Salty Droid: Man on a Mission or Internet Troll? Or Me and Mr. Jones


Jason Jones, aka Salty Droid, will be writing his latest story about me and BlogWorld today. I am not exactly sure what will be in it, but it is sure to include at least parts of the email and Skype exchanges included in this post.

I’m not sure when I first read the Salty Droid blog, but I know it was a post about Naomi Dunford explaining what a horrible person she was. I thought it was really funny. It was also really mean and in my opinion 100% deserved.

Salty Droid is a blog written by Jason Jones who says he is dedicated to exposing internet frauds and scammers. It is also the name of the “fake robot” alter ego of Jones. The blog is written from the perspective of the fake robot aka Salty Droid. The blog’s tag line is “…you can’t make money online.”

Jason uses lots of strong language that is offensive to many, but hilariously funny to others. Where Jason leaves off, his commenters take it much further. His comment section can get pretty rough and as far as I can tell is not moderated.

Here are a couple excerpts from posts on Jason’s blog:

“This past March :: BlogWorld New Media Expo Cofounder & CEO Rick Calvert asked me if I’d “consider” giving a keynote at an upcoming BlogWorld event. Of course :: he didn’t ask me himself … because he’s a cowardly bitch. And he didn’t ask me a couple of years ago when it would have been hip :: and prescient :: and brave … because he’s a cowardly {not hip or prescient} bitch.”

“…because people are not feeling like now is a good time to fuck with me Chris Brogan. Yet here you are :: all fat :: and dirty :: and groganish … pasting me … the MOTHERFUCKING SALTYDROID {not to brag} … into your goddamn scam blog as a way to distance yourself from the very thing that you are.”

Most of his targets are people you have probably never heard of like Frank Kern, Perry Belcher, Ryan Deiss, James Arthur Ray, Russel Brunson and a host of others. But he also talks about
some names you might recognize; Matt Cutts (the head of Google’s Webspam team) and infomercial guy/motivational speaker Tony Robbins, for example.

At some point he started adding some very popular and respected bloggers to his list. Coincidentally, they were also speakers at our show and friends of ours like Darren Rowse, Chris Brogan, Brian Clark of CopyBlogger, Jim Kukral and others.

Occasionally I would hear from a friend or someone on our staff that Jason had mentioned our event or one of our speakers. I would drop by and see what was said, but it was usually just insults and claiming person X was a scammer or a fraud etc. I really took most of it as shtick.

Fast forward to last April when me, my partner Dave and our new conference director Shane were discussing potential topics for our June event in New York.

One of the ideas we came up with was to have a talk about what exactly are legitimate, acceptable and ethical business practices for content creators and what aren’t.

Are things like SEO, affiliate marketing, internet marketing, email marketing, pay per click, content marketing, and pay per post acceptable or not?

Fortune 500 companies, small businesses, bloggers, podcasters, Web TV creators and, yes, scammers all use these tools. All of them have their detractors and proponents.

These tools and others are always talked about in the hallways at our show and, really, any other social media or technology event. If you asked our community about it, you are likely to get a thousand different answers.

I have had numerous conversations about them with friends, attendees, speakers and sponsors and have overheard many more.

One very successful podcaster told me last year that all SEO was snake oil. I am 100% confident he is dead wrong about that, but he was just as certain he was right and refused to even listen to
any counter argument. I had the exact same experience this year at our TBEX event in Denver where a popular mainstream journalist and speaker at our show refused to attend Rand Fishkin’s
(SEOMoz) keynote because he believes anything to do with SEO must be a scam.

The internet is still in its infancy, or at the very least its adolescence, so a lot of these terms and tools are widely misunderstood and, yes, many times abused.

It was my idea to reach out to Jason to see if he would consider speaking at the show. I mean who else to start this conversation than the man who thinks anyone who makes money online is,
by definition, a crook?

Long story short, I asked Shane to contact Jason while I contacted a couple of our speakers to see what they thought about it. While we did discuss the possibility of Jason’s talk potentially being
a keynote, that’s not what Shane was supposed to ask him. It being his first month on the job, Shane jumped the gun and asked Jason if he would like to keynote our show.

When everyone I talked to said they didn’t want anything to do with the fake robot, we decided not to ask him to speak. I never contacted Jason after Shane’s email exchange with him,
Jason quickly posted an “expose” on us that included Shane’s email to him. C’est la vie.

Those of you who know me, know I am pretty stubborn. I’m also not afraid of bullies, especially on the internet. Now I was intrigued by Jason and his fake robot. Right around this time he wrote
a post on my friend Chris Brogan, accusing him of being a scammer. I read it several times and I swear I couldn’t find one actual piece of evidence that Chris had ever done anything wrong. It was just a bunch of innuendo and insults.

So I instructed our editor to find an objective journalist to write a story about the Salty Droid blog. I wanted someone to thoroughly review his posts that mentioned any BlogWorld speaker or our event. Vet any claim of wrong doing he made and report if it was accurate or not.

My instructions were clear. If there was any legitimate claim of wrong doing we are going to report it, if there was no evidence we would report that, and if it was all insults and accusations we would report that.

We hired someone to write the story, a journalist named David Copeland. David is a writer for Read Write Web, who has also written for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, the Dow Jones News Service, the Boston Globe, Boston magazine, and the Wall Street Journal. He is a journalism professor at Bridgewater State University in Massachusetts and is also author of Blood & Volume: Inside New York’s Israeli Mafia. In full disclosure, David has spoken about journalism and ethics at our conference.  However, after a few weeks he got back to us that no one would go on the record about Jason. He didn’t know where to go with the story. Then he heard Jason was coming after him which I had warned him about upfront.

In the end, the story wasn’t what we were looking for. There weren’t any definitive conclusions to report one way or the other, so we decided to ditch the article, hire someone new and start over.

Fast forward to September 25 and the ensuing email exchange (warning: it is long)

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 6:34 PM, saltydroid <saltydroid@gmail.com> wrote:

Rick ::

So I’m finishing up my story about your hiring Dave Copeland to write “objectively” about me and my wrongness.

I’d like to give you an opportunity to comment on the record first though …

1. Is the story still on? If not, what happened?

2. Did you know that Copeland started his research by putting in a totally daft HARO request?

3. To your knowledge, did Dave Copeland ever do a single interview? He represented to me that he had done many.

4. Did you pay him up front?

5. Will he be speaking at any of your future events?

6. Any other general comments on the matter you think I should consider?

Thanks Rick.


:: >>
SaltyDroid

Then another email from Salty the next day:

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:36 PM, saltydroid <saltydroid@gmail.com> wrote:

What’s wrong ChattyCathy? Cat got your tongue?

