I’d be the last to claim that I’m above superstition, but. . . .
I’m presently entertaining a hypothesis that may amount to no more than post hoc ergo propter hoc, fallacious thinking: namely that practitioners of a certain form of nettlesome online manipulation, commonly identified by combining the name of a canned meat product with the way that many blogs permit visitors to leave observations pertinent to the topic under discussion — i.e., c0mm3nt $p^m — seem to afflict my site more often after I allude to the practice.
So I’m carefully avoiding naming the phenomenon by its most obvious designation. Maybe it’s superstition, or maybe they have bots that look for entries that discuss their means of attracting attention, reasoning that sites that mention c.s. may be more likely to be vulnerable to re-infection. Either way, I’m not issuing any invitations.
I am looking forward to upgrading to MT 3.0 and its monitoring features, though, to give it a fair chance before I decide whether to change horses.
Posted by AKMA at July 3, 2004 02:35 PM | TrackBackThe scourge that must not be named.
BTW, why is it that the comment screen never remembers who I am? Does it have a memory disorder? Insufficient, um, er....
Posted by: Wes at July 3, 2004 07:09 PMYes... the word appears to have a magnetic attraction. Or perhaps that of a piece of rotting meat to the turkey vulture. Not superstition at all.
I recently implemented a force preview which seems to have worked wonders. I'm considering reopening previously closed comments, it's so successful.
Posted by: qB at July 4, 2004 01:26 PMThat's not a superstition-- it's a conspiracy theory!
Posted by: ARJ at July 4, 2004 11:21 PM