Google PageRank Lunacy

[cbp]

What a sad world we live in :-(

http://searchenginewatch.com/searchd...le.php/3319461

CBP

[janeth]

Hi CBP we where talking about it today here

<edit>by fathom: at posters request</edit>

I think it is sad that people get so up set over crazy things.

[minstrel]

I vehemently disagree with you here, Janeth - this is hardly "getting upset over crazy things".

I don't know if you've ever lost someone close to you but I have. This amounts to the same thing as desecrating gravestones and markers and I cannot understand the mind of someone who would do that. To attempt to justify it because the creator of the site neglected to anticipate the crime ahead of time and install safeguards and security measures is in my opinion another case of blaming the victim - in criminology that's known as "techniques of neutralization", wherein the crime is justified because the victim in some way "asked for it" - the woman who is raped caused her own rape because she was stupid enough to allow herself to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, or the child who is killed deserved it for getting into a car with a stranger.

Insensitivity and unhumanity cannot ever be justified by "carelessness" of the victim - lay the blame where it belongs: square at the feet of the offender.

[PhilC]

What "crime" would that be minstrel?

If people put systems online where anyone can add to a site's or page's content (forums, guestbooks, etc.), they are putting them in a virtual world where there are programs that go around finding those systems and automatically adding something to them. It's normal life in the virtual world, and is to be expected.

The fact that it happened in this case was unfortunate, but it was due to an oversight on the part of the creator, and not to anything else. It's rather like saying I went out and left my door wide open. When I got back the house been robbed. Who would be to blame? Me for leaving the door wide open, or the thief? IMO, the thief would be wholly to blame, although some may say that I was partly to blame for leaving the door wide open for all to see.

In the case of the guestbook, the thieves weren't to blame because they were computer programs and unaware. The people behind the programs weren't be to blame because they didn't see the nature of the guestbook and were also unaware. What about the search engine people who developed the systems that make guestbook spamming beneficial? I could go on and on but the point is that nobody is to blame for spamming that particular guestbook, or any other. The virtual door was left wide open and virtual people left messages (didn't steal anything). Sure it can be a mean old scene at times, but it's reality in this World Wide Web of ours.

Incidentally, it isn't anything like "desecration" as you suggested. The guestbook was like a book of condolence, and the ads were more like advertisements placed in its pages - not in the same league at all.

[Mel]

We do live in a less than perfect world and we recognize that in our everyday life by having locks on our doors and alarms on our cars and much more to insulate ourselves from lifes potentional unpleasantries.

I certainly do not condone the writing of adverts into a book of condolence online or offline, but experienced webmasters (and Mike Grahan should be in that category I believe) should be aware that there are robotic programs which go out and add such adverts any time they find an "open door" and have no notion if the guestbook is located on a memorial site or on a porn site. IMO it is most likely a case of simply not thinking the thing through completely before putting it online as had he done so he could have perhaps put some safeguards in place to prevent access by bots.

Look at it this way, would you place a book of condolence on the sidewalk so that everyone could have a chance to sign? In most cities that would attract the same acts of vandalism, but this time done by humans not computer programs.

But, given that the act has apparently caused so much distress to the family and friends of the deceased, is it sensible or in good taste to publicize the matter by using it as a subject for a PageRank article?

[Steven Glover]

I can't even be clever I am so shocked at the clear sillyness (using this word because of my better judgment)

By that thought process I suppose if I get mugged its my fault for leaving my house.

[Mel]

No Steven but IMO if you go to certain parts of Orlando at night and get mugged that would be your fault.

[Steven Glover]

And if I were new to the area and didn'y know better, perhaps just setting up a little home for my family, would it still be my fault?

[Mel]

My point was Steven, that we do not live in a world where we can do whatever we want without thinking and not expect some less than ideal results.


Who would you blame if you set up your home in a new city and without any investigation of the neighborhood, and then you found out that there were drug pushers on the corner? The drug pushers, the mayor, the police, the guy who sold you the house...?