So Mr. Copeland tells me that the article is off because you weren’t going to pay him if he wrote the article with integrity {paraphrasing} … and that he has retracted his acceptance of a speaking gig at the next #NMX over these events.

True?

Sounds pretty bad for you Rick … I guess if you don’t have any comment I’ll have to assume that’s an accurate portrayal of events.

I replied on Friday the 28th:

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Rick Calvert <rick@blogworldexpo.com> wrote:

First question, am I talking with Jason or your fictional character?

Sorry I missed your email before. I have been on-site producing an event and traveling since it ended without a good internet connection. I am back in the states Oct 6.

Your accusation if false and baseless.

Salty replied:

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 10:39 AM, saltydroid <saltydroid@gmail.com> wrote:

Sure, you can talk to Jason for awhile.

How are my accusations false and baseless? I haven’t even made any yet.

Did you see this yet?

http://bjmendelson.com/2012/09/06/a-textbook-example-of-attack-and-distract-thanks-to-new-best-friend-dave-copeland/

Classy stuff.

I replied:

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Rick Calvert <rick@blogworldexpo.com> wrote:

“So Mr. Copeland tells me that the article is off because you weren’t going to pay him if he wrote the article with integrity {paraphrasing}”

Untrue.

Then Salty:

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 12:19 PM, saltydroid <saltydroid@gmail.com> wrote:

Okay … well that’s his accusation not mine. I’m asking you to comment on it.

“Untrue.”

… is not a comment. Well I guess it sort of is … but it’s not a very useful one.

My response later that day:

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Rick Calvert <rick@blogworldexpo.com> wrote:

Sorry Jason I was writing a long email reply but its midnight here an I have to pack for a 4:30 taxi to the airport tomorrow. I will get back to you tomorrow night Munich time.

Then his:

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 4:52 PM, saltydroid <saltydroid@gmail.com> wrote:

Alright Rick.

And then:

On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 5:20 PM, saltydroid <saltydroid@gmail.com> wrote:

Can I get my answers now Rick?

This story needs to run before Thursday, and if you want me to give a fair hearing to your side of the story … then you need to give me time to verify and confirm whatever you tell me. Cause unlike Dave Copeland, I am very meticulous and careful.

Leading to:

On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, saltydroid <saltydroid@gmail.com> wrote:

Well, so much for Thursday. You’re pretty bad at saying your going to do something … and then not. This is why I don’t let people talk to Jason. Nobody responds to polite pestering. The robot could have said …

“Hey Rick :: does the fucking Earth rotate slower in Munich or something …
because “tomorrow” just came and went.”

Classic stuff!

But I guess I can do Koenigs exploits ass cancer today, then Naomi Dunford’s latest bit of
bullshit … and bump this BlogWorld/Copeland thing to Monday/Tuesday. It might actually help, because the Naomi thing will probably help build traffic and interest for the BlogWorld v. SaltyDroid {Part 3} post.

It’s strange don’t you think, how all your blogging about blogging speakers promoted the crap of her … and then pushed out her fake death threat claims … but not a single one of them has ever retracted their endorsement or issued a mea culpa about death threat defamation. It’s almost like they have some big secret to hide that goes way beyond Naomi?

Jason

And then:

On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Rick Calvert <rick@blogworldexpo.com> wrote:

sorry Jason. I am traveling (in Amsterdam this morning) I really do want to respond to you and will. I am packing and heading off to the airport to fly home now. So on a plane all day.

And more:

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 5:22 PM, saltydroid <saltydroid@gmail.com> wrote:

Rick let’s have this email chat pronto.

This story is going up Thursday because it’s basically all researched and ready to be written, and I have two other huge things I’m working on that aren’t to be written about any time soon, so this is what I’ve got … my only story this week. Thursday … final offer.

I’m going to quote people in the story, something I basically never do, as part of the joke about Copeland not doing his job. Funny right? So if you don’t want to comment then I’ll quote you standing me up again … which is fine by me because that is also quite funny.

The photo is Paul Colligan at Mike Koenigs’ scam-a-thon two weekends ago. Koenigs is one of the scamworld main men … and being his sad little sycophant is Paul’s main gig. He filmed BlogWorld promos at Mike’s “studio” … for which I’m sure you paid nothing. He was pushing “studio time” to victims at this seminar as being worth tens of thousands for a couple of hours. I’ve got pictures of that too if you want. Any event I want to snoop on, any product, any service … I’ll be able to find someone to help me out. What’s on the blog represents less than 5% of my knowledge on these matters.

Maybe it would be easier for you to respond if you admitted that you initially misread my seriousness, and seriousness of my cause?

Then, finally:

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM, saltydroid <saltydroid@gmail.com> wrote:

Okay then … your no comment has been noted. Who needs your comments anyway … when I have this instead?

[8/17/12 3:51:06 PM] Rick Calvert: Hey Dave you around?

[8/17/12 3:57:39 PM] Dave Copeland: on a call

[8/17/12 4:02:29 PM] Rick Calvert: np. would you mind buzzing me when you are done. wanted to chat briefly abot this salty thing. I think you can see now, we weren’t trying to micromanage you. Just stay on top of his lynch mob. This is far from personal for me. it is just a story that I believe we are responsible to cover.

[8/17/12 4:11:35 PM] Dave Copeland: As I told Amber, I’m afraid I’m done – I feel like I’m being set up as the hired gun to go after his guy and all fo your speakers are on board with it, but none of them will step up and go on the record. It’s hard for me to dfend them when they won’t defend themselves. It’s just getting very weird and I’d rather not be associated with what is already be portrayed as a hatchet job. I’m sorry it didn’t work out as I invested huge amounts of time into this but I’m not going to put my reputation on the line and stoop to his level by publishing unsourced innuendo.

[8/17/12 4:13:40 PM] Rick Calvert: we never asked you to do that Dave. I would prefer to talk on the phone if you would give me 5 mins

[8/17/12 4:13:53 PM] Rick Calvert: First of all, I don’t want you being harmed in anyway.

[8/17/12 4:14:40 PM] Rick Calvert: I think we warned you before taking this on, how this guy is and what he would do. None of our speakers are on board with this or even aware of it. No one wants us to talk to or about this guy.

[8/17/12 4:15:32 PM] Rick Calvert: they are wrong. This is a huge issue for the new media industry. it is our job to talk about issues like this. I know I also told you let the chips fall where they may. If any of our speakers are guilty of any wrong doing, we don’t want them in the show and we want the truth to come out as well

[8/17/12 4:17:28 PM] Rick Calvert: I am the one getting ripped up here. I am a big boy I can take it. Its just words on the internet. I saw your bio Dave. You have taken on guys with real guns who could really hurt you.

