Why does everyone pull my leg like this ?

Message has been deleted

_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid

unread,

Nov 12, 2009, 5:07:10 AM11/12/09

to

Look at the commercials/SPAM in this newsGroup:
http://Google.COM/group/alt.free.newsservers/topics?hl=en&tsc=1

What's up with this post:
“ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SURVIVAL RIFLE ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ” ?

How was my “ Authors in Sci.Physics by Rank ” post worse ?

Speaking of these fine “ scientists ”...

TJ Frazir claims he sent me a 200 million dollar check,
he says it'll arrive today ( Thursday ) via overNight Fed Ex.

He says there's no tracking number ( as if that were possible ).

Assuming the check exists ( ha ha ) suppose it gets stolen,
how would you track it without a tracking number ?

Why does everyone pull my leg like this ?

Message has been deleted

_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid

unread,

Nov 13, 2009, 1:59:52 AM11/13/09

to

Testing... Will Google Groups reject this as SPAM ( yet again ) ?

Message has been deleted

_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid

unread,

Nov 13, 2009, 3:56:15 AM11/13/09

to

As I recently posted...
Google·Groups ·bans· certain domain names ( e.g. Doug's xx·com ).

Boy, did that throw me for a loop !

It took about 60 seconds for Google to Shit·Can the offending posts.

I wonder if Doug knows about this.
I was posting “ xx xx·com ” not “ xx@xx·com ”... would it matter ?

Message has been deleted

_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid

unread,

Nov 13, 2009, 4:57:16 AM11/13/09

to

I think Doug was just typing xx@xx·com, he wasn't thinking of xx·com.

You ( Robb ) wrote:
“ I've noticed that posts arrive on google FASTER
than ever, almost instantly for many. ”.

Yea, I noticed that too... I wonder if the speed will remain.
Maybe they fixed some bottle·necks when they added the filters.

You asked:
“ How can you tell that delete was
because of the domain instead of the content?

A right slash shouldn't be filtered, but maybe hundreds of them are. ”.

There were 1,136 authors, slash·separated.

I wasn't sure if I should've used a <PRE> tag or not,
I was trying to avoid the “ read more » ” link but... I failed.

Goes Google ( PLAIN Google, not Google Groups )
index the stuff after the “ read more ” ? I doubt it.

I knew xx·com was the problem after Google rejected this ( tiny ) post:
news:_@Jeff_Relf.Seattle.2009_Nov12.11.17pm.fI

After visiting xx·com, I was even more sure about it.

Even now, much later, my HTML post remains; Google·Groups kept it:
http://Google.COM/group/sci.physics/msg/829562ebd2cd9666

At any rate, I want to see how people doing “vanity searchs”
( thus loading my <img> tags ) effect the ranking
of a Google·Images search... it'll have a HUGE effect, I'm guessing.

Normally, 3 weeks might pass before a Google·Images search will find
one of my JPG·Files... beause people weren't Googling for it.
[ By “Googling” I mean a plain·jane Google search ]

If I'm right, I'll know more about S.E.O. ( Search Engine Optimization )
and I'll be able to tell Eric Gisse:
“ Do a Google·Image search for "Goofy panhandling", Eric. ”.

Message has been deleted

_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid

unread,

Nov 14, 2009, 10:22:27 AM11/14/09

to

Google Groups rejected the x·com, the slashes had nothing to do with it.
······················
I was talking about how my images are ranked at Google·Images;
I don't give a flying·fuck about “googlebot visits”.

After a Googlebot visit, 4 weeks might pass before
the image ranks high enough to show.

When lots of people Google my image-laden posts
those images are highly ranked. ( yes, I track these things )

If too·few people Google a post, its images won't even show
( because the rank will be too low ). I know, I've seen it.

Message has been deleted