Saturday, October 15, 2005

Is there such a thing as spamming a blog?

Marketing Software Blog: Is there such a thing as spamming a blog?

Yesterday I wrote, with regret, that in order to prevent my blog from being inundated by unauthorized commercial advertisements, I had decided to establish a filtering protocol which would hopefully prevent automatic entry for these . . . people.

Someone who called himself Bruce Riddell (perhaps in response to my action, but perhaps not) commented:

Do you think that blog spam is a problem?

Then you should read today's blog article.
Is there such a thing as spamming a blog?

Posted by Bruce Riddell to Cogito Ergo Geek at 10/15/2005 06:55:10 AM
I went to the link (which has been deactivated here) and read what he had to say.

Yesterday I got a comment in my blog from someone accusing me of spamming his blog.

(Geek: It wasn't me. Apparently I'm not the only one he's been spamming, but whomever left a comment on HIS blog seems to have ticked him off. Read on.)

What happened was, I was using my automated blog submission software BLOG LINK GENERATOR to post my custom targeted comments into approximately 100 blogs.

This software finds keyword relevant blogs by searching for all the blogs listed in the Internet search engines that have the chosen keyword in the title. The software then adds a link back to your web site by adding a link to the selected keywords within your posted comment. Using this software to submit your comments to literally hundreds of keyword related blogs at the touch of a button is a real time saver!

(Geek: I'm glad HE is happy with the results. It means nothing to him that the bloggers who provide a media for his parasitic activities resent his uninvited intrusions.)

Anyway, getting back to the point..... I got this comment on my blog accusing me of spamming his blog. I told him that he should be happy for the comments (spam) in his blog. I told him that even though he thought of these comments as spam, that in truth they are valuable, keyword rich, relevant content!

It is absolutely true that the search engine robots travel the blogosphere looking for web sites (blogs) with fresh, keyword rich content and when it finds some it rewards that site for it. In the robot's eyes it can only see the quantity of keyword related content. It doesn't see any spam.

(Geek: well, the 'fresh, keyword rich content' should stand by itself. It usually isn't intended to provide a media-culture for parasitic automated spam software. It's unclear how Comment-Spam constitutes a "reward" for the original blogger.)

I also told this blogger that the fault was partly his. He should have set up his blog in such a way that wouldn't have caused all the comments made on successive days to appear on the same page. If he really objected to repeated posts from the same person appearing on the same page then he had several options of what he could do..

1) He could write a comment on my blog accusing me of spamming his blog. (this is the option he picked)

2) He could have thanked me for my comment thereby adding more content to my blog and he would have increased the search score of both of our blogs.

3) He could have changed the settings on his blog to require validation, members only registration and other options that would have made automated software comments fail.

4) He could have written in his blog more often to keep his content fresh. He could then have set up his blog to only list his ONE blog post per day. This would have limited the comments to that one day only.

(Geek: "The FAULT was partially his"? Does this tacitly admit that there is an unwanted situation, for which fault may be assigned? This lends itself to interpretation. As an afflicted Blogger, I have a slightly different view of these 'options':
  1. Comment his blog? I don't want to encourage him by adding traffic to a purely commercial enterprise which is hitching a ride on my readership.
  2. Thank him for his comment? It wasn't something that he submitted as a thoughtful contribution to the thoughts I had provided. It was just an advertisement inserted without prior knowledge or permission to use my efforts as a venue for his commercial enterprise. For this, I should thank him? This guy is like the telemarketeers in a boiler room, blind-calling people to sell them something that they don't want.
  3. Change the settings on my blog because he is abusing the open-forum style I had hoped to proliferate? Sure, I finally did that. I didn't want to, because it makes it more difficult to establish an open-forum for dialogue on the issues I consider important. I'm hardly likely to thank him for making me lock my doors, draw the blinds, and hide out in my home.
  4. I should change my blogging style just to keep HIM from abusing my forum? This is rich. First he suggests that I should blog more than once a day, then he suggests that I publish only one blog article a day . . . just so I can more easily edit out his unwanted commercial advertisements. Frankly, I very much resent his arrogance even more than I do his intrusions. That his suggestions are self-contradictory only makes it more obvious that he is scrambling to justify his nefarious activities in his own eyes, NOT that he truly feels justified for the reasons he has so pondorously expostulated.

