C3PO: “Etiquette and Protocol Robot”

The Virginian ^ | 6/19/2010 | Moneyrunner

[moneyrunner]

A great deal of the internet is populated by C2PO wanna bees. If you ever watched a Star Wars movie (and who hasn’t) you know the shiny gold robot named C3PO whose purpose is “etiquette and protocol.” The internet has developed its own system of etiquette and protocol. One of these is an abhorrence of what is referred to as “link whoring” which is defined as encouraging people to click on your website. According to this protocol the internet virgin is supposed to sit demurely on the sidelines, knees tightly together, until she is spotted by a search engine like Google.

This phenomenon was one I recently experienced at one of my favorite sites, FreeRepublic.

[GLDNGUN]

Apparently I have needled you to the point of exasperation.

You mean all the parts where I'm laughing in your face because you are throwing a temper tantrum over a link to a wannabe blogger?

Yeah, boy, you've got me pegged all right. ROFL

[Eaker]

Yeah, boy, you've got me pegged all right.

I guess you've learned your lesson.

[Mad Dawgg]

"If you have educational issues and trouble understanding words perhaps you should address the problem with your parents and spend your video game allowance on a dictionary."

I see you are having trouble with comprehension again.

let us review:

You posted:

"Because it upsets blog pimps and the pets that support their faggotry."

I replied with the question:

"I see so are you saying people who excerpt their blogs to FR are Homosexuals?"

Your answer:

"I didn't say they were homosexuals, I implied that their behavior was faggoty and that you are supporting their faggotry. Why do you capitalize homosexual? That's kind of faggoty too."

And I replied with this question and observation:

"I see so could you explain to those of us who don't know such what exactly the words highlighted in Bold Text above mean. (Note in the original post I said Red (text) but as I chose red and blue text to distinguish between our posts I've changed "red" to "bold" for clarity.)

Because according to the slang dictionary you just contradicted yourself and it is a bit confusing."

So as you can plainly see I've already consulted a dictionary, actually several. The standard dictionaries that I have access to define don't have the word faggotry and faggoty but they do define faggot as:

Faggot noun:

1. a bundle of sticks or twigs, esp when bound together and used as fuel
2. (Engineering / Metallurgy) a bundle of iron bars, esp a box formed by four pieces of wrought iron and filled with scrap to be forged into wrought iron
3. (Cookery) a ball of chopped meat, usually pork liver, bound with herbs and bread and eaten fried
4. a bundle of anything

Faggot verb:

1. to collect into a bundle or bundles
2. (Clothing, Personal Arts & Crafts / Knitting & Sewing) Needlework to do faggoting on (a garment, piece of cloth, etc.)

However the slang dictionary defines faggotry thusly:

Faggotry noun:

A negative term applied to something homosexual in nature. It typically applies to homosexual stereotypes, such as men who perform in Broadway musicals.

But they also define faggotry as:

1 noun; usually disparaging but not necessarily a homosexual. see also gayness
2 adjective; usually disparaging but not necessarily homosexual. see also gayness

And they define faggoty as:

The state of being or possessing qualities of a faggot.

And further they define faggot as:

An ignorant, derogatory phrase used to indicate that the receiver is a homosexual.

Also used as a general insult, but it can be very hurtful to other so it shouldn't be.

So could you tell us all which of the definitions you meant?

[Eaker]

LOL!

[Eaker]

Oh crap!

I get it now, I have insulted you. I didn't put two and two together when you capitalized "homosexual". You did it out of respect for your "choice" of lifestyle.

Do you prefer gay or poofter or something more mainstream than faggot?

Really it is really none of my business, don't ask don't tell and all.

I have to go help my wife prepare dinner and I hope you and your best feller have a nice evening too.

[GLDNGUN]

I guess you've learned your lesson.

Ah, another woeful attempt at sarcasm, I see.

Keep the day job. ;-)

[Salamander]

Are you implying that Jim Robinson, in some way unfathomable to any rational mind, [let alone a court of law] now “owns” all the crap posted by blog pimps?

LOL!

“Are you a lawyer by any chance?”

People are never a lawyer, by chance.
Generally, they make a conscious choice to be one.

Are you a contortionist, by any chance?

I’ve rarely witnessed such tortuously twisted reasoning.

[Salamander]

“Ok then simple question: Bloggers usually use advertisement on their websites and there fore can male an income from people surfing to their websites, correct? “

WTH was the question?

“there fore can male an income”?

Is that a typo or Freudian slip?

[Salamander]

FR uses Google Analytics.
[as do I and it’s for reputable purposes of keeping track of your demographic to better tailor and improve your website content/loading time/navigation/screen resolution/browser add on capability for the enjoyment of visitors]

It also uses a cookie to log you in.

