<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Spambot University Library</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/spambot-university-library/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/spambot-university-library/</link>
	<description>falling indelibly into the past</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 16:37:58 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/spambot-university-library/#comment-383</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Jun 2006 22:50:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.new.plannedobsolescence.net/?p=188#comment-383</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;We occassionally get automatically solicited for link exchange by ad-farms using the keyword &#8220;art&#8221; - also, a lot of positivity spam along the lines of &#8220;Nice site! Great information. Respect to admin! Well done, etc.&#8221; What I think is interesting about these (and most trackbacks) is that we can define them as spam regardless of whether they were typed by vacuous visitors or evil spambots. The interesting corollary is that there might be an automated comment generator that left useful or insightful comments - would we screen it just because it was a robot?
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We occassionally get automatically solicited for link exchange by ad-farms using the keyword &#8220;art&#8221; - also, a lot of positivity spam along the lines of &#8220;Nice site! Great information. Respect to admin! Well done, etc.&#8221; What I think is interesting about these (and most trackbacks) is that we can define them as spam regardless of whether they were typed by vacuous visitors or evil spambots. The interesting corollary is that there might be an automated comment generator that left useful or insightful comments - would we screen it just because it was a robot?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