Anyway, I told him that If he were to ban all automated posting on his blog then he would be shooting himself in the foot. If it weren't for all the automated comments that were being posted to his blog then he would have had NO POSTS AT ALL!

Did I mention to you that almost ALL of the comments on his blog were made by different people also using automated blog linking software?

(Geek: No, Bruce, you didn't mention that. Nor does the blogger find solace or satisfaction in the implication that 'If it wasn't for my commercial comments, he would have "NO POSTS AT ALL!' Note this is a paraphrase. His suggestion that there is no readership of the blogs to which he attaches himself is insulting and demeaning. Further, he suggests that he is, in fact, performing a service to the blogger. Read on.)

I doubt that this blogger realizes that his ego drivel is only interesting to himself and that he is totally missing the real point of owning a blog. As a marketer I believe that the real point of running a blog is to appeal to your true audience which is the search engine robot that is eternally traveling the blogosphere looking for new content. That's it! Period. If you're writing for any other reason then you're endulging in an egotistic venture that is sheer vanity. Think about it!

(Geek: "ego drivel" is about as demeaning and insulting as it gets. There is little one can say which better demonstrates the arrogance and egocentricism of the blog spammer; to suggests that a blog's 'true audience' is a 'search engine robot' is to state that NOBODY reads the blog for the content. Why would a blog spammer wish to advertise in a blog that nobody reads? Could it be . . . vanity?)

Well, that's about it..... I guess that I've alienated just about everyone. You probably realize by now that I believe that blog comment spam can be viewed as a good thing. That is why I don't put up any barriers to auto commenting software. SPAM AWAY!

If anyone is really offended by my opinions, please leave a comment in my blog. I don't mind getting some free additional content :)

(Geek: Actually, I was offended before I ever read this self-justifying bullshit. I don't mind that he assumes a privilege that he denies others . . . the privilege of asserting himself with null-content comments . . . without permission, against the expressed wishes of his involuntary hosts, and with total disregard of their sensibilities. I don't even mind that he's trying to profit from someone else's efforts.

I just wish he, and other bottom feeders like him, would get . . . off . . . my . . . back!)

Friday, October 14, 2005


With great regret I announce that comments now require word verification.

This is an option which will not allow comments to post unless a 'hidden word' is duplicated in a field on the comments form.

This is the mildest version of spam-filtering available, and I have imposed it only because my blog is slowly being taken over by spammers.

Every day I receive copies of comments submitted by people who have no interest in the context of this website. Their only interest is to promote their own commercial websites. I have made every effort to inform them that their advertising is neither encouraged or accepted here, but they persist.

While they were commenting in 'current' blog articles, it was not too difficult to review all of the articles and remove their comments. I even tried humor, to high-light that I was removing their comments but held no ill will. No joy, they continued their predations on the content of this website. Now they are commenting in 'archived' posts, and it is impossible for me to edit these in detail on a daily basis.

Spammers are vandals, they litter the landscape of diarists with no regard for the authors or the honest participants of the dialogue. They do it to make money, which is not necessarily a base interest except that they usurp control over another's interests even when they know their efforts are not welcome.

I take this step with great reluctance, and in full awareness that I may dissuade people who read this because they are interested in the subject by making it more difficult to comment. If you are not a spammer, and are moved to comment on this website, please understand that I would allow increased spamming rather than to discourage your contribution, if it was possible for me to keep this website clean of commercial advertising.

My hope is that this will at least decrease the amount of comment-spam to which you, who read because you are interested in the subject, must deal with. Please bear with me as I attempt to deal with this plague of varmints.

var·mint (vär'mĭnt) pronunciation
n. Informal.

One that is considered undesirable, obnoxious, or troublesome.

[Variant of VERMIN.]

IPSC Shooting: What's It All About?

Mr. Completely has kindly linked to several of my IPSC posts, and one his posts generated some comments. I've taken the liberty of copying the comments, and also my own response, because it occurs to me that the sport LOOKS a lot scarier than it really is. I apologise to Mr. Completely for stealing his entire comments content, but I wanted to make sure that the true image of IPSC competition is represented.
At 4:17 PM, DirtCrashr said...

Those guys look awful close to the targets! I have to sit or stand 200 yards away and don't even get to use a scope. ;-( If you were that close, how much back-spatter would you get on you?

