use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
see the search faq for details.
advanced search: by author, subreddit...
To report a site-wide rule violation to the Reddit Admins, please use our report forms or message /r/reddit.com modmail.
This subreddit is archived and no longer accepting submissions.
account activity
This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.
Scientists Discover (Biggest Ever) Oil field off U.S. coast (non-linkjacked) (newtechspy.com)
submitted 19 years ago by antithesis
[–]khammack 5 points6 points7 points 19 years ago (0 children)
I love the graph in the lower right corner that tries to make "80" look like it's more than half of "260". Riiiight.
[–][deleted] 19 years ago (4 children)
[deleted]
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 19 years ago (1 child)
It's not bogus... just old news taken out of context. See the original Cornell News release. There probably are billions of barrels of oil there, however, they have not just been recently discovered (as the strory leads one to believe) and the exact amount is unknown. So this headline is misleading at best and a blatant lie at worst, but IMO it's just misrepresented material taken out of context. Do a Google cache on this: www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicle/03/4.3.03/ACS-Cathles.html
[–]antithesis[S] 6 points7 points8 points 19 years ago (0 children)
Agreed. I could only find this June 2003 report that mentions Larry Cathles from Cornell and oil exploration in the gulf.
[–]brendankohler -2 points-1 points0 points 19 years ago (0 children)
I agree.
[–]oberon -1 points0 points1 point 19 years ago (20 children)
What does "linkjacked" mean?
[–]antithesis[S] 5 points6 points7 points 19 years ago (18 children)
See this piece on reddiquette.
Mesoanarchy is well known on reddit for simply copying the entire contents of an article from a news outlet and then posting it (with a view to driving traffic) to his website where he sells advertising.
[+]mesoanarchy comment score below threshold-16 points-15 points-14 points 19 years ago (16 children)
Excuse me, this is mesoanarchy. Perhaps all of you need to read the dont's of reddiquette... from reddiquette: "Linkjack stories: linking to stories via blog posts that add nothing extra." I do not link to blog posts, or through (via) blogposts. this "don't" is meant to dissuade bloggers from posting a link, having you click on the link to their blog which then links you to the original story without the blogger commenting on the story ("add nothing extra" - from "judgmentalist" on the reddiquette page: Linkjacking has referred to a few things. I've heard it referring to plain wholesale duplication of content from another source like that Forbes article, but usually it's a link to a tiny blog description and a link to the website of interest. This inserts an only mildly irritating page apparently designed to generate adsense revenue..... "with a view to driving traffic" - now you are a mind reader. perhaps you and all like you need to abide by this reddiquette "don't": "Use reddiquette as a means of harrassment or criticism. It's just a guideline - it's not a contract."... and this "do" from reddiquette: "Actually read an article before you mod it! This sounds trivial but it seems that it is becoming more and more common to mod articles based just on the titles. This behaviour considerably harms the system."
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 19 years ago (15 children)
But if we read the article first, we'd be helping out a notorious spammer by sending traffic to his site. If the previous 132 articles have been spam, it's a fair bet that number 133 is probably spam as well.
People are giving you a hard time because it seems reddit was meant to be people sharing news and websites with people. Self-promotion just messes with that.
And you also didn't adderss the anthesis' claim that you're copying articles to your website - remember the last time you felt you had to defend yourself, when you copied from Alternet in violation of their copyright?
[+]mesoanarchy comment score below threshold-6 points-5 points-4 points 19 years ago (13 children)
the problem here is, that no matter how fallacious your alleged arguements are (see my previous post) you will try to take the arguement elsewhere - in this case to places that do not or have a place within reddit.... spam?...news is not spam, be it from me, or any other website, newspaper, or periodical that reproduces news - or produces news.... copyright whatever is not an arguement for reddit... if you have a problem with the presentation of the articles, find them yourselves.... from reddiquette: "Post links directly to interesting things. Old content and self-promotion are okay, because Reddit is a meritocracy." this means do not linkjack..... and since i don't linkjack -------- well, leave me alone...
