Two-minute edit, referenced.

After immersing myself in the hundreds of opinions and articles which stemmed from my reading Fiona McQuarrie’s (Freshly Pressed) blog entitled, “Imagine: How Did This Happen?”, and hastily checking whether I still believed what I have written about plagiarism on my website, I thought that perhaps I should snap out of the daze thus induced and delete the spam on my blog.

Before doing so, I thought I would quote someone (or something) called

Softlum§softlum.com§/§tag/easy-§hide-§ip/§x§BrogBettencourt06@hotmailDOTcom§5.9.238.68

(name stuffed with § symbols by me, and one DOT to prevent the actual link occurring) and have a bit of fun with font colours.

This is what my “editing eyes” see.  Colours here have no hierarchical importance; they are simply used to distinguish one oddity from another. The two pink words make me think of possible false cognates from French, German or Portuguese. Sigh.

Thank you, I have just been looking for information approximately this subject for a long time and yours is the greatest I have found out so far. But, what about the bottom line? Are you sure about the supply?|What i do not realize is if truth be told how you’re not actually a lot more smartly-appreciated than you might be now. You’re very intelligent.

Has anyone ever tried a theatrical interpretation of this stuff? A clown suit perhaps? Or a business suit with a clown hat?

Granted, referencing the work (if taken from a months’ worth of spam, say) and validating copyrights (yes, some spammers claim to have copyrighted their material) would be painful, but would it not all be worth it to achieve the status of being “a lot more smartly-appreciated”?

Perhaps too, the lack of salutation and valediction is a new marketing tool?  If that is the case, it is not a very satisfactory one. It leaves me feeling as if I have just finished watching Waiting for Godot (Samuel Beckett) backwards in fast motion.

Allison