Slashdot Mirror
LinuxToday Astroturfed By Its Own Staff?
Not sure if this is funny or just interesting, but apparently Kevin Reichard, the "Executive Editor of the Linux/Open Source & Internet Technology Channels at internet.com" has been accused of
astroturfing LinuxToday. Astroturfing is pretending to be a bunch of people to fake grassroots support, and LinuxToday is one of the larger Linux news sites. And obviously this is a rumor. Pretty interesting to read some of the stuff that was said.
[...enters the soapbox, piercing sounds from the megaphone...]
All geeks in the universe, unite! Click here to Slashdot the Slashdot.
---
Anonymous Coward
I know that it is getting fashionable to criticise slashdot these days, and most of the time, my answer is "if you don't like it, don't visit the site", however I think that this definitely steps over the line.
So are we to see a relaxation of any editorial standards whenever the opportunity arises to take a swipe at a competitive news site?
--
If it turns out to be true, this guy should be voted the Iago of the Internet. People really hate being played for rubes. Destroying trust is a serious no-no. It shouldn't be too hard to prove the story. Check if those so-called aliases are real people. If not that should lend credence to the story.
Note - Iago (not the parrot on Disney's Aladdin) was a rumormonger that got Desdemona whacked by her own husband Othello (not the board game).
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
The term moron has been around for many many years.
The term 'astroturf' has been around since the 1960's when the grass died at the Astrodome and they replaced it with fake green stuff.
I'm actually somewhat amazed at how the zealotry of the anti-Microsoft crowd are willing to rewrite history in their quest for vengance against imaginary wrongs.
They don't have to. There are plenty of us who will speak out on it's positive merits for free.
First, Let me say that I have an agenda: I've had a war on, since 1998, with the authors of a crappy little program for Linux called linuxcad. This is a several hundred dollar (yes it _does_ cost more than $99 to get all the stuff, trust me) piece of junk that, in addition to not being worth anything like the price (can you say "rip-off"), they are constant newsgroup spammers.
Now it amazes me that, for as long as I can remember visiting linuxapps, this program has been in the #6 "Most popular today" position. I notice that kind of thing. Now a quick search around and you'll only find this program at one other site, SAL, which may not know any better. I've written to linuxapps.com suggesting they remove it to keep Linuxers from getting ripped off (I've got a number of emails to back that), but it's still there. It sure is suspicious to me.
Ok, maybe the list isn't updated, but then again, I have seen it change. So it seems to me, that they're playing a similar game here (the game of deception) to make you think lcad is a popular program, probably for pay from the lcad authors (I emphasize probably), and get you ripped-off, too.
And obviously this is a rumor. Pretty interesting to read some of the stuff that was said.
And that's why nobody should bitch about what slashdot does and what slashdot says. Ever see anything in the Wall Street Journal followed by "and this is obviously a rumor"...
This is not a professional journalism site. This is a rumour mill, a flame room, and all kinds of other things. So if I see another post saying "slashdot really sucks because they don't give equal time to X" I'm going to start spinning, and spinning, and I'm not going to stop, until THERES BLOOD ALL OVER THE WALLS.
-- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
Wow! It sounds like it can do anything.
If LinuxToday, that cheesy little newswire-excerpt site with the amateur design, is a major Linux news portal, then I'm the Archduke of Luxembourg.
And Internet.com! Isn't that the flagship publication of INTM, the company that operates the burned-out husks of Mecklermedia's trade papers and Earthweb's awful developer portals? Internet.com gets respectable traffic numbers, but they're not exactly in ZDNet or CNet territory.
I'm shocked--shocked--that a dorm-room project like LinuxToday would engage in planted self-promotion.
Does LinuxToday even pay for its wire feeds? I'm not sure the entire lead paragraphs og stories constitutes fair use.
The term astroturfing was around long before that, 'moron'.
Boy, its a good thing Microsoft would never do anything like this to make NT look more popular.
They don't have to. There are plenty of us who will speak out on it's positive merits for free.
