passionate spammers

[cellio]

My journal just received the anonymous spam that's been going around for Mel Gibson's new movie. The spammers are obviously doing some keyword-matching; the version I got was targetted at Jews. (I've seen this in other journals; particularly amusing was the case where the spammer tried to talk about a band he clearly knew nothing about.)

Here, isn't this quote special? "Some people, not really representative of Jewish people, but rather self appointed Jewish spokespeople, such as Abraham Foxman from the Anti-Defamation League, seem to have been attempting to denounce this film for months as being anti-Semitic. The news reported that they even stole the script last year! But here's what some Jews say (Jews who don't make it their job to tear apart other people): Protesting Gibson's Passion Lacks Moral Legitimacy by Rabbi Daniel Lapin." (There was a link here, but I'm not going to do this person's work for him after he barges into my journal and makes accuastions of theft...)

Yes, I know I can disable anonymous commenting, but that would block some legitimate readers of my journal and anyway, it's no real skin off my nose to mock the spammer and delete his comment.

Still, I welcome any insight any of y'all can offer on the traceroute output for our "friends" at 219.94.76.250:

traceroute to 219.94.76.250 (219.94.76.250), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 wwwnet3-gw.jtan.com (207.106.84.1) 1.28 ms 0.978 ms 1.181 ms
2 198.187.37.41 (198.187.37.41) 5.73 ms 7.767 ms 16.70 ms
3 phl10-core1-g2-0.atlas.algx.net (165.117.179.1) 28.533 ms 16.481 ms 34.76
ms
4 jfk11-core1-so-1-1-0.atlas.algx.net (165.117.192.177) 6.863 ms 7.11 ms 7
ms
5 jfk11-core10-pos6-0.atlas.algx.net (165.117.192.94) 6.901 ms 6.942 ms 10.
956 ms
6 so-3-1.core1.NewYork1.Level3.net (209.244.160.141) 8.976 ms 9.6 ms 8.844
ms
7 ae-0-52.bbr2.NewYork1.Level3.net (64.159.17.34) 8.798 ms 8.736 ms 9.44 ms
8 so-0-0-0.bbr1.SanJose1.Level3.net (64.159.1.133) 84.739 ms 85.117 ms 87.8
75 ms
9 ge-6-0.ipcolo2.SanJose1.Level3.net (64.159.2.4) 84.701 ms 86.949 ms 90.27
5 ms
10 TELEGLOBE.ipcolo2.Level3.net (63.210.199.6) 96.655 ms 89.558 ms 130.756 m
s
11 219.93.155.65 (219.93.155.65) 339.548 ms 348.23 ms 322 ms
12 219.93.174.65 (219.93.174.65) 338.835 ms 329.473 ms 329.233 ms
13 210.187.132.81 (210.187.132.81) 326.183 ms 332.383 ms 326.273 ms
14 brf-odsy01-srp1-0.tm.net.my (210.187.135.1) 326.529 ms 326.606 ms 328.557
ms
15 210.187.143.1 (210.187.143.1) 326.63 ms 411.91 ms 354.203 ms
16 219.93.218.202 (219.93.218.202) 342.474 ms 328.385 ms 330.733 ms
17 219.94.76.249 (219.94.76.249) 335.780 ms 336.445 ms 329.160 ms
18 219.94.76.250 (219.94.76.250) 329.34 ms 333.796 ms 404.392 ms


You know what? There was a time when I would have considered going to see this movie (in the theatre), because while I utterly disagree with the message, I can still appreciate well-told stories that I disagree with. (I don't know if this one is well-told, of course.) But with the way its supporters have been behaving for the last year (this sort of campaigning is only the latest step), no way. I'll see the movie someday, probably, if I don't conclude that the apparently-excessive violence wouldn't squick me and if I get past my aversion to "movies I have to read" (I don't do subtitles), but if I do, I will do it in a way that does not contribute to a "blockbuster". It'll show up on TV eventually, after all. Or someone in my circle of friends might lend a DVD.

Comments

[laurabee.livejournal.com]

I haven't gotten any, but Willie has gotten some. His theory is that they're using the "100 most recent posts" feature and spamming people that way. Which follows because I post almost nothing that's not "friends only", so they wouldn't see my posts.

[cellio]

That's my theory too, given that the spam generally seems to show up within a few minutes of the original posts. And, of course, they can't spam you if they can't see your entries, so you're pretty safe.