom is known as unanimity which halts the individual person from becoming a critical thinker, but rather urges the individual to agree with the consensus since everyone else does. As the group grows closer, so do the boundaries of conformity, as disunity among the group becomes the greatest threat.

Emphasis mine

Kind of heavy stuff, I realize, but I do think it explains what's happened to some. What's even more interesting is that "sucking up" is what Doug accuses the rest of the world of, while failing to see it in his own community.

Spamfighting has become the "cohesive ideal" so it doesn't even matter if it really is spam... anything done by someone suspected to be a spammer must be evil... which is how we got this thread!

Morality also serves as another symptom of groupthink as it becomes less questioned among each individual as they soon believe that what the group believes and does is always right. The group begins to justify its actions even if what they've done is extremely questionable.

This explains why it's ok to flame and call people names... it's all for the higher good.

Ideas that the enemy are always wrong and always evil become truth and justify the group's actions to attack them.

or at worst a VERY light

or at worst a VERY light shade of grey

I kind of like the term "pearly" white. I might even use it for myself just because of the fact I did have quite an interesting discussion with Fanto at last year's roadshow. No matter that you're actually learning something (whether you use it or not), it's that guilt by association type of thing, you just never know what will rub off.

Edit whose offensiveness?

Hey, Scottie - that was IRONY, dig?

And while I do appreciate your take, I chose that term with some care, you know - I mean, isn't the "pointed white hat" metaphor an explicit, clear cut KKK association? And isn't that what their behavior is actually a more than superficial reminder of?

This apart, let's not get into cross cultural terminological hairsplitting too much - it wasn't I, after all, who invoked the term "nazi" (or Godwin's Law, for that matter) which may be read in a slightly different manner over here in Europe, too. (Not that I personally disagree with them one bit within this particular context.) IMV, John is spot on with "Arian Hat".

I'm certainly not after hurting anyone's feelings on this board, but calling for editing explicit/offensive language in a thread sporting the title "Scummy Bollocks" is a mite hilarious, don't you think? So don't you Benedict me! :)

As for the rest of your post, Wikipedia or not, I think you've summed it up pretty neatly - unless he's a mere sham pretending to crave for recognition while actually only going for linkbait, Mr DH to all probability really can't help himself. At least he hasn't to my knowledge manifested any contradictory indication in that bandwidth waster of a forum of his.

Point being that people of this particular psychological setup (and I've met more of them in my time than I'd care to count ...) quite frequently are not entirely devoid of what many weaker, insecure personalities may easily mistake for charisma. (Very similar to maniacs, actually.) And yes, they'll usually attract those who are very prone to succumb to groupthink, so that part of the equation seems to be accounted for as well.

OK then...

I dig. I totally get the whole KKK thing Ralph; it fits the analogy.

But just thought you might want to know that could offend people you didn't mean to offend. After all, bollocks is just a funny word to me ... ;-)

(Semantics: I think you guys mean Aryan hats. Maybe they could be Skinhead SEO's- that has a certain ring to it. No hats at all. )

Ah, but skinheads

even come in leftist radical flavors. At least in Europe they do, though this particular species is very much in decline these days.

And yes, I agree that it really should be Aryan Hats.

Man, I have run out of popcorn

This certainly was a three serves of popcorn train wreck.

I just wonder where the ball is now. It was in Doug's court, and he returned it to Danny.

I think You kids need to stop playing with that ball and come inside right now and eat your dinner. Quickly. Before the leftist skinheads gets yah.

Game Over

I really think we've kinda run as far as we can with this one, so let's just move on ...

Fanto... as an aside..

In all seriousness as an American...

Are Nazi references as offensive in Europe in the same way the N word is here in America ?

If so I sincerely apologize I won't throw that around so lightly in the future.


Nazi references are generally no big deal here, a little offensive but not shock/horror.
Very little useage of words is offensive in Europe if those words are used in the context of a serious discussion. They only become abusive if used in an abusive manner. The ironic useage of the N word did not seem the least bit offensive to me but then I'm not American or black so what would I know? Seems a bit strange to me that I hear the N word in American rap music, but it still gets people hot under the collar. Anyone remember the John Lennon song?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.