Or "How Better To Formulate Subject Lines". But "How To Better Formulate Subject Lines"? Ugh. Have to read that three times to parse it.

Well, I'd mod you up. And a great WHOOOOOOOSH! for all the rest of you. I see someone already posted the Oatmeal comic.

Nice idea!

Though the implementation might need tweaking.
Judges 5:16, word 10 could be any of:
the, to, hear, bleatings, pipings, lowings
depending on your version.

The Indian traffic comes over a Google-owned network. It's very unlikely that that was spoofed or set up, scammers don't generally go to that much trouble. It's far more likely that these are in fact Google originated actions.

I would suggest that you actually read the original article before posting comments next time, it helps make them a tiny bit relevant.

I'm not defending anything. I merely stated that the mention of Mountain View CA in the whois information is not proof of anything other than the registration being in Google CA's name, rather than what the earlier posted thought it implied.

OrgName: Google Inc.
OrgId: GOGL
Address: 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
City: Mountain View
StateProv: CA

That just indicates that the network is registered under Google CA, not that any authorisation for the activity going over that network is. The only thing we can really infer is that the operation is larger than _just_ the Kenyan office, but whether that's some Kenyan dude calling his buddy in India to do him a favour, or the CEO of Google personally masterminding an eeeeeevil takeover of everything, is anybody's guess. Probably somewhere in between.

The whois info, at least for the Indian access, has Google details, not something your regular scammer would take the time to register. Google have also launched the GKBO initiative which lends more circumstantial credence to the conclusions.

Apart from the bit about it continuing on from Google India's offices. Read the whole article before commenting.

It's the Mocality blog, blogging about Mocality's own investigations, into things that were done to Mocality. How much closer to the source do you want?

Fine for many. But some families I can think of need a directed graph.

Parent is *actually* a devilishly informative date-format troll. Froth.

People who are in love with this utopian vision of anonymity-free forums are always amazed to find out that not everyone shares their opinion.

People are assholes to each other offline despite knowing each other's real names (and addresses, and mothers, etc.).

People are assholes to each other online despite knowing each other's real names too. You can feel pretty secure being an asshole when you know for a fact that your target lives a continent away, or in another city. Unless you actually break some kind of harassment or hate speech law, what are they going to do?

The kind of person who would actually travel a vast distance to beat up someone who pissed them off on a forum would obviously have a field day with real names, and I doubt the reciprocal revelation of their own name would do much to deter them.

Some people don't want to connect their real names to their forum nicknames, not because they are ashamed of anything they say or think that there's anything wrong with it, but because they're aware that they might attract serious meatspace trouble for it anyway. Or because -- like me -- they just don't want everything they've ever said online to be instantly and trivially linked to their real names with a single search.

Finally, some people don't like to use their real names because the names themselves reveal things about them which invite additional crap from assholes: gender, nationality and race. The internet allows people to present a neutral public face to strangers, and thus communicate on a more level playing field than is ever possible face-to-face. I consider this to be one of the best things about the internet, and I'd like to cultivate it, not eradicate it.