Re: BillUCF (I hope this is not in bad taste, if so I appologize)
 

[ QUOTE ]


One of the things that led me to be suspicous was when he wrote something like 'you need the catchy titles to be read and responded to' (not exact quote). The reason this particularly got me thinking was that it was a very innocent thing to say and also it indicates motives other than just expression and discussion, namely the purpose for posting is to get as many reads as possible, while it also sounds like something some TQM supervisor might say at some meeting. And overestimating the intelligence of this particular type of influential tactic is really not a good idea.


[/ QUOTE ]

YES!!!! That is exactly what tipped me off. Now I know you are on the level.

The question is though what can we do to counter it? Maybe the admins can do something.

Re: BillUCF (I hope this is not in bad taste, if so I appologize)
 

[ QUOTE ]

The question is though what can we do to counter it? Maybe the admins can do something.

[/ QUOTE ]

Post? that's all I could think of.

Re: BillUCF (I hope this is not in bad taste, if so I appologize)
 

[ QUOTE ]
The purpose of this type marketing or political messaging is not to go to the biggest places with the most influence but rather to seem grass-roots (although 2+2 is a heavily trafficed forum).

[/ QUOTE ]


Does this heavy traffic have any weight on search engine returns? I know there's been a lot of discussion/controversy about sites coming up with subtle ways of "rigging" their content to reflect "signal return" (or whatever it's called) in a way that gets queries directed to them.