Sure, sure. Considering that *every one* of your posts is either Pro-Microsoft or anti-Linux/Open Source, I think we know what you are. Fairly convincing evidence that Microsoft doesn't have any real grass-roots support, don't you think?
--
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
I don't know how many sources Joe had, but I do know that he researched this story. He contacted me for some of my opinions on LT, but, so far as I can tell, the only contribution I made (assuming others didn't make it as well) was to notice that LT's talkback policy changed a couple of months ago, eliminating language about frowning on deceptive practices.
- 02 -21-001-20-OP-BZ-CY-0027
- 03 -07-001-21-OP-DT-RH-0019
I seriously hope that these charges are not true. I have spent a lot of time there, and count some of its former staffers (damned dot.com bust) among my friends.
I have to admit, slow and dim-witted as I am, even I had noticed a couple of funny things.
Here are a couple of posts that really stuck in my head:
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001
(George Tirebiter telling ac he had posted his response to another article)
The interesting thing here is that Tirebiter's response doesn't seem remotely
right for an LT reader. Why?
1. Because it crosses articles
2. Because Tirebiter must have some reason to assume that ac didn't post
the link in response to two different articles - something he couldn't know
without being an insider
3. If one hadn't just read the ac post containing the link, searching for
it would have been all but impossible with the broken LT search engine.
Searching for AC chokes. The only way to make is show up (at least back when
I tried it) was to search for "1999". Not exactly intuitive.
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001
(Clark Addison telling me that I must not be an attentive LT reader or I
would have noticed the InstallShield banner adds)
1. Just odd to have a reader drawing my attention to the banner ads.
2. This is the guy's third post and second on this article. His first post
was three days earlier.
3. Funny -- there is a Tirebiter response on this, too.
Clark Addison had two more posts (3/13 and 14) then disappears into the ether.
Two weird posts don't mean anything.
Still...
Dean Pannell
(a.k.a. dinotrac)
...but it would have been better if Barr had actually provided the evidence linking Reichard with the "George Tirebiter", "Tom Dooley" and "Will Smith" aliases, instead of just making the claims and leaving it at that. I dunno if Barr is protecting his source by not presenting any evidence yet, or if he's giving Reichard a chance to fess up.
'Course, the whole thing could be based on unfounded rumour or flimsy, weak "evidence," but we won't really know until LT speaks up, now will we?
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
Oh boy.
I posted above before reaching this particular post... if LT staff were astroturfing their own site, the question would have to be "why?" Would it be to create the impression LT has a larger, more involved readership than it really does? To generate conversation? Boredom on the part of the staff (insert "idle hands" comment here)?
I don't post to LT all that often; usually only if something pops into my head, or a Mozilla article (I'm a rather vocal Moz advocate there:). If it turns out some of the comments I saw, or even possibly replied to, were made by staff for less-than-admirable purposes, I'd probably stop posting there for sure, and possibly stop reading the site. I won't tolerate or support underhanded tactics from a site I trust to not manipulate forums on the articles posted.
Now, Slashdot is another matter; I'm nearly positive that a few of the authors are well-known trolls, and manipulation/correction of posted articles is common, so shit-disturbing by the authors wouldn't surprise me. I'd certainly be a little surprised, and more than a little miffed, to discover that LT wasn't being completely honest with its treatment of stories and comments.
Interesting side note; I think it was Reichard that posted an article a while back outing the IP of an anonymous person who submitted an article highlighting a circumstance where Windows bested Linux in some real-world situation. It was an M$ IP, which Reichard apparently "took offense" to. He was soundly lambasted in the comments, and the article disappeared from the site hours later. So I suppose I shouldn't be entirely surprised to discover some other less-than-angelic actions have been taking place there... but it would be very disappointing to have that confirmed.
Man. I dunno. As I type this, LT hasn't posted anything regarding the charges, but I imagine Kevin's doing some fast typing, and possibly e-mailing, right about now.
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
post a summary of the article for those of us who are affected by the train derailment?
Best Slashdot Co
You know, that could explain some of the stuff that's shown up in the queue at k5 lately.
