Out of curiosity has anyone ever looked into the c3PO name? I am not sure Carbon3 and Polonium have/can be joined, but with all the Star Wars geeks out there, surely someone has theorized it?
I have an idea what a C3PO is. I am puzzled about the C2PO referred to in the first line. Is that someone not quite up to C3PO standards? Perhaps an earlier model?
You mean mentally unstable people with a fixation on someone named Pablo?
“(Excerpt) Read more at moneyrunner.blogspot.com ...”
Why excerpt from your blog?
It isn’t on the list of sources that must be excerpted:
abqjournal.com
adn.com
afp.com
aim.org
atimes.com
associatedcontent.com
awsj.com
baltimoresun.com
barrons.com
barronsmag.com
bayarea.com
bendbulletin.com
boston.com (www.boston.com The Boston Globe)
boxofficemojo.com
bsudailynews.com
businessweek.com
californian.com
canadafreepress.com
Capetimes.co.za
careerjournal.com
cavalierdaily.com
chicagotribune.com
chron.com
cnn.com
collegejournal.com
crainsnewyork.com
csmonitor.com
ctnow.com
daily-chronicle.com
dailypress.com
dallasnews.com
dj.com
dowjonesnews.com
djnewswires.com
dowjones.com
feer.com (Far Eastern Economic Review)
fresnobee.com
foxnews.com
gallup.com
The Guardian (UK)
gazette.net
GCN.com
goerie.com
greenwichtime.com
gwpi.net
heraldnet.com
holahoy.com
ibdeditorials.com
idahostatesman.com
iht.com
investors.com
jacksonville.com (Florida-Times Union)
janes.com
jewishobserver-la.com
jewishworldreview.com
kansascity.com
laopinion.com
latimes.com
livemint.com
marketwatch.com
mcall.com
mercextra.com
mercurynews.com
modbee.com
msn.com
msnbc.com
nasdaq.com
nationalweekly.com
nctimes.com
newhavenregister.com
news.com.au
newsday.com
newsweek.com
nhregister.com
nj.com
nola.com
nynewsday.com
nypost.com
nypostonline.com
nysun.com
nytimes.com
ocregister.com
opinionjournal.com
oregonmag.com
orlandosentinel.com
pcworld.com
pnj.com
post-dispatch.com
post-gazette.com
postwritersgroup.com
readexpress.com
realclearpolitics.com
realestatejournal.com
rockymountainnews.com
sacbee.com
sacunion.com
seattletimes.nwsource.com
sfgate.com
sitepoint.com
sjmercury.com
spectator.org
spokesman-recorder.com
sportsillustrated.com
sportsillustrated.cnn.com
si.com
stamfordadvocate.com
startribune.com
startupjournal.com
statesmanjournal.com
sun-sentinel.com
sunspot.net
theatlantic.com
thewbalchannel.com
time.com
timesdispatch.com
toledoblade.com
tribune.com
tribune-review.com
trivalleyherald.com
todaysthv.com
victorhanson.com
washingtondispatch.com
washingtonpost.com
washingtontechnology.com
washingtontimes.com
washtimes.com
washpostco.com
wnd.com
worldnetdaily.com
worldpress.org
wral.com
wsj.com
wsjbooks.com
wsjclassroomedition.com
Or are you simply trolling for blog hits?
Otherwise, nice thread.
If you are able to post the full write-up here, why just post an excerpt? If you want to share your thoughts with folks why not do that here in full, then post a link back to your site as an archive for those that want to find out more about your thoughts on other matters. As it is, you are using this site and this thread as a lure to your site. To me that does seem a little like “link whoring”. I think that if others found your writing interesting enough they would appreciate a full write-up and want to seek out more.
C3PO was the gay version of C2PO.
This phenomenon was one I recently experienced at one of my favorite sites, FreeRepublic.
(Excerpt) Read more at moneyrunner.blogspot.com ...
LOL. If that was intentional, well done. If not, oh bitter irony...
And, again, we are tricked into visiting someone’s personal web page, blog, etc.......
From your viewpoint, I'm sure that is a good argument.
However, I must say that I came to FR (and stay at FR) to:
1. Read articles that interest me.
2. See what other Conservatives have to say about those articles.
3. Be informed about the background and agenda of the individuals who generated the articles.
4. Gain information from other posters who are more knowledgeable on the topics.
5. Get access to links posted in the comments which provide further information supporting or arguing against the information in the original posted article.
6. Reading comments that are moderated to eliminate the leftist crazies' rants, and that exist at FR, along with the article itself.
Accessing the plethora of information on FR can sometimes be like trying to take a sip from a wide open fire hose, and there are only so many hours in a day.
I prefer to accomplish item #1 above by having the full article posted at FR, so that I can quickly move on to accomplishing items 2-6.
Sadly (for me), too many new bloggers are "pimping their blog" on FR with the clear desire to drive traffic (and income from hits) to their blog by partial-posting.
That, coupled with noobs who seem to have a dire need to post vanities, sometimes makes me think that they believe FR is some sort of "facebook/look at me" activity.
FR's owner is the final arbitrator of what will appear on FR, and at this juncture he is allowing partial posting of blogs. Obviously, I fully control my clicking activity at FR and thus can chose not to read something or follow an off-site link.
My suggestion would be that someone who wants to generate interest in their blog should post their full article on FR. If they are good enough writers, with good information to share, they will achieve enough "net cred" to generate interest in what else they might have to say, over on their own site.
Good luck with your endeavors and remember that another poster on FR is not "in charge" of you or FR, and thus their comments are worth what you paid for them. But do be very careful with your own "justifications" for whatever you decide to do.
As Sky King used to say: "Over and Out".
Good for you. I have always disliked the shreiking, self-appointed, ‘blog pimp’ nazis on here...JFK
Are you complaining about link whoring..... by link whoring?