[8/17/12 4:18:11 PM] Rick Calvert: We never told you want to write for this story or anything else and never would.

[8/17/12 4:21:49 PM] Dave Copeland: I’m certainly not scared of this guy, Rick. But what he’s doing is opinion: if someone sues him for libel, if someone shows me where he is dead wrong, there’s something to write about. I can’t right a cut-and-dry piece saying “this guy’s opinions are wrong” when none of the people he’s targeting will step up and say just that.

[8/17/12 4:23:30 PM] Dave Copeland: Then he goes after you and now it looks like I’m coming in after the fact because he dinged you up

[8/17/12 4:23:37 PM] Rick Calvert: again I never asked you to do that. If its just opinion, then thats what the story should say.

[8/17/12 4:24:40 PM] Rick Calvert: I think we discussed this when you took the gig. We expected him to write something. Thats why we didn’t have a hard deadline but we did want it as quickly as doing the job thoroughly would allow to hopefully not be in the position we are in publishing after him.

[8/17/12 4:25:14 PM] Rick Calvert: But I dont care. We are going to do this story. I dont care if it takes a year to get it done right. I have never worked in an industry where people were afraid to talk about a big issue. its really weird to be honest

[8/17/12 4:25:21 PM] Dave Copeland: I’ll snedover what I have when I get off this call

[8/17/12 4:25:30 PM] Dave Copeland: send over

[8/17/12 4:25:58 PM] Rick Calvert: ok. Dont let me distract you from the call. again. Id appreciate a few minutes going to voice to clarify what we are trying to do

[8/17/12 4:51:23 PM] Dave Copeland: still stuck on this call but I took a quick look at what I had an emailed it to Amber.

[8/17/12 4:51:29 PM] Rick Calvert: ok

[8/17/12 4:51:54 PM] Dave Copeland: sending file to Rick Calvert

SaltyDroid.doc
43.5 KB

[8/17/12 6:12:41 PM] Rick Calvert: thanks Dave. I think this is fine. I realize this was a tough assignment. I really did try to warn you about how vindictive this guy is. It’s one of the many reasons why we need to cover the story.

[8/17/12 6:13:17 PM] Rick Calvert: More than anything I want you to be clear about my intentions here. I want the truth no matter what that is and where it leads.

[8/30/12 11:07:55 AM] Dave Copeland: Hey there…just wanted to get a status update on what else you need/want me to do on that post. I’d like to try to close that out.

1. Got something to say now?

2. Alison Navarro requested that you send her info about the LAPD investigation into Naomi’s fake death threats. Do so with fucking alacrity, or I’m going to call you liar on that very sensitive subject.

Jason out.

And my reply to Jason last night after writing this blog post:

Sorry for not responding Jason. It wasn’t out of a lack of respect for you or lack of interest. I was working our event in Spain, took some time off afterwards and then got sick when I came home.

Obviously I have my job to do and a lot of work to catch up on. You can see by the Skype
exchange you have shared that addressing your claims particularly when they are about our event is important to me but it’s not my number one priority.

I am still committed to having an objective journalist vet your posts about our event and our speakers. All I want is for a neutral party to report if you have posted any factual evidence of wrong doing or not. If all you post is “rick is a liar; rick is fat; rick didn’t comment on something I asked him to comment on” then that’s what I want reported. I would love to get people to go on the record responding about your posts but I can’t force them and I can’t be the one to ask the questions. That wouldn’t be objective.

I am happy for you to print this entire exchange. It says pretty much what I would have told you anyway.

As you can see, I wasn’t telling Dave anything different in private than I was saying to you in public.

Call me whatever you like. My responsibility was and is to the safety of our attendees when someone publicly claims harm might come to them. I fulfilled that responsibility by reporting it to the authorities. They assured us there was nothing to worry about. I have no interest in being involved in someone else’s drama.

As I have said in comments on your blog and other places, I support you or anyone else exposing real wrong doing, real scams etc. I just disagree with you when you claim people like Matt Cutts at Google and other people who I happen to know are scammers.

I still don’t know what your story is. Are you just overzealous? Are you crazy? Is this just a big game to you? Or am I the one that’s crazy and Matt Cutts really is a scammer?

Is my friend Chris Brogan who I have seen do so many generous things actually a bad guy in disguise?

*** UPDATE AS OF 10:30am ET today

Salty responded this morning:

From: saltydroid <saltydroid@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: where’s my hit piece?

Chris Brogan isn’t wearing a disguise. I refuse to believe that you’re this naive. If you’re so naive … if your conscious is without guilt … then why did you totally overreact like you did to scamworld? don’t bother answering now because it’s too late and I already know the answer. nothing tells the truth like a person’s reactions.

If you contacted the LAPD and repeated what Naomi said … they would have contacted me because those were very serious allegations. They didn’t. Name the officer … or the incident number … both of which would have been given to you. You are lying.

It’s funny you think you come out okay in that chat. You want him to have something ready for when I write about you {which I wasn’t planning on doing by the way} … and yet you keep saying it’s going to be “objective”. That’s oxymoronic and moronic. Then you don’t print it when it doesn’t say what you want.

I don’t give a fuck about your respect or interest Rick … I’m fighting for hundreds of thousands of harmed parties who have almost no voice or advocates. Am I crazy? I don’t know … but I’m going to get change for them I can promise you that.If you don’t want to see change … better make your next hire a hitman because nothing short of that is going to slow me down.

My response:

You have probably seen my blog post from this morning but just in case:
http://www.blogworld.com/2012/10/11/salty-droid-man-on-a-mission-or-internet-troll-or-me-and-mr-jones/

I assume everything I say to you is on the record and will be posted on your blog Jason. So I went ahead and posted our entire email exchange. I will update the post with this exchange as well.

So anyone who doesn’t agree with everything you say must be a guilty of something?

You know that sounds crazy right?

You are talking about some people who I have known for several years. While I’m not best friends with any of them, I think I have spent enough time with them and have seen enough of their character to tell they aren’t the scam artists you are accusing them of being.

Which by the way you have never met any of them personally right? You have never seen how they treat people. How they act, and what they say. You just judge them as guilty due to some association however small it may be with some other nefarious person.

Again it sounds like the logic of a zealot.

You keep saying things like this “Rick … I’m fighting for hundreds of thousands of harmed parties who have almost no voice or advocates. Am I crazy? I don’t know … but I’m going to get change for them I can promise you that.”

I am on board with you 100% in that mission. I just see you dragging some good people down who in my opinion don’t deserve it.

So that’s the latest email exchange with me and Jason. Jason seems to think my Skype exchange
with Dave Copeland is incriminating in some way. I just don’t see it.

I need to mention that everyone on our staff including my partner Dave Cynkin wants me to just
ignore him. I have had many friends say there is no benefit to having this conversation.