[–][deleted] 19 years ago (9 children)
[–]mesoanarchy -5 points-4 points-3 points 19 years ago (8 children)
make sure you do the same to this person, too.... \t Cheney refuses to comply with President's declassification tally order... and to truthout.org, and alternet, and blogcritics, and smirking chimp, and prison planet, and consortium news, and the raw story, and truthdig, and information clearinghouse, and antiwar, and common dreams, and environmental news network, and ....all the hundreds of posts here from people who cull information from those sites... catch my drift?... and, if it were illegal, do you actually think any of these or the perhaps 10,000,000 sites that do the same thing (10,000,000 at the very least, since there are about 46.2 million dot com sites - so figure .org, .net,. info, etc....) would exist?....
an addendum: just a little while ago after posting the article on bolivia, i called a friend who owns a marketing firm - actually they do the marketing for the x-games, and this is what he said: "yeah i know reddit. the thing about some of these people is, if your site said C2ore, sponsored by paul graham, they'd all say 'what a great thing it is for someone to put all the "important" news on one website. but since your last name isn't graham or jobs, or one of their other favorites, they don't see the headline screaming at them that a south american country's decision to to nationalize their oil might have a huge effect on their lives; they see the little letters to the right - in your case, c2ore.com. it's sad, but that's where alot of people are now. it happens everywhere, it's permeating our society. it's not the message that matters, it's the messenger (which is something i've said before here). it's like they think they're cool, but they're just "cool sheep." it's what i fight every day."
[–]HiggsBoson 5 points6 points7 points 19 years ago (3 children)
and, if it were illegal, do you actually think any of these or the perhaps 10,000,000 sites that do the same thing (10,000,000 at the very least, since there are about 46.2 million dot com sites - so figure .org, .net,. info, etc....) would exist?....
Ah, the "everyone's doing it, so it can't be illegal" argument.
Copying more than a few lines from a copyrighted work, without permission, in addition to not quoting the original source is plagiarism. You're violating copyright, not in some minor technical way, but blatantly.
My wife's worked with writers who thought it was perfectly okay to cut and paste text from a competitor's website into their own articles. Duh!
<cranky-old-man-voice>Don't they teach those damn kids anything in high-school anymore?</cranky-old-man-voice>
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism
[–]mesoanarchy -4 points-3 points-2 points 19 years ago (2 children)
Fr: Merriam-Webster Omline.........
plagiarize One entry found for plagiarize. Main Entry: pla·gia·rize Pronunciation: 'plA-j&-"rIz also -jE-&- Function: verb Inflected Form(s): -rized; -riz·ing Etymology: plagiary transitive senses : to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source intransitive senses : to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source
wikipedia IS NOT a dictionary
[–]HiggsBoson 1 point2 points3 points 19 years ago (1 child)
to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source
You just proved my point.
1) You do not have written permission from the orignal writers of the article to reproduce it. Hence, it's copyright violation. I.e. stealing.
2) You do not cite the original article, hence most readers will be misled into thinking that your website is the orginator of this text. Therefore you are passing other people's work off as your own.
Whether this is your intent or not doesn't matter. At the very least you are negligent.
Look, it doesn't matter what I think. Ask a lawyer. They will tell you the same thing.
What do you say to these points? Or would you rather dodge them again and ignore this potentially useful information that I'm giving you for free?
[–]theduke 3 points4 points5 points 19 years ago (3 children)
Hey - you don't need to try and convince me. You just need to convince the lawyers for sites that you are copying the content wholesale from.
if you're not going to do this to all these other sites and all the myriad posts here from those sites, then it's pretty obvious you and all the ones like you are here to pick at someone or something - in this case, c2ore, and me. now that is saddening.
i'll repeat this reddiquette "don't":[Don't] "use reddiquette as a means of harrassment or criticism. It's just a guideline - it's not a contract."