[PhilC]

It's not a good comparison to make with the guestbook, Steven. You have to look at the reality of life on the web. Robots do those things and the particular gentleman who put up the guestbook almost certainly knew it. What happened was unfortunate, and everyone can be sympathetic, but it is known to happen and it should have been expected.

If you really want to equate it to getting mugged, we all know that muggings happen and we all know that we should keep half an eye open for anything untoward. If I go walking down the street, counting a lot of money so that everyone can see, and somebody snatches it from my hand, I should have known better than to show that amount of money to everyone, and to have it openly in my hand where it could be snatched. The fault is with the thief because theft shouldn't happen, but I'd have to accept some responsibility for my foolishness.

With the guestbook, there was no theft, nothing illegal or even immoral - just some ads being placed by robots. It was unfortunate in this particular case, but it happened. It was known in advance that there was a fair chance of it happening, and it could probably have been prevented. There is really no point in moaning about it when the door was left wide open.

[janeth]

I can not believe the nerve of people in this city. Last night while I was sleeping, with the door wide open and $10,000.00 cash laying in the door way, can you believe some jerk stole my money?

This is the second time it happened the first time was when I went on vacation for two weeks and I left the front door opened to air out the house. But that time I left the money on the kitchen table.

[minstrel]

Like Steven, I find myself almost speechless - I'm not even sure how to interpret the arguments that are being made here. Are they sincere? or is it debate solely for the sake of debate? I hope it's the latter.

Sykes & Matza (1957) - "Techniques of Neutralization" used by antisocial invididuals to justify their antisocial acts:

Denial of Responsibility
"I couldn't help it"
"It wasn't my idea"
"It only happened because I was drinking"

Denial of Harm/Injury
"I didn't hurt anyone"
"They were insured"
"No one was physically harmed"

Denial of the Victim
"He asked for it"
"She deserved what she got"
"She really wanted me to do it"
"He's probably done the same thing to other people"

Condemning the Condemners
"The police/lawmakers are just as corrupt as the criminals"
"All people are basically dishonest and selfish - it's just that most people are weak and scared"
"Rich people commit crimes all the time and get away with it because they have money"

The point in Sykes & Matza's article was that antisocial individuals justify their behavior (and thereby avoid the emotional-psychological consequences such as guilt, remorse, depression, or other negative feelings) via a process of rationalizing and justifying their rationalizations - cf. the posts above condemning the website creator.

About 2 years ago, a cemetery near my home was extensively vandalized overnight. It shouldn't be very difficult to imagine the distress these acts caused the friends and family members of those buried in this cemetery. The logic presented in the posts above would tell me that the fault for those acts lies with the people who were stupid enough to bury their loved ones in a cemetery without armed guards and attack dogs...

[sparky_t]

I'm afraid to say, (my only comment on the subject) it saddens me to see members of this forum with the 'he should have known better' attitude. On a site commemorating someones life the thought is in the action and gesture, not 'I'd better spend 6 months learning about bots, spiders, SE and the like.

I feel genuinely sorry for them, and the family of the Ed Harwood, and hope that, despite the debate here, everyone feels the same.

Sparky

[PhilC]

It's difficult to undertsand the thinking of some of the posts here. It was not a cemetery minstrel - it was the equivalent of a book of condolence into which some automated processes inserted ads.

We live in the real world and we understand things about it. Computer programs don't understand anything - they just do what their programs tell them to do. If someone puts a forum online s/he can expect programs to post spam in it. It happens all the time and nobody gets upset about it. Guestbooks are no different - nobody gets upset about it.

Nobody is being unsympathetic with the family - this discussion isn't about that. It's about what happens on the Internet at the present time. In other words it's about about reality.

[greeneagle]

What does this thread have to do with Google Page Ranking?

[Mel]

Originally Posted by sparky_t

I'm afraid to say, (my only comment on the subject) it saddens me to see members of this forum with the 'he should have known better' attitude. On a site commemorating someones life the thought is in the action and gesture, not 'I'd better spend 6 months learning about bots, spiders, SE and the like.

I feel genuinely sorry for them, and the family of the Ed Harwood, and hope that, despite the debate here, everyone feels the same.