At 7:45 PM, The Conservative UAW Guy said...

Man, that looks like a blast.
Never shot that way before...

At 10:53 PM, Josh said...

I shot IPSC once, then switched to IDPA. At least there I can compete with a stock Springfield XD without getting smashed by guys with 6" race 1911's.

At 9:28 PM, Jerry The Geek said...

It was very thoughtful of Mr. Completely to link to these posts, and I'm grateful.

IPSC is unlike any other sport . . . even IDPA. The reason the photos and videos are being posted to the internet is so that folks who have never heard of it know it exists, and so that those who have heard of it but never attended an IPSC match get to see a little bit of what it's like.

Yes, the targets are close in the pictures you see. But, DirtCrashr, you should remember that it's entirely possible to miss the high-scoring zones of the targets at even very close distances. Of course, these targets are all made of cardboard, so there's no problem with "back-spatter". When we shoot at steel targets (as we often do), the IPSC rules require that we stay at least 10 meters away from the targets. Yes, we do still get bullet fragments bounced back to us from time to time, which is why the rules require us to use safety glasses.

Josh, I know a LOT of people who compete in IPSC with a stock Springfield XD, and they often don't receive as high a score as people who compete with race guns. But the race guns are not competing against the "Production" guns. Just as does IDPA, IPSC has competitive divisions. Revolvers compete against revolvers only. Production guns (Glocks, S&W, Springfield XD, etc) are restricted in modifications they can make to the guns, number of rounds they can carry in their magazine, equipment placement on their carry belt, etc. Limited 10 may only have 10 rounds in the magazine. Limited can have as many rounds in their magazine as they can cram into a 140mm Magazine, but they must be a "production" model (not a 'prototype') and must use iron sights. Open guns ("Race Guns") can use dot-sights, compensators, and can carry as many rounds as they can cram into 170mm magazines.

But when you're shooting for score, your only competition is those people who are using similar equipment. Just like IDPA.

And IPSC is a safe shooting sport. We don't put ourselves in the position where we may perform an unsafe act. If a competitor violates any of several rules of safe gun-handling, he is immediately stopped by the Range Officer and is not permitted to continue competing in the match. The Range Officer follows the competitor through every step of the stage (just like the Safety Officer in IDPA) and will not permit unsafe actions.

Finally, to The Conservative UAW Guy . . . most people have never shot that way before. But it's addictive. And fun. And people who shoot in competition are among the safest, and finest, people in the world.

(The pictures which are referenced above are those which depict a shooter in the Jungle Run at the 2005 Croc Match. You should go to Mr. Completely's blogsite to see everything in context.)

I take three points from this brief exchange:
  1. "Those guys look awful close to the targets! I have to sit or stand 200 yards away and don't even get to use a scope. ;-( If you were that close, how much back-spatter would you get on you?" Translation: IPSC looks scarey, and you could get hurt, and how hard can it be when you are so close to the targets?
  2. "I shot IPSC once, then switched to IDPA. At least there I can compete with a stock Springfield XD without getting smashed by guys with 6" race 1911's." Translation: IPSC is Elitist.
  3. "Man, that looks like a blast. Never shot that way before..." Translation: "Man, that looks like a blast. Never shot that way before..."
The image of IPSC must deal with #1 and #2. Generally, these impressions are based on limited experience. People who shoot should logically be receptive to the idea that ALL shooting sports are worthwhile and have value, even though it may not be appealing to them personally. Yet, we frequently see that people who have accepted one shooting sport are not inclined to accept the validity of another. The person who wrote comment #1 appears to be a rifleman, and doesn't accept (or understand) the attraction of pistol shooting The person who wrote comment #2 seems to have had a bad experience in his single trial of IPSC shooting, and is evermore biased against it for reasons which have no grounds in fact.

I'm not sure that we can ever recover the acceptance of these people, and that's saddening. They like to shoot, but they will likely not be receptive to any kind of recruitment to IPSC competition unless they meet someone who competes in IPSC and who they trust.

I think that means that we must all make positive efforts to meet and make friends with people who are involved in other shooting sports. We may not recruit them to IPSC competition, but at least we can present to them the comcept that we are no different from them, we just have different but similar interests.

Person #3, however, seems to have an open mind about shooting competition. I've visited his blogspot, and perhaps I'm biased in his favor because he likes to write (and writes well), and he likes guns.