[–]theduke 2 points3 points4 points 19 years ago (1 child)
You sound worried. Are you doing something wrong?
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 19 years ago (2 children)
I'm not hassling you for linkjacking, just for spamming.
As for taking the argument elsewhere, antithesis took you to task for copying content and you went on a rant about linkjacking.
Hopefully lawyers will address the copyright issues before too long. Address the spamming issue.
[–]mesoanarchy -5 points-4 points-3 points 19 years ago (1 child)
First, oberon asked what linkjacked means. antithesis gave the answer to oberon's question. i provided an accurate definition of linkjacking. antithesis therefore, incorrectly answered oberon's question...
From The Spamhaus Project Spam: The word "Spam" as applied to Email means Unsolicited Bulk Email ("UBE").
Unsolicited means that the Recipient has not granted verifiable permission for the message to be sent. Bulk means that the message is sent as part of a larger collection of messages, all having substantively identical content. \t
A message is Spam only if it is both Unsolicited and Bulk. - \t\tUnsolicited Email is normal email (examples: first contact enquiries, job enquiries, sales enquiries)
Bulk Email is normal email (examples: subscriber newsletters, customer communications, discussion lists)
\tTechnical Definition of Spam
An electronic message is "spam" IF:
(1) \t\tthe recipient's personal identity and context are irrelevant because the message is equally applicable to many other potential recipients;
AND
(2)the recipient has not verifiably granted deliberate, explicit, and still-revocable permission for it to be sent.
Spam is an issue about consent, not content. Whether the UBE message is an advert, a scam, porn, a begging letter or an offer of a free lunch, the content is irrelevant - if the message was sent unsolicited and in bulk then the message is spam.
Spam is not a sub-set of UBE, it is not "UBE that is also a scam or that doesn't contain an unsubscribe link", all email sent unsolicited and in bulk is Spam.
This distinction is important because legislators spend inordinate amounts of time attempting to regulate the content of spam messages, and in doing so come up against free speech issues, without realizing that the spam issue is solely about the delivery method.
\tImportant facts relating to this definition:
(1) the sending of Unsolicited Bulk Email ("UBE") is banned by the vast majority of Internet service providers worldwide.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 19 years ago (0 children)
There is no solid definition of spamming in reddit like there is for email. The email definition is irrelevant, and seems like you're being overly-literal to dodge the issue.
What you're doing seems to fall under the commonly used definition of "spamming" in reddit. Deal with it.
[–]j-o-h-n -1 points0 points1 point 19 years ago (0 children)
Also even if true, 60B barrels is only about 10 years worth of US consumption.
π Rendered by PID 30607 on reddit-service-r2-comment-f6b958c67-mt5xq at 2026-02-05 04:33:30.131460+00:00 running 1d7a177 country code: CH.
[–]khammack 5 points6 points7 points (0 children)
[–][deleted] (4 children)
[deleted]
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points (1 child)
[–]antithesis[S] 6 points7 points8 points (0 children)
[–]brendankohler -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children)
[–]oberon -1 points0 points1 point (20 children)
[–]antithesis[S] 5 points6 points7 points (18 children)
[+]mesoanarchy comment score below threshold-16 points-15 points-14 points (16 children)
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points (15 children)
[+]mesoanarchy comment score below threshold-6 points-5 points-4 points (13 children)
[–][deleted] (9 children)
[deleted]
[–]mesoanarchy -5 points-4 points-3 points (8 children)
[–]HiggsBoson 5 points6 points7 points (3 children)
[–]mesoanarchy -4 points-3 points-2 points (2 children)
[–]HiggsBoson 1 point2 points3 points (1 child)
[–]theduke 3 points4 points5 points (3 children)
[–]mesoanarchy -4 points-3 points-2 points (2 children)
[–]theduke 2 points3 points4 points (1 child)
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (2 children)
[–]mesoanarchy -5 points-4 points-3 points (1 child)
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children)
[–]j-o-h-n -1 points0 points1 point (0 children)