Best Slashdot Co
Tirebiter comments on Linux Today:
e r
http://linuxtoday.com/search.php3?tbquery=Tirebit
"Tire Biter" Hmmm...
- - - - -
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
http://linuxtoday.com/search.php3?tbquery=Joe+bar
I don't know anything about him, but a lot of these seem pretty inflammatory to me, too.
Nate
-- Watch the REAL Jon Katz.
No, dinotrac is a regular on Linux Today, as am I. (in fact the only reason I'm here is that LT isn't covering this). You can verify this by searching on either of our names in the search talkback option on LT. This is whole thing is very surprising to me. I'd suspected for a while that one person was running several "Characters" but never would have guessed it was Kevin who seemed like a pretty upstanding guy. He was though, very entertaining in the posts...
---
RobK
Myddrin
Hey, no shit genius!
/.
Gee thanks, I enjoy being insulted for no reason. So which one were you, Scooby perchance?
The tone sure sounds like it.
If it is, then I got my fair share of chain yanking in too.
It was troll heaven, except for the totally outrageous moderation system with editors stopping posts for no other reason than they didn't agree with them.FWIW: I developed a real dislike for LT in the end. I got to see the true nature of the talkback system and how the editors slant the whole thing to support their own views and worst of all, actually EDIT posts to change their meanings (yes, this happened to me a couple of times).
This accusation has been made several times by many trolls on the site. It's a boring accusation which is easily proved. The email function emails the talkback as it exists when first posted. All you need to do is set up an email account and send all of your talkbacks to that. Then do a diff on what actually appears. If something is not posted, you can make it public.
And yet no one has done it. I've even offered to host the files demonstrating this at several times in the past. To date there is still no proof of either arbitrary editing or arbitrary censoring.
Personally, I never had a problem with them not posting my talkbacks...or changing them. Even when I _know_ they disagree with me. On the few occasions that they didn't post my talkback, they always had a very good reason. Just email them and get a response within an hour or two.
Why don't you go dig up some proof, it would make for quite a story. You might even get a write up on
---
RobK
Myddrin
Gee thanks, I enjoy being insulted for no reason. So which one were you, Scooby perchance?
Still a pretentious windbag, eh? Telling you which trolls I was would spoil the fun. You'll work it out, maybe.
I may be a pretentious windbag, it's true. This is hardly the first time I've been called that. OTOH, I've never felt the need to take cheap shots to make myself look/feel good.
Then do a diff on what actually appears. If something is not posted, you can make it public.
And the response would be the same... "you are a lying troll."
Hmmmm... I don't recall myself personally ever calling anyone a liar, just asking for some form of verification. And such a response I've only seen very rarely on LT. It's odd that you would think so... but I'm not here to psycho-analyze anybody.
Such a step would at least show some form of good faith on the accusers part. Heck you could even do it to an email address where several people have the password, so that they could each verify the what posts appeared.
My point remains. It is simple to provide evidence, yet no one has. Considering the small amount of time and the press to be gained, you'ld think that someone would make the attempt.
Personally, I never had a problem with them not posting my talkbacks...or changing them.
Well that's alright then... it must not be happing if it's not happened to you.
<Sarcasm>
Thank you for so cleaverly deducing my point for me. I appreciate your depth of insight into what I was saying.
</Sarcasm>
That was not my point, and you know it. I was simply stating what my experience was in contrast to yours. I've never had a problem with a post that the editors didn't have a very good reason for their desicion. I'm sorry if that is not your experience, but it is mine.
---
RobK
Myddrin
Yeah, it's me.
e d&order=0&thold=0 about 90% of the way towards the end.
I just wanted to comment that Joe Barr has posted some verifiable evidence of severe editorial manipulation at LT that goes well beyond the trolling that KR was doing.
It now looks as if I got the eviedence I was looking for, which is all that I was after in the whole thing from the begining. (Despite the offense taken by many people whom I asked.)
