Simple and Not-so-simple Sics

XXX is a legitimate firm that doubles cryptocurrency and helps you to earn money instantly in bitcoin for it’s [simple sic and change in point of view] many customers on a daily basis and it is one of the hottest new trend [sic] within the finance world through digital currencies which has [sic] been around for a few years.

I know we’ve had this conversation (or convo as the merely middle-aged are now saying. Goodness knows what the actual young are saying.) Anyway, I know I’ve commented on blog spam before, but it never fails to surprise/annoy/amuse, usually all at once.

Buying Bitcoin (BTC) has been setting records this year, reaching a peak of around $63,000 in time period with different cryptocurrencies like Dogecoin (DOGE) and Ether (ETH) have additionally been gaining quality as investors scramble to leap aboard the cryptocurrency bandwagon [sic, sic, sic, sic] [I think that’s all]

This one took about a scrolling vertical-foot of screen space to offer me some unhelpful financial commentary of the “win some, lose some” variety.

It’s possible to form heaps of cash when you open an account in cryptocurrencies for profits, however it is also doable to lose heaps of cash if you invest with the wrong bitcoin investment company.

All right then.

Do these stupid things actually work, “work” here meaning “entice half-awake people to click on the embedded links”? When I consider some of the sophisticated spam email I receive — flawlessly reproduced logos, context-sensible sending addresses, and coherent sic-less messages — I find it hard to believe that these flakey spam blog-comments are effective.

But I guess what’s true for doctors and other professionals is true for these folks too: Half of all spammers graduated in the bottom half of their class. And, in truth, I don’t really want them to be any better at their jobs.


This entry was posted in Language and Communication, Laughing Frequently, Wired and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Simple and Not-so-simple Sics

  1. I may have to spend the rest of the day on your last paragraph, because I do want doctors, especially, to be better at their jobs but I’m not sure if class standing is entirely a measure of excellence and I don’t know if spammers go to post-secondary institutions of learning unless some doctors also are spammers. Or are those lab-coated, online docs pushing new products and their books phony-baloney spammers? If we could devise filters for medical excellence like spam filters for websites would that help? And I saw an ad for bitcoin participation this week that sounded so authentic I could understand, at last, why some people fork over their “real” cash. It’s a jungle out there — or is that, in here?

    • Isabel Gibson says:

      Laurna – 🙂 It’s a jungle everywhere, I think. As for medical doctors, I’m just glad that our standards for graduation are as high as they are. But they too, like the politicians, bear watching.

  2. John Whitman says:

    Isabel – like you, I hate SPAM and spammers. I used to be tempted to correct there (sic) mistakes just to show them I wasn’t as gullible as they’d like me to be. Then I realized that that would just be aiding them in their quest to separate people from their money, so now I get my satisfaction from the ‘Delete’ button. I also use the ‘Block sender’ function a lot for really pernicious spammers.
    Also, unless you are on the dark web, I don’t understand why anyone would deal in something that has no actual physical substance like bitcoin. Maybe that is why it is easy for me to ignore the spammers who do manage to slip my ‘Block’ sender’ walls.

    • Isabel Gibson says:

      John – 🙂 Yes, the delete/block option is great for emails and texts but for my blogs I rely on an app that sequesters suspected spam for my disposition. The app works well, but I admit to still being confused about the purpose of spam. I just don’t see how it can deliver what They want (because it’s clunky and obviously fake), but it must do something for Them or They would stop.

      • John Whitman says:

        Isabel – Not everybody is a former editor or an anal engineer. I also think they are hoping that people will be in a rush and won’t pay close attention to what they are reading – but just do as they are told. There is also the ‘gullible’ factor as well.

Comments are closed.