Well, when you think about it, what higher praise . . . ?

MWG: FREE AR-15 Magazines

MWG: AR-15 Magazines, Ruger 10/22 Magazines & Mini 14 Magazines

H/T: Earthworm

The MWG Company is . . .

the manufacture and distributor of the 90 Rounder High Capacity Magazines for the AR-15 / M16 & Mini 14, the 50 Rounder magazine for the Ruger 10/22 and quality gun accessories such as Rifle Scopes and Rifle Stocks for the discriminating shooter in the competition, varmint and tactical disciplines.
Earthworm sent me the link, because I'm the only blogger he knows. (Poor Earthworm, must watch television when he could be reading Geek-length purple prose about IPSC shooting here at Cogito Ergo Geek.)

If I link to the MGW website on my sidebar, and write a daily entry and hyperlink it to their website, they will send me two new AR-15 magazines for free.

Here's the deal:

MWG Company is giving away 100 AR-15 MAGAZINES to people who have a Blog and link to our site. That’s correct, use your first amendment right, speaking your mind in your Blog could get you a 2 FREE 10 Round or 5 Round AR-15 MAGAZINE (a $36 Value with free shipping). Simple just add the keyword “AR-15 MAGAZINES” to your side bar and one daily entry and hyper link it to
Once you have added the link to your Blog, E-mail us the URL of your Blog, Name and Address to We will review your site and if your one of the first 50 people who meets the rules we will mail you a 2 FREE AR-15 MAGAZINES .

That Simple!

The Rules:

  1. You must have a Blog that has a been active for over 3 months.
  2. The key word “AR-15 MAGAZINES ” must be linked to
  3. The key word “AR-15 MAGAZINES must be viewable on the side bar through out the site and one daily entry.
  4. E-mal us the URL of your Blog, Name and Address at Please include if you want a two 10 Rounder, 5 Rounder or combo.

Participating Blogs:

nothingspectacular the griz lives on RedneckAsianGunfanatic:
Justins Guns And Stuff gandalf23 Ry Jones SayUncle The Smallest Minority
TriggerFinger Mostly Cajun Hell In A Handbasket
comedian one-in-a-row lewisofarabia

Okay, I think I've pretty much accomplished most of it. Now all I have to do is to email them, and let them send me the magazines (a $36 value). Kewl.

Only problem is, I don't have an AR-15. Earthworm doesn't, either. He said if I sent them to him, he would give it to his local 'Junior Program'.

More kewl ... they have a Practical Rifle Junior Program in Jersey?

But that's a lot of trouble.

Tell you what. When I get the magazines, I'll toss them in my range bag (or in the GeekJeep) and bring them with me to local IPSC matches. The first one who comes up to me at an IPSC match and says "Hey, Geek, I have an AR-15, give me the magazines!" gets them.

I won't hold them for anyone, and it only works if I have the magazines with me.

You won't know when I have them, and I have no idea how long it will take MGW to decide to send them to me.

I'll announce the winner here, and maybe even include your picture (if you're the winner, and if you don't object to having your picture taken. Of course, if you DO object, you're a wuss and I'll tell the world about it. Think it over.)

I figure MGW is doing this to announce their website. I'm doing this for the same reason, to know who's reading my website.

I'll keep you posted, and maybe I'll even tell you when/if I receive the magazines.

On the other hand, maybe not.

And if I don't receive the magazines in what I consider a 'reasonable time', I'll let you know about that, too.

In the meantime, you can practice saying the secret phrase. Remember, if you don't say the magic words . . .

"Hey, Geek, I have an AR-15, give me the magazines!"

. . . I'm not obligated to give you the magazines.

Thursday, October 13, 2005

Croc Match Videos I

For months, I've been threatening to post IPSC Match Videos online.

I have software and an IP which allow me to post photos, but the movies are a lot more complicated.

Now, thanks to Brian B. (whose name I can't spell correctly), I have access to a IP who not only provided the server but also a lot of coaching so that The Geek can share videos with everyone.

(H/T to SWMBO, who actually filmed movies at the 2005 Croc Match.)

Right now, I have about 200MB of movies, mostly from the Croc Match. Here are the first few videos. Please download the files and save them on your PC, rather than attempt to view them directly. In this case, "BandWidth" IS a serious consideration, and when the files are accessed in any way other than 'download', it makes the data access run slower for everyone.

