So I just received a comment on the Star Trek: DS9 alignments post as follows:
congrats!
You grabbed the number one google ranking for “DS9 character alignment” and Star Trek character alignment” from me.
This was followed, of course, by a link to said person’s webpage, which was presumably their page which previously had the number one Google ranking for those things. (Link has since been edited so it is no longer an active hyperlink.) Curious about their SEO desperation, I followed the link…
…and found my own damn alignment chart there.
This is why I watermark all my stuff now, even if I don’t always like the aesthetic thereof.
Related Articles
19 users responded in this post
*sigh*
I just don’t get why people would do that. I really don’t. I mean, I guess part of it is the “this is something cool, everyone have a look at it”, but why not link back to the source at least?
@Michael: Because they’re shameless attention whores.
It’s not the stealing that’s weird to me, it’s the contacting him to complain that the original is more popular that’s bizarre.
I almost went over there and raged at them, and then thought better of it. Is this what “being mature” feels like?
I just wanted to compliment you on a fine choice of pseudonym.
The funny thing is, the post is a year old. Apparently you managed to “grab” the top spot from him just by having the awesome rub off from your recent posts to older ones. Or something?
Also, I’ve noticed that many statements or posts around here, mostly but not entirely in the “D&D Explains Everything” category, that get called the nerdiest ever. Unfortunately though, I think it’ll be hard to top “congrats! You grabbed the number one google ranking for ‘DS9 character alignment’ and Star Trek character alignment’ from me.”
How long before rec.arts.rexthemotherfuckinwonderdog gets on your case?
Why does he care who has the number one Google result for “DS9 character alignment”? Who is checking this statistic other than him?
This is funny.
I can see what I posted could be seen as being snarky or bitching, but it was not meant that way.
But yes, watermark your stuff. I normally source where I find stuff, but (if I remember correctly) I ran across that image either in a forum post or on imgur.
Normally I source who creates the images I post online, but in this case (as with many image files), it was not tractable to the content creator until now.
Notice, I updated it with citing you as the source….
http://ifuckinglovestuff.tumblr.com/post/3069756911/star-trek-deep-space-9-character-alignment
Clearly we need to go nerdier. An alignment chart of search engines?
I was trying to work out a Psychoville alignment chart in my head the other day. It comes to something on a show where the Good line runs “Convicted thief” “Serial Killing manchild” and “Misanthropic Clown”.
OK, I went through his site, and it’s a fairly simple “Look at the cool shit I found on the web” web site. Taken in context, no one would really believe that he’s the creator of the material, rather the archivist. Sourcing would be nice, but hey, it’s the interwebs. It doesn’t always happen.
Actually, I like it. It makes it so I can put it as my desktop wallpaper without losing the bottom quotes.
Speaking of people taking your stuff…
http://blastr.com/2011/11/awesome-alignment-chart-m.php
Yeah, this is why I’ve had to watermark stuff at my toy review site for years now; even with watermarks I still see our Gundam photos turn up on eBay auctions. Which is actually sad because we’ve gotten much better at photography since our Gundam days.
Does this mean you won the internets? Is there like a certificate you get? With kittens?
So I clicked the blastr link regarding Futurama. I saw they had a credit of where they saw it (not here). That site had a credit. Which had a credit. Which had a credit.
… The internet just feeds off itself doesn’t it?
you should do an alignment chart of alignment charts. all the words should be in klingon, elfish, and esperanto.
as long as we are making alignment chart requests what about alignment charts of mightygodking contributors.