You can choose *not* to accept the cookie *if* you want to have to manually sign in, take the cookie every time you visit and delete it every time you leave.

Big difference between that and web bugs and trackers.

There’s no “pay per click” crap here, either.

Every dime he gets he gets honestly and right up front where every one can see it.

[humblegunner]

So could you tell us all which of the definitions you meant?

You really don't know what a faggot is? Honestly?

Are you just being intentionally obtuse or are you
in denial about what happened at the last Blogger convention?

The images are on line for all to see.

[new cruelty]

So could you tell us all which of the definitions you meant?

Us all? MD, just how many people did you need to look up those definitions?

Anyway, nice job, all of you, on researching on the word faggot and all things faggoty.

Faggot verb:

2. (Clothing, Personal Arts & Crafts / Knitting & Sewing) Needlework to do faggoting on (a garment, piece of cloth, etc.)

Just a guess. The blog is the needlework. The blogger is the one doing the faggoting.

[moneyrunner]

You got to the party a little late. There are a few A**holes here who accused me of "link whoring" because I excerpt my posts on my blog with a link. Read the discussion and you will find the thread. The bottom line is that I won't accede to cyber stalking. If you want to read my entire post, you'll have to go to my blog. If you don't, it's all right with me. I'm not here to create a long thread and am surprised that this one is as long as it is.

[Mad Dawgg]

“there fore can male an income”? male was supposed to be make.

But the question still remains “Ok then simple question: Bloggers usually use advertisement on their websites and therefore can make an income from people surfing to their websites, correct? “

[moneyrunner]

You are a shill for the blogger in question. Perhaps you 2 are one and the same. LOL

You have Eaker's secret. He's my sock puppet!. And humblegunner is another one.

Ssshhhh! Don't let Jim Rob know.

[Mad Dawgg]

"You really don't know what a faggot is? Honestly? Are you just being intentionally obtuse or are you in denial about what happened at the last Blogger convention?"

humble have you noticed you can't follow the thread of the conversation? I have. read all of the posts concerning Eaker's use of the word fagoty and faggotry.

Then try again he said he wasn't calling people a homosexual. Do you believe he was?

[Mad Dawgg]

"Are you implying that Jim Robinson, in some way unfathomable to any rational mind, [let alone a court of law] now “owns” all the crap posted by blog pimps?"

Two things i've noticed you have trouble answering simple questions and you seem to have trouble with basic logic.

Copyright law is such that when you post your writings on someone else's Forum you have given them a limited right to use it. Therefore if you wish to sell the rights to your work it complicates any transactions you wish to make with publishers.

Its why you will see a band take down a selfmade youtube video once they sign a deal with a publisher. The publisher wants the rights protected and leaving it on the Internet for free in their eyes dilutes the value of the work. The problem with a site like FR is the users have no ability to erase a thread. So then by excerpting you retain the control over the work. Its really very simple IF you have taken the time to research and understand how Copyright and the Internet works.

[Salamander]

“If” I know how the internet, vis a vis copyright works?

LOL!

I get paid for my art and photography so I *have* to know copyright law.

I forced Yahoo to utterly -kill- a paying business website because they stole and posted 2 of my photos without my permission and refused to remove them.

So, yeah...I know “how it works”.

To answer your previous question, [busy little thing, aren’t we?] sure, bloggers can flog their sites all they want and make money.

To do so on what I consider a -serious- public service forum is disgusting, repulsive and distasteful in the extreme.

Jim has to pay for the bandwidth *we* are blessed with, out of the conviction of his political principles yet there are those who abuse their privilege to post here by pimping their blogs in a parasitic fashion.

If I want trackers, web bugs and bots following my every move, I’ll [foolishly] go visit some XXX or warez site.

*Nothing* in this entire thread actually has jack squat to do with copyright and/or the infringement thereof; it’s about _blog pimps leeching from a legitimate forum, solely to put money in *their* pocket_.

You’ll have to pardon me, but I do dislike seeing JR taken advantage of in such manner.

If *you’re* okay with pay-per-click ticks sucking him dry, that’s your ‘viewpoint’, not mine.

[Mad Dawgg]

"*Nothing* in this entire thread actually has jack squat to do with copyright and/or the infringement thereof; it’s about _blog pimps leeching from a legitimate forum, solely to put money in *their* pocket_." So then you are saying that by posting an entire piece on a website does not grant a limited right to the work to that website?

And is it your intention to disrupt threads in which people excerpt their blogs and other forms of online media in order to deny traffic to those websites?

"If *you’re* okay with pay-per-click ticks sucking him dry, that’s your ‘viewpoint’, not mine."

Could you explain how that works exactly?

[Salamander]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toHlMD50eYY

Pearls.
Swine.
Fini.

[Mad Dawgg]

Do you have trouble with the questions?