Be advised that the maximum download rate is something like 97 KB/s and these files run from 7 to 15 MB. I'll try to keep you informed about the subject, the file size, and the significance of each video.


This is a 62-round-minimum, 310-point Comstock stage which requires the competitor to do a LOT of movement, keep track of rounds shot and rounds remaining in the magazine, and find the very best solution to the shooting problem based on his or her own strengths . . . and magazine capacity. The back wall, built with orange perforated snow-fencing, features ports which are partially blocked by doors. In the far right and left hand corners of this back array, Pepper Poppers are situated at extreme angles. When they are shot and knocked down, they move the doors to partially obscure one port and completely open another port right next to it. When you are shooting a 10-round max capacity class (Limited 10 or Production), you are forced to do a 'standing reload'. Also, the arrays which feature the Pepper Poppers also have 4 IPSC targets, which means that you need a minimum of 9 rounds to successfully engage all targets. Even if you're shooting a hi-cap gun, you require a minimum of 17 rounds to complete both adjacent arrays without reloading.

Designed by Marty Lee, this stage challenges the competitor to not only keep track of round-count and perform reloads ONLY when needed, but because it requires a lot of movement it tempts the competitor to push the 180-line when moving backwards to engage the three sloped targets hiding behind barrels at the uprange end of each side. Whether the competitor if moving uprange or downrange, it's entirely possible to DQ on this stage because it is loaded with 180-traps.

Besides that, it's a HUGE stage. In future posts, we'll see gun jams, DQ's, and competitors searching their pockets for that last magazine in order to complete it.

But first, let's watch the match winner, and the winner of Production Class, as they work their similar-but-different approaches to this Monster Stage.

(Look at the videos, or the still at the end of the post, to get a 'feel' for the stage. The still-pictures of Yong Lee and Darrion Holliwell were taken on the Jungle Run stage, and are included only to identify them.)

The first video (I'll only include two, as a trial) is Limited GM Yong Lee shooting the stage in Bay 4 at the 2005 Croc Match. Click on this link to download it.

(Same file available from the URL shown below)
(File size 8.28MB, download time 1:30 at 97 KB/s,Video time 43 seconds.)

Well, that went well. You'll have to look at a lot of videos to see THIS stage run any faster. Actual run time was 21.96 seconds for 283 points, and since Yong Le won the stage he was awarded the maximum 310 points.

Here's what it looks like when shot in Production Division. The shooter is Darrion Holiwell, who rode down from the Seattle area to shoot this Oregon match.
(File size 8.48MB, download time 1:30 at 97 KB/s,Video time 43 seconds.)

Can you see the awkward choices the Production Shooter has to make in deciding when to reload? About 9 or 10 seconds into the stage, he has to make a reload to shoot only four (4) rounds at two IPSC targets (not visible in the film.)

Darrion completed the stage in 36.81 and earned 274 pounts for a stage total of 179.0563 points and a 38th place for the stage.

For comparison, I completed the stage (shooting Open with hi-cap mags) in 27.22 seconds and 274 points, but I racked up 70 points in penalties for missed shots which earned me a stage score of 49th place and 162 stage points.

No videos exist of my run on this stage. It cost me a lot to make them disappear, but it was worth it.

Future posts will eventually NOT display the entire URL, but will only show the highlighted link to the file. Just click on it, follow the instructions on the pop-up. If your browser doesn't support this click-and-download option, please email me (address at the bottom of the page) and let me know. I don't mind showing the URL, it just makes the post seem kind of cluttered.

Here's a look at the stage without all the action:
Free Image Hosting at

Tuesday, October 11, 2005

October Blogmeat

Publicola has done his homework on recent TSA regulations concerning flying with ammo. Seems there are existant laws that still apply. Of course, that doesn't mean that you can figure out how to put your handloads 'in the original package'.

Mark Jurey *(no, I've never heard of him either) tells us how to make a perfect "Penny Alcohol Backpacking Stove" out of three beer cans. H/T Waddcutter.

Yes, I've read the directions. No, I don't understand them. But I appreciate the "First, drink three Heinekins" part of the directions. Apparently, you can't follow the directions without the beer.