But as I said above I am stubborn. It’s the political blogger in me. I love a good argument even
when and if I am proven wrong.

I just do not understand why people are unwilling to comment on Jason’s accusations. Maybe
you can tell me what I am missing.

Is this story interesting?

Most importantly I would love to hear what our community thinks. Is Jason’s blog telling hard
truths in an irreverent off beat style or is he just a troll with a blog?

One last housekeeping note for Jason’s fans who are sure to comment. Feel free to make your
arguments, but be respectful. Insults, slurs and unsupported accusations will be deleted.

Photo Credit: Bigstock

Join us in Las Vegas at our biggest event ever! REGISTER TODAY for best savings on your pass! Want to learn how to create better content for your Blog, Podcast or Video Series from the most successful content creators? What about growing your audience or monetizing in smart, sustainable ways? How about leveraging social media marketing to grow your brand, sales and community? Come network with peers and most importantly, find the solutions you need at the world's largest conference and trade show for the new media industry, New Media Expo! Reserve your seat at the best price now!
  • Tip Techmeme

Comments

  1. Cala Lily says:

    Isn’t one of the most important rules of journalism to protect your sources? I know who I won’t be hiring to write my stories. I won’t be reading RWW any time soon either if this is the caliber of journalist they hire. Two words for you Rick “Non Disclose.”

    • I do know journalists have gone to jail to protect their sources. But I certainly trust articles I read when sources are on the record vs. anonymous.

      It’s 6:30 in the morning so I may not be awake yet but I didn’t get your comment to me Cala.

  2. So many things online are silo’d out – podcasters fear/hate bloggers (and the other way around) – bloggers fear/hate journalists (and the other way around) – content marketers fear/hate SEO (and the other way around). Just because something works – or doesn’t – for you doesn’t make it snake oil.

    A tool is only a tool – only as good as the person or company using it. I also spot another tool, going by the name of some sort of robot. Enjoy your 15 minutes of unwarrented, unearned fame buddy.

    • _cartman_ says:

      Just because something works – or doesn’t – for you doesn’t make it snake oil.

      What makes something “snake oil”, are fraudulent claims/tactics used to “sell” it. Whether or not something appears (correlation does not equate to causation…except in the pseudo reality of r-tards) to have a certain benefit, is irrelevant.

      ie: selling vitamin C as a cure for cancer = snake oil, selling vitamin C as a prevention for scurvy snake oil.

      Do you grasp that?

      *Editor’s Note: This comment has been slightly edited to remove name-calling, which is against the NMX comment policy.*

  3. Rick – I love your enthusiasm and naivety about this topic. We live in a very small village. Those of us who have been here a while all have stories to tell. Who slept with who at which conference, who had an affair with who, who is really a $10,000 Millionaire, who is barely keeping the lights on, whose book proposal was just rejected etc. etc. There are two reasons why no one would go on the record for the journalist – firstly, some of us truly are friends with each other in more than just the Facebook sense and we aren’t going to dish the dirt on our friends, secondly, even if we aren’t friends with people, we may well be dependent on their good will for income. As with any small village if you break the social code the village will turn on you in a heartbeat. Heck this village will turn on people who have barely grazed the social code let alone broken it.
    While I applaud your efforts to bring transparency to a community that preaches and even demands transparency to others – I really doubt you are going to find someone willing to sacrifice their career to do so.

    • Thank you for the comment Simon.

      If what you are saying is true then those are careers that deserve to be sacrificed. This is not what new media is supposed to be about.

      Trust me I am as cynical as the next guy and I don’t think new media is utopia come to pass but everyone of us in it has a responsibility to make it the best it can be. Particularly when we run the event for the industry.

      • Rick, who would cast the first stone, and who is to judge who’s career is sacrificed and who’s is saved? I truly doubt that any of the big names who may have committed a transgression would be sacrificed, they are too big of a crowd draw, so that leaves the lesser names – which is always the way of the world. So instead everyone maintains silence.

        • @Simon ::

          I think this is pretty much true all the time everywhere …

          “I truly doubt that any of the big names who may have committed a transgression would be sacrificed, they are too big of a crowd draw, so that leaves the lesser names – which is always the way of the world.”

          … it’s so annoying … and so absolutely counter-productive.

          I’ll hope you’ll note that I have the opposite strategy.

    • Couldn’t agree with Simon more. Everyone has skeletons in their closet. Everyone in this industry has some element of bullsh*t in what they do, what they say and what they claim. Some more than others.

      Why go on the record honestly to “out” someone’s activity when that person may have some dirt on you or at least put you in the spotlight to have any of it dug up? That’s why it hasn’t happened.

      Plus the fact that there’s a cult-like dynamic throughout much of this industry where much of your success comes or can come through others promoting your work, affiliating your product, guesting on your webinars, etc. You don’t think anyone that speaks up will be ostracized from this “circle of trust” for calling shenanigans?

      While I do believe Jason Jones sometimes draws a bit exaggerated conspiratorial conclusions from a few simple facts, but conceptually, I think he’s spot on most of the time and hits the true tip of the iceberg on issues, that if researched and vetted properly would turn out to be extremely accurate.

    • Lucretia Pruitt says:

      Have to say I concur with Simon here. But he missed a reason: people don’t really want to know sometimes and will actually “kill the messenger” rather than acknowledge that someone might be not quite the image s/he presents.

      There was a time where I thought most people approached this from the same perspective I do (and Rick seems to be presenting) – that if there is someone lying to me? I’d rather know it than not. I was very wrong. It turns out that most people prefer their heroes to remain heroes, their friends to remain the people they see them as, and will do much to preserve whatever image they have built about someone.

      Honestly, can you blame them? Do you think the fans of the Droid would willingly accept information that countered their image of him? Or for than matter, the fans of anyone he writes about?

      Being the person who goes on the record about the Emperor’s new clothes is a job that no one particularly cares to be as it is seldom rewarded and often results in dire consequences for the whistleblower.

  4. Simon – No one is going to cast the first stone even though we can all out social media gurus for bad behavior. I think that’s not what Rick’s reporter wanted everyone to go on record about. People aren’t willing to go on the record not because they don’t want to out someone for having an affair but because they don’t want to get on Salty Droid’s radar. I’m an Internet market and I spoke at BlogWorld twice. I do not scam people. Even though I have nothing to hide I’m not going on record because I don’t want Salty Droid getting pissy with me the way he got pissy with Rick.

    This whole thing is about Salty Droid acting like a pussy because Rick didn’t return his phone call. If you say something online and Salty Droid doesn’t like it, he comes after you. If he was fair I wouldn’t be worried but he’s not fair. We all know Chris Brogan isn’t out to steal from people but Salty Droid’s hit piece wanted you to think so.