So it looks like I must admit that you were right, and I was wrong. I can't link directly to the post in question, however it's here http://varlinux.org/article.php?sid=296&mode=nest
It starts out "Dear LinuxToday Staffer (or apologist)," and was posted on "Friday, July 20 @ 06:11:06 PDT", incase you want to check it out.
---
RobK
Myddrin
Actually, I'm violating several Troll High Council rules by telling you this but: I don't think you'll ever learn. This entire thread is a troll Rob (not that it's untrue, just a troll)... and you've walked into it yet again.
/., LT and others for much too long to be that naive. I know when I'm being trolled, and I very rarely take this stuff as seriously as people seem to think I do.
/. supposedly isn't moderated. Or email it to a regular. Or... or... or...
Do you really think I'm so stupid that I didn't know that? I've been hanging out on usenet,
Of course, you'll respond with some smartass crack like "What ever lets you sleep at night." And if that makes you feel good, you can go ahead an believe that I'm lying.... doesn't matter to me.
Despite what you seem to think, I decided to feed the trolls _knowingly_. It is fun and entertaining to me. Especially when I can illicit reactions such as I got from some of the LT trolls such as "Scooby" and "Marc Adams." Or, to watch their reactions. Lately, I was picking on "Anon," but it looks like that will get interrupted as LT's been down for quite a while. And even if it comes back up, I won't be going back there w/o a _really_ _good_ explination of what they did and why.
Think of it as metatrolling, it's a matter of having that much more paitence than the given troll and getting them to lose their temper.
If you look back about 90% or so of my posts are real and genuine...my honest to goodness opinion. The other 10%, responding to trolls are just to p*ss them off.
I've been doing it for years. Ted Holden (on talk.origins) and Alexander Abian (on sci.physics) were my two earliest victims. That was in '90-'91. If you feel compelled, I'm sure google groups would have some of the postings from rk3h@andrew.cmu.edu, my college email address.
Sadly, the real hum-dinger flame I got from Ted was sent to my private email, which was probably deleted long, long ago. So you won't get to see that....
It is my sworn duty to drag this thread out until it degenerates into childish name-calling, but I'm giving you a get out of jail card. I hope you appreciate it.
Huh--- yeah, you've been so successful in the past. IIRC, I've not resorted to out and out name-calling in any thread since I stopped hanging around talk.origins back in '91. Ocassionally little snide comments, but that's about it. Trust me, I'll stop posting _long_ before I get to the point of childish name calling.
Think of it as a challenge....
You can believe this, or not, it really makes no difference anymore, but: I did as you suggested. I posted all of my censored messages in a hidden slashdot sid. I advertised its presence in trolltalk (another hidden sid), and tried mightly to get it mentioned in an LT talkback. No chance.
Every time I mentioned the sid, and that people could get my uncensored messages there, my posts were deleted.
Then post the url.
Joe Barr is still collecting more information on this, you could email _him_ the URL, or post it on the varlinux discussion about this story.
I'm not saying that I _don't_ believe you, it's perfectly possible you've done such a thing. I'm not about to defend LT now, or question claims about the site now that all of this evidence is staring me in the face. But, it would be really nice to know just how bad this corruption at LT goes.
---
RobK
Myddrin
As a matter of fact, no. I think you have such a blazing desire to win an argument that you will not let it drop. I've been around even longer than you Rob, I know your type.
I'm glad that you seem to think you know me so well. Unfortunately you are wrong.
So long, nice talking to you again.
---
RobK
Myddrin
Uh Huh,
;)
You are just trying to mislead us from finding the AC's true identity! You are one of THEM!!!!
Paranoia, paranoia, everyone's coming to get me!
Moderators: This is funny +1 (if you are humorful) or +1 Insightful (if you are paranoid)
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
Contributed by Anonymous on Wednesday, July 18 @ 19:39:00 PDT
Printer Friendly Page
[Miscellaneous] An anonymous source has provided detailed evidence showing that the popular Linux news portal LinuxToday.com has been astroturfed by its own staff for almost as long as it has been owned by internet.com. In particular, the source has identified Kevin Reichard, Executive Editor of the Linux/Open Source & Internet Technology Channels at internet.com, as having allegedly posted these messages under a number of aliases on the site.
According to the source, others were involved in the astroturfing as well, though not to the same degree as Reichard. The source expressed hope that they will step forward and out themselves of their own accord.
"Astroturfing" refers to a method used to create the illusion of grassroots support. The term came into popularity following the LA Times revelation in 1998 of a Microsoft PR plan which would pay individuals to write letters, opinion pieces, or comments in online forums supporting Microsoft in their protracted antitrust battle.
Based on the evidence supplied by the source, Reichard has been posting talkbacks under a number of fictitious names since late 1999. Reichard has allegedly used the aliases of "George Tirebiter", "Tom Dooley", and "Will Smith" among others. These ersatz talkbacks reveal a very clear pattern of demeaning the competition while cheerleading for those associated with internet.com. The posts have targeted the sites and/or staff from sites such as LinuxWorld.com, Newsforge, Slashdot, Linux.com, ZD Net, Infoworld, Linux Journal, and The Register.
The talkbacks posted under these names accused others of trolling for page views and claiming that they were something less than honest and candid. About O'Reilly, "George Tirebiter" said, "Just some FUD spread by a company with a vested interest -- and they don't tell you their interest."
A search of LinuxToday talkbacks done today returns eight instances of the use of the perjorative term "Newsforger" when referring to the competitive site, Newsforge.com, which is a site owned by VA Linux. Seven of those eight instances are from talkbacks posted by the aliases "George Tirebiter", "Will Smith", and "Tom Dooley". The eighth is a post by Grant Gross, editor at the Newsforge site. Gross was responding to a talkback posted by the alias "Tom Dooley" which attacked Newsforge, saying that they were "blatantly and shamelessly trolling for page views. At least when LToday talks to RMS it's over something important, not something stupid like this."
These alias "personalities" also went after leaders of the open source and free software communities. People like Eric Raymond, Richard Stallman, and Alan Cox. "George Tirebiter", in particular, attacked the GPL, Linux geeks, Red Hat, VA Linux, Sun, and IBM.
The rollcall of the "Tirebiter" targets reads like a Microsoft "enemies list." In one talkback "Tirebiter" defends Microsoft's attacks on the GPL by asking "Why are we villifying Microsoft for raising valid concerns that others have raised?". "George Tirebiter" said about Alan Cox, "I woulda thought better of Alan. But then again, he's the only one not to release his opinion to the public, preferring to retain ownership on a closed-source Red Hat site."
In one rant, "George Tirebiter" lashes out at Eric S. Raymond's piece called "Beware the Microsoft shell game." "Tirebiter" posted a message saying "Y'all are a hoot. I want some of the wacky tobaccy y'all are smoking, because it certainly does alter your senses. You don't even see that stunts like this allow ESR to claim a victory no matter what happens: should someone from MS give a speech that doesn't mention open source, he'll claim victory." In the same post, the alias conludes by telling LinuxToday readers to "Wake up. You're being manipulated, and y'all don't even know it."
Wheeeee
Rumors have it that CmdrTaco and Hemos are astroturfing Slashdot...
So that's where all the first posts come from...
---
/bin/fortune | slashdotsig.sh
I hate to inform you of this, but, your conspiracy theory fall apart when you start to read the posts on /. Too many of them have somewhere between excellent and decent grammar, and most words are spelled correctly. Heck, even the tenses of words are correct. As has been proved time and time again, CmdrTaco cannot spell, use proper grammer, and tenses are a complete mystery to him.
Of course, I could just as easily be CmdrTaco in disguise. The whole spelling and grammar thing - it's all a ruse. I just post article... er, HE just post articles with bad spelling to produce a distinctive writing style, while using a totally different, almost sane, style while Astroturfing here on /.
Davis Ray Sickmon, Jr - looking for something to read? Check out my three free novels at MidnightRyder.org
I've got a new .sig! (Replicated below for those people who have signatures turned off.)