(Is this anything like the classic directions for Hassenpfeffer? "First, catch a rabbit.")

Gullyborg is hot to trot with some fascinating links (including some Birdman Weapons Systems stuff that I haven't seen before . . . and much that I have) and a sh*tpot of Gratuitous Gun Photos. Check it out here. It's worth it if only just for the pictures. No, I didn't contribute this week. Again.
Free Image Hosting at


Canoe has it's photoday picture up, here's a piece of it.
Image Hosted by

Naw, The Geek isn't showing this! It's a fly in the ointment!

Go here to get the whole thing, and shame on you!

Tanks For The Memories

Am I the only one who is interested in Tanks?

I mean, besides The Donovan, who is the (h/t) source for this website.

Photos of WWII ("The Big One") tanks, gratuitously displayed and lovingly detailed.
I'm liking this, it's on my permanent bookmark.

Here's a sample:
Free Image Hosting at


Finally, here's a link that proves you can get information here that you can't get anywhere else.

There's probably a reason for that.

Uh, no, I'm wrong. This is (h/t) from Ghost of a Flea.

You can make book on it.

Target Taper Alternative

The Unofficial IPSC List has noted that CED offers a different target taper, which is, in the minds of some people, superior to that previously sold by TargetTaper.COM.

Free Image Hosting at

The "Quick Patch" target taper (above) sells for $79.95, compared to $44.95 for the T-4000 Target Taper (below).
Image Hosted by
One advantage of the Quick Patch model is that it " . . . will handle most brands of full size patches available on the market today." The pasters shown in the Quick Patch picture looks like the kind of pasters which you can get from Target Barn for hand-patching targets.
Image Hosted by

The price from Target Barn for these pasters is $3.50 per two rolls of 500, making it competitive with the price from CED.

I have to admit, I do prefer these pasters because they're bigger than those used by the T-4000 Target Taper. It doesn't make much difference usually, except that the larger pasters make it EASIER to completely mask a .45 caliber bullet hole. Why? The pasters for the T-4000 are easily 3/4 inches on one dimension, but only about a half-inch on the other. The Target Barn pasters mentioned above seem to be about 3/4 inch square.

Also, the larger patches provide more area to stick to the cardboard, and may stay on the target more reliably when sloppily applied.

On the other hand, the patches sold by CED for the T-4000 cost just $2.50 for a 1000-paster roll. Compare this to the $3.50 price for 1000 of the larger pasters, which cost 40% more.

The Quick Patch gun costs about 80% more, the patches used for the Quick Patch cost 40% more.

(Also, you can buy a new T-4000 plus 25 rolls of tape [12,500 pasters] for $92.95 in the "Club Kit". The same price will buy you a new Quick Patch $79.95 and $13 worth of pasters . . . 3,000 pasters and you have a dollar left over to fritter away as you please.)

On the other hand, those who have used both prefer the Quick Patch for ease of use, and I have already cited the advantages of the larger pasters.

I suppose your choice will be a matter of personal preference. I've managed to get along fine with the T-4000 for three years, and after going through about 100 rolls of pasters the taper is still working fine, so I probably won't change. However, The Hobo Brasser has been experiencing problems with the tape jamming in his T-4000 for several months, and nobody can figure out what the problem is.

On the other hand, he has feeding problems with his Caspian, too.

Monday, October 10, 2005

Target Taper

Last week I ordered another box of brown target tapes from

Image Hosted by

I bought my Target Taper from them about three years ago, and it has worked great. I use a box of tapes (25 rolls, $50) in a little less than a year.

I was down to my last four rolls of tape, so I went to the website at and put in my order. They have an online order page, which I used, but I didn't give them my credit card number because I noticed it was an unsecured website. I wasn't comfortable with sending my credit card number when it isn't an encrypted transaction. Instead, I clicked "I'll Send A Check" and completed the order, then printed the order. I wrote out a check for $50. Then I thought again, and sent an email describing the process and a warning that this was NOT a second order, to the email address displayed on the web page (, which I note is no longer active) with a copy to myself. I printed out THAT document, and stuffed all the paperwork and the check into an envelope and sent it to the address given on the webpage. It was so fat, I put two stamps on it.

Job well done, what?

This morning, as I was walking to my office from the parking lot, I got a call on my cell phone. It was someone from Competitive Edge Dynamics (CED), and he wanted to talk to me about my Target Taper order!