Sparky

I think you miss the point Sparky, everyone agrees that the comments in the public guestbook were untasteful, but they were quite possibly not even the result of human actions. If they were not neither your distress nor Minstrels dissertation about antisocial individuals is relevant to robots and is misplaced at best. How does one judge the morals of a computer program?

Or is Mistrel attempting to intimate that it is those members of the forum who have the fortitude to call a spade a spade antisocial?

Let me be perfectly frank, millions of people die every day and I do not see anyone here bemoaning the fate of those who die unnoticed and unknown and suffer far worse personal degradation than this defacement of an intangible electronic creation.

If you have true compassion have some concern for those that deserve it and stop moaning about a silly electronic book.

There is only one person who could have taken action to prevent this occurance - the person who put the book up there without adequate thought for the consequences. He did not have to learn about bots and spiders - he is an accomplished webmaster who knew these things beforhand.

On the other hand the poor bereaved friend was so shook up about it that he only managed to get 4 hyper-links to his site in his article. Note that he was not so bereaved that he could not profit from it.

[janeth]

Greeneagle,

First up and I quote you

"not to mention the obvious personal degredation into moderator disputes"

This is not a moderator dipute but a dispute about a topic. That is very much on topic.

Minstrel and I are very good friends and although we may disagree from time to time we are still friends. Everyone has a right to be wrong. (:

[Mel]

Originally Posted by greeneagle

What does this thread have to do with Google Page Ranking?

You've got me there Ken.

[Mel]

Originally Posted by minstrel

Like Steven, I find myself almost speechless - I'm not even sure how to interpret the arguments that are being made here. Are they sincere? or is it debate solely for the sake of debate? I hope it's the latter....

I can only speak for myself Minstrel but I am speaking for the sake of honesty as opposed to hypocrisy.

Do you really mean to tell me that you personally grieve for the defacement of an intangible electronic device that you have never seen, which commerates the life of a person who you have never met and knew nothing about?

[janeth]

Very good point Mel

Do you really mean to tell me that you personally grieve for the defacement of an intangible electronic device that you have never seen, which commerates the life of a person who you have never met and knew nothing about?

[/quote]

[Steven Glover]

were untasteful, but they were quite possibly not even the result of human actions.

Did a machine set the bot into action in the first place? I think these most certainly were the actions of a human the bot was merely an extension similar to a wrench and a mechanic.

[Mel]

Thats kind of fuzzy logic Steven, sort of like saying that because someone built a road ten years ago, and a car has brake failure while driving on that road and crashes, the fault lies with the human that built the road to drive on.

[Steven Glover]

Thats not even close to the same thing. I wasnt refering to the person who created it. I was talking about the person who added their spam to the bot and then started its engines. They are the human behind the machine.

If someone purchases NAV and they keep it up to date all the time. Yet somehow they still found that their computer was infected with a virus. Is it their fualt they recieved the virus. I mean after all they could have been more careful by not having an internet connection right?

[PhilC]

Originally Posted by Steven Glover

Did a machine set the bot into action in the first place? I think these most certainly were the actions of a human the bot was merely an extension similar to a wrench and a mechanic.

The question doesn't really merit an answer, but I want to ask a question instead:-

Steven what is it you're so against in this thread - robots spamming forums and guestbooks, or robots spamming that particular guestbook?

If it's the first, then there's a real world (wide web) out there where it happens. You have to live and cope with it as best you can. If you put a forum or guestbook online and take no precautions against robots, it will be spammed. If you don't want it to be spammed, take precautions. Don't blame anyone else.

If it's the second, then there's a real world (wide web) out there. You have to live and cope with it as best you can. If you put a forum or guestbook online and take no precautions against..... do you see where I'm going with this?

[Steven Glover]

I pay for my sites bandwidth for legitimate users. Adding spam to my site from an accidental oversight on my part is stealing. You have used my bandwidth in a manner I have not given permission for.

It is the same thing as hooking up your house to my electricity in the middle of the night when no one is looking.

It is not a harmless act and its ridiculous to justify the crime.

[minstrel]

Another thread going nowhere in a hurry...

<edit>by fathom: link removed</edit>