    If we could all speak off the record and remain anonymous like the people who go to Salty Droid\, plenty of people would talk about what a jerk this guy is and how many of his claims are unfounded.

    Thanks for looking out for your speakers, Rick. You’ll always have my respect.

    • James Simpson says:

      Has Chris Brogan ever made a dollar online except by selling snake-oil, or selling your click to others who sell snake-oil? What, exactly, does Chris Brogan do to earn his barely getting by living? Chris Brogan’s paltry income seems to come from BSing about making money online when, in fact, he doesn’t. Will you help a brother out by telling me how Chris Brogan makes his unenviable income?

      • The first step James is to explain exactly how you definite snake oil.

        I took a Webinar that Chris charged for on how to use Google + last year. I thought it was worth every penny.

    • Feel free to make your
      arguments, but be respectful. Insults, slurs and unsupported accusations will be deleted.

  5. Thanks Lars. We wanted and still want someone to do two things. First review his posts and report what they find. Good bad or irrelevant. Then if possible we want people he has accused of wrong doing who have spoken at our show to respond to his accusations.

    If all he is saying is your fat, you live in a condo and you have bad credit, then there really isn’t anything to respond to. If he calls you a crook, you should be able to reply and explain why your not and why is accusation is unfair, baseless, crazy whatever the case may be.

    I think there are several reasons why people try to avoid him but I am really curious what Lars and Simon and anyone else who knows SEO better than I do think about a theory of mine. I think Jason plays a little bit of an SEO blackmail game. If you notice how he tags his posts he will name random people not even connected to story or tangentially connected in some way and connect their name with the term scammer or fraud.

    I think people just don’t want that negative stuff showing up in their organic google searches. The more attention anyone gives him the more it raises his (Jason’s) SEO rankings.

    In the real world if someone made an unfair accusation in a newspaper, magazine or television, you could go on and refute their claims or write a counter editorial and the truth hopefully comes out. On the internet these accusations live forever and the more you deny them they more attention they get.

    Am I right at all?

    As for me, I am not afraid to have this discussion at all because no one who would have any interest in attending our event would have their mind changed by this conversation and I know we aren’t doing anything wrong. It’s so easy to have an argument when truth is on your side.

    • The scammers out bid for all keywords pertaining to them, including gems like: “John Doe is a scammer.” They flood the search engines with their paid propaganda thereby blocking any legitimate research into their background. Were it not for Salty Droid being indexed by search engines, the average consumer attempting to perform due diligence would be completely stymied. Salty Droid is performing a much needed public service.

      Also, if a little person tries to sound the alarm on a scammer, the scammers just hire attorneys to send letters threatening lawsuits against such little person. Little people fold because they don’t have the war chest to fight the scammers’ attorneys. Salty Droid is performing a much needed public service.

  6. SaltyDroid says:

    Seems like this Jason kid really works hard to get asshole badguys to talk.

    Who knew?

    Thanks for giving us this little peak behind the curtains of an Internet legend Rick :: and for teasering my next post … which contains neither these emails nor that chat transcript.

    Toodles.

  7. John Roberts says:

    After reading this post I went to the Salty Droid blog and I read everything I could find on BlogWorld. It’s an awful, negative community filled with anonymous trolls and haters. No one is willing to go on record there which makes them far from credible sources.

    What disturbs me about Salty Droid isn’t so much the the claims, which don’t provide fact as much as speculation (speaking of good journalism, Droid), but how Allison Navarro seems to be just as victimized and manipulated by the Salty Droid as Dave was Naomi. Allison is turning into borderline bully herself. Salty Droid’s community reveres here as some sort of Madonna figure. Hark! Allison is speaking.

    I met Dave in Las Vegas the night before BlogWorld began where he was having beer with some other friends before Naomi was in the picture. He and Naoimi never even made it to BlogWorld the next day. The people who speak at BlogWorld and go to BlogWorld and work at BlogWorld had nothing to do with why Dave left you. No one even saw them at BlogWorld because they never showed up. Naomi was telling everyone she was boycotting BlogWorld so she never intended to go there in the first place. Dave and Naomi used BlogWorld as an excuse but the conference itself has nothing to do with why your husband left you.

    Allison, if you want to do good and warn the world of the evils of the Internet, there are more positive, plausible and effective role models than Salty Droid. Don’t let his mission cloud your judgement though. He’s using you for traffic and impact, not to mention your computer hard drive.

    Also disturbing is how people who piss off Salty Droid distract from the true problem. Shane Ketterman didn’t do anything wrong, Salty Droid wrote about him because no on called him back. Rick Calvert isn’t scamming anyone but Salty Droid felt slighted because his phone calls and emails were unanswered. Dave Copeland isn’t ripping anyone off but Salty Droid made him a victim because he dare write about him. It seems to me that Salty Droid lets his personal vendattas get in the way of his true mission which is supposed to be to expose scammers. Aside from his core audience of anonymous trolls and haters, very few people take Salty Droid seriously because he lets his his anger over not receiving a phone call cloud his personal judgement and because he thinks calling people fat is exposing some sort of dirty secret.

    One more thing, I’m not a lawyer and I don’t play one on the Internet but wouldn’t the above email exchange be considered harassment and cyberbullying? Take your emails and all the blog posts to an attorney Rick. You may have a casehere.

    • Dear Rick ::

      You said this …

      “Insults, slurs and unsupported accusations will be deleted.”

      So unless this Chief Justice John Roberts here has done some vast research into the personal lives of Dave and Alison … I think this comment has some content which demands deletion.

      And for the record :: I have no problems at all with Shane … he was just doing his job.

      • I agree. John’s comment has been moderated.

        • Rick :: I’m talking about the first sentence of the third paragraph.

          Justice Roberts does not know what Alison does or does not know. It is completely appropriate for her to opine about the happenings in her own life … people can take it or leave it. It is completely inappropriate for some random outsider to comment on the same. Especially during a period where the wrenched Naomi Dunford is once again heaping personal attacks on this innocent family … which was the reason you may recall … that I was forced to use Alison’s name in the first place.

    • I appreciate the comments and the support John. I did remove a couple adult words from your comment. We try to keep our comments respectful and we want to ere on the side of caution on this one more than any other.

  8. John Roberts says:

    Maybe it’s time you start letting Allison speak for herself, Droid. I didn’t attack her, I made an observation much in the way you make your own observations. I’m not going to take back anything or apologize just because it’s hitting a little to close to home.

    If you didn’t have a problem with Shane you should have kept him off your website.

  9. John Roberts says:

    Besides my being much more respectful, how is my opining any different from your opining and making comments such as:

    “BlogWorld New Media Expo Cofounder & CEO Rick Calvert {he insists that you call him by his full title on all occasions} … was born in a small stupid town that sat right outside a slightly larger stupid town. Rick always wanted to live in the slightly larger stupid town {where all the good people lived} :: but his family was too poor … they could barely afford to keep the goats. Rick’s mother was an Oompa-loompa :: and his father a failed professional bowler … hopelessly addicted to sniffing shoe glue. ”

    You can’t have it both ways, Droid. You say things like the above with no respect for Rick, his family or the people who work hard for BlogWorld so it’s kind of off for you to get on your high horse all of a sudden when it’s pointed out that a conference didn’t break up a marriage, a person broke up a marriage. I wasn’t disrespectful to Allison and I certainly didn’t treat her the way you treat people you don’t care for.

    • You’re right Justice Roberts …

      Rick ::

      I’m sorry that I revealed that the fake mother I made up for you was an Oompa-loompa :: I thought it was funny … but I guess it really wasn’t my place to disclose such an embarrassing fake detail.

  10. I really liked when Jason talked, instead of the Droid.

    But one thing needs to be asked, I think. To Rick: if all Salty’s got are opinions, then why pay attention to his accusations?

    To Jason: I am on Brogan’s email list and have talked to him a few times over email. In all honesty, your ‘take down’ of Chris Brogan had no evidence, only opinion. It is clear, you do not like how he works. But I don’t see him cheating. Then why say it like that, cussing and all?

    The people you are trying to help might as well be more welcoming to your opinion if it is not laced with curse words.

    hmmm….

    • Thanks Mo. To answer your question, because the truth needs to be defended. Bullies need to be confronted. The funny thing is Jason says he has a similar passion for his mission. He wants to expose scammers and frauds. I applaud that mission. But then I see good people labeled as scammers and frauds who aren’t who happen to speak at our event on his site. I felt compelled to address it.

      I know it was a very long post but if you listen to the vergecast Jason links to in his post today: http://ow.ly/erhxH At 33 minutes and 30 seconds in you will hear Danny Sullivan who is one of the most respected SEO people in the world call in and say very similar things to what I am saying. Calling out scammers is the right thing to do, but claiming anyone who makes money on the internet is by definition a scammer is completely wrong.

      Trying to equate people like Chris Brogan, Matt Cutts, Jim Kukral and several other good people to some of the other people on Jason’s site is wrong headed at best and deliberately misleading and shameful at worst.

      • Thanks for the reply, Rick.
        From my exceptionally limited experience, I’ve learnt that one needs to “peel away” the presentation layer to arrive at the meat of the topic. This needs to be done consciously. I think Droid raises some serious issues that need to be addressed. I for one, DO NOT approve of the presentation layer that Jason has chosen. It does make the Droid sound like a bully indeed. For example, I’ve been reading Chris Brogan for some time now, and his articles and posts have always helped. I have never bought anything from him. Being from Lahore, Pakistan, it is not possible for me to easily get my hands on his book even. His co-writer for Trust Agents, Julien Smith, is also someone I’ve been in contact with, and he too has been exceptionally helpful. So much so that it encouraged me to “go the extra mile” with my readers. But if Brogan is trying to game the system by getting people to buy his books in bulk, to increase the ranking, then that must at least be frowned upon. I for one, understand that this is marketing done too much. The fine line between a “good presentation” and “outright lie” is always a fine one. Sometimes, even the good guys (for I think Chris Brogan is a good guy) cross it. That’s OK. But that’s the issue. That needs to be addressed. For example, BlogWorld can do a keynote/speech/talk etc on “Why You Shouldn’t Game the System” or something. That’d be honest. Then you can get Jason on the panel too. Of course, no panel in the world can (or rather should) have Droid on their panel.

        I think there can be more effort from BlogWorld’s point of view to ARRIVE at the CORE of the issue. Don’t defend names, defend ‘concepts. Hope I’ve been able to convey my thoughts aptly here….

        • Again this line of gaming the system has some grey in it. Virtually every author I personally know sells books in bulk. Meaning if you buy X amount of books from them and give them to your attendees, they will speak at an event. They do this at conferences and with private events to companies.

          This is not new. This is not a social media development. This has been happening in the book publishing industry for decades across all genres. I personally do not see anything wrong with it. People are buying the books. People who would buy the book on their own are receiving them as a gift or perk for attending an event. The author sells books. Everyone wins.

          There are definitely other things people to that I would call gaming the system. For example having a marketing firm send out people to buy books in retail shops all over the country to make it appear there is a demand when there isn’t.

          That is certainly wrong and deceptive. However none of the people you have mentioned or none of the people who have ever spoken at our event have ever done that to my knowledge. If we ever did learn of an author doing that we certainly would not have them as a speaker.

      • Thanks for letting me know about the Danny Sullivan call-in. The Verge editors seemed to miss his point, and I would be shocked if The Verge doesn’t have PR people that pitch out the articles, and do social media marketing. And I know that Engadget did, so there goes that part of the argument.

        There are issues in the fields – like all fields – but eventually it shakes out. We see it already.

    • @Momekh ::

      Jason is always available to anyone who asks for him. And he’s the guy who leaves comments like this on other people’s sites where it wouldn’t be appropriate to intentionally misbehave like I do inside my own house.

      The post about Brogan didn’t have any of the bang bang, lock this guy in jail, type tidbits … I get that. I just illustrated how he is poser, who relies primarily on an echo chamber of posers … using mostly his own words and deeds to make the point.

      There are several different types of posts on The Salty Droid :: the first type is subjects I pick myself for strategic and storytelling reasons …

      The Syndicate
      James Arthur Ray
      The Secret
      Utah
      Tony Robbins
      The Lazy Media
      Naomi Dunford
      Jeremy Johnson
      Boiler Rooms

      Then there are the posts that are about defending the structural integrity of the site … and disincentivizing the sort of misinformation and smear tactics that enable the scamworld code of silence to continue …

      Tim Brownson
      Sean McAlister
      The DMCA posts
      The “sticking up for other bloggers being pestered by evil lawyer” posts
      Rick Calvert

      And lastly are the posts the prevent people who are part of the problem from in any way capitalizing or exploiting on the popularity :: trust :: and hope … that have built up around the site’s mission. That’s the Chris Brogan post. Maybe Chris is a nice guy who just got sucked into all this crap, one tiny bad move after the next, until it was too late. That’s the case with 95% of the people involved … and I’m sympathetic to that. If that’s the case with Chris :: then he should make changes to his life RIGHT NOW … because it’s never too late.

      And to the question of my presumed cruelty :: the way-over-the-top profanity :: shallow fat jokes … etc. It’s method … not madness …

      http://saltydroid.info/sheeple-part-5-mind-raping/

      • Thanks for the reply, Jason.

        One thing I can’t help but notice: I loved reading Jason. I hope you read my latest reply to Rick, about presentations and the actual issue. The method you’ve chosen is remarkable, especially the method behind the madness. I kid you not, I seriously believe that although the Droid has ruffled more than just a few feathers, but changing the voice can have a bigger impact. Instead of ridiculing them like a bully does, you can ridicule the actual concept. Even the quotation by “Dr Meerloo” that you reproduced in your article (Sheeple Part 5: Mind Raping), that quotation itself is a brilliant example of saying the right thing in the right way.

        I wouldn’t even want to listen to the Droid, because I’d have to work very hard to “peel away” the curses, the insults etc to arrive at the point. Phrases like “haters gonna hate” and the subculture of “standing up to the bully” actually works against the Droid. For example, to test this concept, let’s stretch this a bit. Say, someone you love, say your Father, Mother, spouse etc, that person is doing something wrong. I come over and start ‘ridiculing’ them like the Droid. Or, I send a letter, that is even sugarcoated to an extent, preparing you that I am about to say something shocking, and then lay out “just the facts”. Which of the two will have more impact on you? Which of these two approaches will stand a higher chance of you being able to see the faults of someone you’ve come to respect, love or adore?

        Maybe Jason can start writing more often, presenting a case, rather than “just insulting people”. And I must confess, the comments and your explanation in the previous comment actually got me thinking and researching. Thanks for this man. Thanks.

        • @Momekh ::

          Poke around my site friend … I think you’ll find most of the answers to your questions about why I do it like I do it.

          I really wish I had more readers in India and Pakistan, I think something of the joke gets lost in translation. I’ll help you understand it by telling you this :: Jason is 37 … and in those 37 years he’s told zero mean fat jokes. Say something mean to fat person in front of Jason though … and you’ll see just how good he is at being smart mean instead of mean mean.

          The robot is the robot for a reason. And I’ll tell you something that will be scary to you if you really let yourself think about it … the robot is a parody of the way the people I write about talk about their victims behind their backs. Sales/Scam culture is absolutely brutal. It scares them to hear me speaking in their language … in their voice … when I am so obviously not one of them. The things you hate about the robot are things that should be hated … that’s kinda part of the joke.

          I did try to clean it up once though. For the three or four months that I covered the James Arthur Ray murder trial :: because I knew all the families and victims were reading every day … I cut my bullcrap levels down to almost zero. It didn’t make any difference :: in fact … in retrospect I consider it a mistake.

          Here’s a good business, blogging, life tip … don’t mess with something that’s working.

          Anywayz I’m going to step out from this convo now :: but feel free to chime in over at robot land … we don’t bite.

  11. Hiring a journalist to write something about you makes it PR, not journalism. You probably meant well, but only a devoted fan could see hired reporting as objective, even if it’s positive. A positive result would make people think they softened it because you were paying them.

    Journalism is something that happens to you. You can’t hire it and get a credible result.

    • We hired a journalist to cover a story about someone else Michael. The idea of the story is to discuss the validity of accusations made on Jason’s website not about us, but about respected people in our industry who also speak at our event.

      We did not hire anyone to write about Jason’s blog posts about us. I can defend myself directly. I think that is an important distinction. Do you disagree?

  12. [note--I don't know if these links will get filtered out or not--so this post is kind of experimental]

    Rick wrote
    “I’m not sure when I first read the Salty Droid blog, but I know it was a post about Naomi Dunford explaining what a horrible person she was.”

    aaand, speaking of that “horrible person” Naomi Dunford, here’s a wayback machine link to Brian Clark’s Coppyblogger LLC’s Scribe SEO (or is it SEO Scribe?) page from 2011:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20110703051815/http://scribeseo.com/

    See the prominent endorsement from Naomi right there on the page? But wait, there’s more…
    Much more recently, like August 2012 recent, here’s a screen shot of the exact same page:
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/7412504@N02/7792923090/

    I can’t show you a screen shot or give you an exact link to the current version of h-t-t-p-://-ScribeSEO.com though because, as a proper website, IT NO LONGER EXISTS.
    The entire website has been moved to a new URL. The old URL now just does a re-direct to
    http://scribecontent.com/

    The Naomi testimonial has been removed, as has Jonny B. Truant’s. The format has changed a lot too (Brian: way to go! It looks much flashier and modern now.) However the content from the remaining two testimonials from Rae Hoffman (now Rae Hoffman-Dolan) and Sean Platt remain the same. Although interestingly Sean’s description has been changed from “Freelance web writer and blogger” to “author, publisher, and online entrepreneur”.

    So, is there anything illegal in all this re-configuring and re-arranging? I guess not. Yet it seems pretty dodgy to me that, as recently as August of this year, Scribe SEO software was using Naomi as a testimonial. To do so seems to imply not just that Scribe SEO is something that Naomi Dunford would want to endorse, but also that Naomi Dunford’s endorsement is something that Scribe SEO would want.

    But… why would Scribe SEO, which is owned by Copyblogger LLC, which is run by Brian Clark want Naomi’s endorsement on its page?

    You, Rick Calvert said Naomi is a horrible person. And you also said “speakers at our show and friends of ours like . . . Brian Clark of CopyBlogger”. And Naomi had a testimonial on SEO Scribe as recently as August 2012.

    So maybe it was just an oversight. I mean, mistakes happen, sure. Would you care to comment on it, Rick? Brian? Rick, have you asked Brian about this?


    Furry cows moo and decompress.

    • So the extent of your evidence is Copyblogger had some relationship with Naomi before her scandal broke and they featured a testimonial from her on their website and then after her deeds were widely publicized they removed her testimonial?

      The best analogy I can think of from the mainstream consciousness would be Michael Vick. Before he was arrested for fighting, abusing and even torturing dogs he was beloved in the city of Atlanta.

      He had a personal relationship with the owner Arthur Blank. When it became apparent that he had done some truly horrible things, he was released from the Falcons. Even after he was convicted the Falcons official statement was pretty tame http://bit.ly/Tv1OKD.

      Even after the scandal Blank found it ok to hug Vick in public: http://es.pn/Tv2wYg

      Does this make the Atlanta Falcons a bad organization for having a relationship with Vick before they knew he killed dogs? Does this make Arthur Blank a bad person for having a relationship with him before the scandal, or being cordial with him after he had been convicted and served time in prison for his crimes?

      The obvious answer is no.

      Does this prove in any way that the Atlanta Falcons or Arthur Blank had prior knowledge of Vick’s crimes or that they condoned them in any way?

      The obvious answer is again no.

      If someone you have a business or even a personal relationship with commits a crime or something morally reprehensible that does not make you a criminal or a bad person. The same is true here.

      Let’s use another example even closer to the mark here. Here is a list of five very popular athletes who lost endorsement deals after they were committed some bad act or crime: http://yhoo.it/Tv2gsm

      Are McDonalds, Reebok, Upper Deck, Kellogs, General Motors, AT&T, Gatorade and others guilty of anything by allowing these athletes to endorse them before the scandals broke?

      Once again clearly not.

      All you are doing is making guilt by association claims that are nearly as scandalous as the original offenders act. It is offensive. You are dead wrong to make these accusations publicly with absolutely no proof of wrong doing. I hope you reconsider your position until and unless you have some actual evidence of these people actually doing something wrong.

  13. Jason/Salty’s vitriolic style is distasteful, but the silence from the Internet marketing people he attacks is weird. It’s like Jason/Salty is egging for a libel lawsuit ,but no one bites. The Syndicate alone should be able to afford to hire an expensive lawyer to sue the beejesus out of Jason Jones for libel, but they don’t. It’s like they have stuff to hide, which they don’t want exposed in a court of law. That’s how it looks to a layman without a dog in this fight, like myself.

    In the end, I believe that is the only way the real truth will come out. Jason Jones and one of his targets hashing it out in court. Facts. No opinions.

    I do applaud Rick for standing up to Jason Jones. Airing out both sides can be a good thing.He seems to be the only person willing to do so. Maybe eventually the truth will come out. If Jason had any real proof of wrong-doing, I would believe he would at least turn it over to law enforcement.

    Finally, Jason Jones isn’t a journalist (I believe he even says as much) so it’s easier for him to flop around in the mud versus someone like David Copeland, who has to deal with pesky little things that real journalists have to deal with, you know, ethics, proof, facts, stuff like that.

    • Mitch, Jones uses parody as a shield and it is probably his dream come true to have his wife defend him in court for free while getting access to all of the gurus files and painting a picture with them with an artistic formula similar to the scary erector set doll in the movie “toy story.” However, with great power comes great responsibility and Jones is blowing it. His downfall will inevitably be harassment charges or perhaps much worse. When one of his site users murders someone he will be responsible for that. Doing a story on an individual and Insinuating that they worked with someone who stole $50,000 from elderly women when they didn’t dramatically increases the probability that this individual be harassed, stalked and assaulted. It’s a train wreck waiting to happen.

    • It’s not so much that Jason Jones (The Salty Droid) is committing libel, it’s that he does not tell the whole truth.

      If you say “Someone beat the shit out of someone else, oh my god that person should be put away!”

      But you don’t explain that the person in question was defending his family.

      Salty also fails at ever effectively really damaging anyone because the stuff he talks about is after the fact and doesnt rank well, so therefore no one cares.

      Forget libel, it’s more defamation, cyberstalking, and harassment.

  14. John Roberts says:

    The reason you won’t see the Pat Flynns or James Chartrands or Derek Halperns of the world weighing in on this is because they don’t want Salty Droid setting his targets on them. They may tell you that in private but they will never tell you that in public. Notice how they stay out of every argument about internet marketing to the point where it’s obvious? I’ll give Rick this, at least he’s not afraid of the discussion.

  15. Thanks John and Mitch for the comments. I am not afraid one, because I know we aren’t doing anything wrong and two, because it is our job as the industry event to have these kinds of conversations.

    I am glad you guys are willing to come share your opinions.

  16. I couldn’t be bothered to read the cat fight between Rick and Jason. I can comment on Jason’s style however as I used to read him quite often, and found it funny in the beginning, but now it’s lost it’s entertainment value. I don’t know if it’s the style of writing, or what’s behind it. He does, often, read like a geek that was bullied when he was young coming out now to berate online bullies, or scammers. Maybe what he’s doing is a good thing, I’m not actually sure (I doubt anyone’s been prosecuted because of his stories), but he still comes across wounded in some way.

  17. hi!,I really like your writing very so much! proportion we keep up a correspondence more approximately your article on AOL? I need a specialist in this space to resolve my problem. Maybe that is you! Taking a look ahead to peer you.

  18. Woah this weblog is great i love reading your articles. Keep up the great paintings! You understand, lots of people are hunting round for this information, you can aid them greatly.

  19. I first have to say , “noob affiliate here” !!!!

    This was the best post i have read in ages. When I thought Online Marketing was in ICU, i find that i am wrong and I am just a NOOB still !!!!

    My writing is horrible, unless I have had some sleep, but I was up all nite reading about small business, Watching YouTube Interviews of PPC Marketers and eating 7-11 donuts.

    I guess that makes me a SCAMMER :(

    my latest Affiliate check, not mailed yet… $288.40 USD o,O should I get a new gaming video card, or save it ?

    maybe I can do a product launch and tell u about how poor i am and put that in a BOX !!!!!!!!!!!!!! ( slams door )

    sorry i need sleep.. just rambling — Huggs..<3

  20. Omg Rick! Aw be lucky that u don’t have Jack Wadd from theantiwarrior.com blog peeking around lol I’m up and sick in bed and loved reading your whole post and all the comments here tho :-)

  21. SEO is a scam. Trust me, I’ve been online in various capacities since 1996 and have a background as a software and web developer. You definitely do not need to pay someone or some company hundreds or thousands of dollars to rank well on search engines. That is a solid fact. And anyone telling you that you do is selling you a bill of goods. Frank Kearn, et al are scammers. They sell bullshit to people who simply do not know any better. Now, before you get your panties in a bunch, there is a difference between selling genuinely useful merchandise using the internet as an advertising and sales medium vs. selling schlock and unworkable marketing schemes/products and MLM pyramid schemes to the unsuspecting who simply want to better their lives with additional income.

  22. However, getting a good software / web developer to optimise your website from a SEO perspective can get results – simple stuff such as removing un-necessary flash, using a credible CMS etc. Agreed that the basics of SEO are obvious – and do not require paying an SEO consultant. huge sums – and the majority of SEO consultants are scammers.

    The Search Engines use algorithims to rank websites according to the credibility and interest that their content generates. SEO is nothing more than ensuring that your website is well coded, and has credible and interesting content.

    To my mind BlogWorld hypes and aids the scammer types – the guys who you mention as “selling schlock and unworkable marketing schemes/products and MLM pyramid schemes” – and should clean up its act.

    Salty Droid is spot on.

    Re the Salty Droid mission: this comment from Salty Droid sums it up:

    http://www.blogworld.com/2012/10/11/salty-droid-man-on-a-mission-or-internet-troll-or-me-and-mr-jones/comment-page-1/#comment-44101

  23. I am sorry Joe, who specifically are we hyping or aiding and what have they done wrong?