The story is, CED has been selling the Target Taper and tapes here "for years", according to the guy on the phone, and they finally just decided to buy the silly old company. Unfortunately, my order came in right in the middle of finalizing the project (I love these managerial buzz-phrases - don't you?) CED told me that the Target Taper (TT) guy was suppose to take his website down, or stop people from ordering there, or otherwise no longer sell the product, but he doesn't seem to have got around to that little detail yet.

As a consequence, CED did receive my order, but the TT guy got my check. That is, CED assumes he got my check.

But TT had been selling the tapes for the stated cost of $50 (CED charges $49.95), and didn't bother to tell you what the Shipping and Handling charges (S&H) will be. CED is much more businesslike, so they're charging the $49.95 plus NINE DOLLARS S&H from Pennsylvania. They don't mention that S&H charge until after you have completed the order, by the way. I just tested it, I didn't take the test transaction down to where they ask you how you're going to actually pay for the bloody thing.

So, here's were we stand right now: Me (GEEK ), Competitive Edge Dynamics (CED), and the old business Target Taper (TT):
  • CED has GEEK order, promises to ship immediately
  • TT has GEEK check, and isn't saying anything to GEEK or to CED
  • GEEK has no tapes, no money, but fine promises
  • CED trusts GEEK about the check, but will bill said GEEK for the S&H
  • CED will negotiate with TT to get the check
  • GEEK will believe it all when he sees it
The bottom line is some GEEK advice:

Don't sent any orders to

Target Taper makes/made an excellent product, but since they're apparently no longer in the business of selling that excellent product, I would STRONGLY advise you to take your tape gun orders directly to the CED website, do not pass go, do not send money to TT. You may send your order to TT as long as the website remains active, which it is at the time of this writing . . CED is obviously receiving the orders . . . but unless you're just so lonely that you'll do anything to get an 8:30 am phone call from a vendor asking "WHERE THE HECK IS MY MONEY?" (in the very nicest way of course) you might seriously consider taking your business directly to the new owner and pay the S&H like a gentleman.

Once again, this link will take you DIRECTLY to the place where CED will sell you all the tapers and tapes you could use:

Yes, I realize I could have said all of that in about three terse sentences and a link.
But what's the fun in that?

Sunday, October 09, 2005



Kim du Tuit may have closed his website, but there is a "new website" under the name "The Nation Of Riflemen" available. There has been no transitional message, but the 'look and feel' of the original website has been preserved.

So have the politics, the attitudes, the gratuitous gun pictures, the photos of sultry movie-type babes, etc etc etc.

I don't know who the 'new editor' is, but I have a sneaking suspicion that his background is "African American" and his initials are KdT.



I've added the Day By Day Cartoon to this weblog. As a courtesy to those with modem access [envision smug GeekSmirk here], I've placed it in the FOOTER, so that access to the most recent post(s) will not be delayed while the DBD image is downloaded and displayed. Just scroll to the bottom of the page. I see no reason to EVER click on the link (see the sidebar on the right) but I'll leave it there anyway.

As this weblog evolves, I've added more and more links, options and helpful tools such as the 'look up your IPSC classifier record" function in the sidebar, and links to books & movies (even sometimes music albums) which I've found interesting.

I would sure like you to believe that I do this as a service to you, assuming that you have similar interests to my own. That's partly true, but I've found that I often call up my own blog when I want to access a frequently viewed website and I don't care to look through my browser history log for the URL. In fact, I've cheated the Columbia Cascade Section out of some traffic to that website (sorry, Mark) by linking directly to the Match Results websites of the clubs in that section. I did this when my only online access was via AOL/Modem, and I didn't care to wait for the background . . . however scenic . . . to load. Since this website is ALWAYS up when I'm browsing, it's a lot quicker and easier to click ONE link instead of following the CCS website framed webpath.

If you are an IPSC competitor and would like to see direct links to interesting websites here, let me know. I'm inclined to be choosey about which links I feature, if only because my sidebar is sometimes longer than the content pages! But I'll certainly consider it and, if it's a webpage that I like to visit, I'll add it to the sidebar and announce it here.

Maybe I'll even give you credit for the suggestion, if it's good, such as:

And if it's totally bogus (or worse, Commercial, I'll give you the Thumbs Down: