So far this morning I have received four spam* for Viagra. I’m not sure who’s spreading the rumour that I’m having problems keeping it up, but I’d like to go on record as saying that it’s as up as it ever was, given that I don’t have an it.
\nWhich means, by the way, that my it doesn’t need to be any longer or wider.
\nTwo of these spam, interestingly, employ what I assume is a filter-busting method: a long string of unrelated words in the subject line. To whit:
\n“elizabethan valois thermistor weiss aplomb crisis aileen clash eden quickie tallyho mcleod ogre onion ace proteolysis hollandaise”
\nAplomb?
\nAs in ‘he swallowed his Viagra with aplomb’?
\nAnd I don’t even want to think about ‘hollandaise’ in that context…
\n*Is this the correct plural form? There are enough technical writers and their ilk reading this – is it spam? spams? spumati?<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
So far this morning I have received four spam* for Viagra. I’m not sure who’s spreading the rumour that I’m having problems keeping it up, but I’d like to go on record as saying that it’s as up as it ever was, given that I don’t have an it. Which means, by the way, that … <\/p>\n