I had a blast yesterday corresponding with a links-on-your-site spammer. It hit me: my spam folder holds hours of free entertainment.
So I sent a few responses.
No replies yet — but I'll let you know.
1. Diamonds Are Forever
Phil Lam to me
I'd like to inquire about purchasing a simple text link – something like "Stein Diamonds – Rolex Watches" or a small banner (120×60) on your homepage on popehat.com.
We've been selling diamond jewelry and luxury watches for over 25 years and I thought our products might be a good fit for your readers.
Our budget is around $40 per year. Is this something you'd be open to?
Ken At Popehat to Phil
Thank you very much for your inquiry. In fact, though Popehat has not previously accepted advertising, we have begun to explore the possibility, owing to increased expenses, some financial reversals, and various bail and attorney fees connected with my co-blogger Charles. It turns out that "if there's grass on the field, play ball" is not actually a legal doctrine. Can you believe it?
Anyway, Rolex watches might be a good match. However, our brand is very important to us. I don't want to be advertising stainless steel Rolex watches, like the one my dad bought in the PX in Korea. We're only interested in advertising heavily diamond-encrusted watches, watches that could only be said to be festooned with diamonds, watches that simply scream FUCK YOU, OTHER 99%.
Can you target your advertising like that? Also, Phil, let's be real about the price. $40 per year? We have to SELL this link, Phil, and this is a link all about GLAMOR and LUXURY. How can we sell GLAMOR and LUXURY at $40 per year? I charge more than that for a tenth of an hour, Phil, and I spend most of that tenth of an hour taking notes on things about my client I can later ridicule on Twitter.
Come back to us with a serious offer, and some sort of guaranteed all-diamond-encrusted-watches-advertising structure, and we'll talk.
P.R. No, seriously. Really diamond-encrusted. I want to have to squint to see the hour hand through all that shit.
2. Hope and Change
Mark to me
Hello, hope business is good ?
I phoned you a short time ago on the topic of Effective search engine optimization with regards to your online site.
Is it possible we could arrange a Seo placement discussion through e-mail at all with one of our consultants?
If you're not dealing with the Web optimization for your online business internet site might you please forward to the someone who does at all?
You could also send an email direct if there is inquiries you wish me to answer direct on the phone or can get in touch via our internet site also.
Tel: (+44) 07538 4083 89
Hope to hear from you soon
[Lengthy opt-out section omitted]
Ken At Popehat to Mark
show details 11:12 AM (2 hours ago)
Thank you for the inquiry. Unfortunately, the hope business is not particularly good right now, certainly not as good as it was several years ago.
I am sorry that I missed the telephone call referenced in your email, and am impressed that you are so interested in helping us that you spent money on an overseas call. I suspect that my secretary took the call and then failed to give me the message. She is slowly but inexorably attempting to drive me quite mad.
I am delighted to hear that there are professionals able to assist me in regard to my online business internet site.
Our internet site is, indeed, online. Is it a business site? I think that it is. Our business is snark. Snark and free speech commentary. Our two businesses are . . . you know, never mind.
I would be interested in determining whether you can use Effective Seo Web optimization to make us the the most popular and powerful snark site on the entire online internet. However, there are many Seo Web optimizationizers out there. We will only go with one that not only improves our search engine rankings, but dramatically degrades the rankings of other sites that purport to be in the snark business. As Gore Vidal says, Mark, it is not enough that I succeed, others must fail.
Also, we are in the business of ridiculing spammers. Can you make us the most well-known and highly-traveled spam-ridiculing site on the online internet? I think that would be a synergistic win-win for us both, Mark.
Very truly yours,
3. One For The Road
Scott Todd to me
show details Aug 22
I'd like to inquire about purchasing a text link that says something
like "Los Angeles DUI Lawyer" or "dmv-dui-attorney.com – Los Angeles
DUI Attorney" on popehat.com somewhere on your homepage for our site
dmv-dui-attorney.com . We're a law firm specializing in DUI Defense
and serving the greater Los Angeles area. Our budget is around $40/yr.
Is this something you'd be open to?
Ken At Popehat to Scott
Sorry to take so long to respond to you. I had an unfortunate misunderstanding with representatives of the government. You know how that goes.
Scott, your offer is very exciting to me. We write about attorney marketing — particularly innovative blog-comment-synergies — and I'm thrilled to see that all our hard word is finally bearing fruit.
I've reviewed your web site, Scott, and I see that "professional" is the first word you use to describe your firm. I can see that professionalism, Scott, in your decision to send out spam offering $40 to complete strangers running eclectic humor and snark blogs to put text links promoting your site. Only professional attorneys are so precise.
One question: could we alter the link to make it clear that you represent people under the influence of all sorts of substances and things, not just alcohol? Because I'm a criminal defense attorney too, and one of the most heartbreaking things about the practice is the way that the driving-under-the-influence-of-alcohol attorneys ignore and reject clients who are wrongfully arrested for driving under the influence of cold medication, ketamine, the Isley Brothers, auditory hallucinations, and/or the later works of Howard Zinn. Because those defendants are people too, Scott, no matter what the stuffy drove-after-four-Scotches crowd says. I don't mean to be rude, but I saw a graphic of a glass of what appears to be single-malt Scotch on your site. So: bottom line, can we change the link to say "Los Angeles Driving Under the Influence of Nearly Anything At All Attorney"? That's much more inclusive.
Also, we'll be needing much more money. I mean, lawyer, please.
4. You Like Me! You Really, Really Like Me!
Dear Law Professional,
It is an honor to inform you that you are being considered for inclusion in:
Sutton Who's Who in American Law (2011/2012 Edition)
The 2010/2011 edition of the registry will include biographies of North America's most accomplished Law Professionals. Recognition of this kind is an honor shared each year by our members from across the United States and Canada, and is often considered to be the single highest mark of achievement.
Upon confirmation of your inclusion, you will be listed alongside other professionals of equal standing in the Sutton Who's Who Registry. There is no cost to be included.
If you are interested in being a part of our national publication click here or on the button below and take thirty seconds to fill out your basic application.
If you have any questions call our staff at 877-936-4577. Or please view our site for additional information.
Senior Managing Director
245 Park Ave
New York, NY 10167
Sutton Who's Who
Copyright 2011. All Rights Reserved.
Stanley H. Kaplan – Founder of Stanley Kaplan Test Preparation Centers
Herbert T. Hoover – Univ. of South Dakota/Professor of History
Ken At Popehat to editor
show details 11:30 AM (2 hours ago)
Dear Ms. Franklin,
I am thrilled too learn that even though I blog semi-anonymously as "Ken at Popehat," my legal analysis is considered meaningful enough that I am being considered for inclusion in Sutton's eminent volume.
I know that recommendations for such honors are often confidential — law is such a cutthroat business, after all — but I rather wish I could know which legal essay I have penned led to Sutton considering me for inclusion in its prestigious work. Was it by any chance my ground-breaking work on the use of the epithet "ho" in legal writing? http://www.popehat.com/2007/09/07/rerun-in-re-ho/
The prospect of being included amongst lawyers for whom mention in Sutton's is "considered to be the single highest mark of achievement" is daunting, to be sure. But I confess I am a little confused by the promise that I will be "listed alongside other professionals of equal standing." I have a few follow-up questions:
1. Does Sutton rank lawyers by standing and then have separate sections of the volume depending on their standing? Because I don't want to be in the same section as, say, Scott Greenfield.
2. When you say "of equal standing," are you segregating lawyers identified from their real names and lawyers who blog semi-anonymously like me? I don't want to be in some sort of semi-anonymous-blogger ghetto in the appendices. On the other hand, I don't want to be in the same section as people whose names are not merely semi-anonymous, but entirely invented, like Publius or Mark Bennett.
I look forward to your response.
Very truly yours,