Wake up. You're being manipulated, and y'all don't even know it.
-- "George Tirebiter", LinuxToday
Wake up. You're being manipulated, and y'all don't even know it.
Nothing for 6-digit uids?
Boy, its a good thing Microsoft would never do anything like this to make NT look more popular.
http://saveie6.com/
Them some pretty mean accusations, but where's the proof? Reading the article makes it sound like this stuff all definately happened. I was convinced for like two seconds. But then I realized, hey, maybe he didn't actually do it?
Information wants Coq
Yeah, whatever... Kevin Reichard!! Yeah, we know it's you!
"And like that
Meanwhile, at kuro5hin, there's a dispute going as to whether the author of a piece saying Linux tech support is going to be difficult is a Microsoft employee. A few day ago, Linux Today posters on various Mono-related articles were insisting, apparently in all seriousness, that Miguel de Icaza is a Microsoft mole, and speculating that Richard Stallman is, as well. Almost every discussion there involves accusations of astroturfing, with Joe Barr, who seems to be involved here, leading the pack.
Hopefully this sort of accusation is going to go out of fashion soon. Anyone with a little experience in the adult world should have learned why it's considered bad form to wildly throw unsupported, undisprovable accusations at anyone you dislike. ("You're complaining that my cattle ate your corn? Well, I think you're a WITCH!") To my mind, shouting "Astroturf!" is like stamping "obnoxious 14 year old" on your forehead* and just gives the impression you're too boneheaded to accept the possibility that anyone might genuinely disagree with you -- let alone that you might be wrong.
Anyway, who cares? Posters say what they say and it doesn't matter who might be paying them. And does it really matter if witless attacks against Eric Raymond by "George Tirebiter" are really by an editor? How is that even "astroturfing" at all?
* As do "BWAHAHAHAHAHA!" and "Bzzzt! Wrong!" You can almost smell the Clearasil when you read stuff like that.
Unsettling MOTD at my ISP.
You know what the great thing about computers are? The fact that (almost) anything that can be claimed about them can be proven (or refuted). With facts (gasp)
:) .
IOW if someone is posting a fact and you believe it to be true when it really isnt its your fault not theirs. If it was an opinion, you still have the choice of agreeing (or not) but no matter who the messenger was if it made you think a little you might even come away with something new (albeit useless
Take anything on the net with a grain of salt. Actually make that two or three.
BOSTON SUCKS!
"I read it on the Internet" "I heard it at a party"
Old age and treachery almost always overcome youth and skill.
Material From everything2.com
/. readers, including variants like "That site has been slashdotted again!" 2. In a perhaps inevitable generation, the term is being used to describe any similar effect from being listed on a popular site. This would better be described as a flash crowd.
1) A great way to stress test any resource on the internet:
Tell slashdot.org about it.
The tides of users all clicking to look at the resource will stress it far better than any commercial tool on the market today.
Hmmmm.... Does that make it an Open Source Stress Test?
2) The coined term for Slashdot pointing it's many participants to a website that can't take the traffic and falls over.
This is soon followed by discussion on Slashdot of why the story's server fell over. Someone will check Netcraft to see what OS they're running and get "+2 Informative". They will get "+4 Informative" if it's running Microsoft. Someone with the site in cache will mirror it and upload a copy to their universities server (copyright, strangely, ain't an issue).
In some circumstances the server won't go down but administrators will take drastic action and 404 the site or restrict access. This is also taken under the umbrella term of The Slashdot Effect as slashdot's responsible.
The Slashdot Effect is something like an unintentional DoS attack.
3) Very subtile variant of a Distributed Denial of Service attack and an example of a symbiosis: The Slashdot folks Flood the Target Site and get good story for that.
4) And here's the Luddite translation:
"Computer try to suck watermelon through straw, computer go boom."
5) 1. Also spelled "/. effect"; what is said to have happened when a website being virtually unreachable because too many people are hitting it after the site was mentioned in an interesting article on the popular Slashdot news service. The term is quite widely used by
--- My Karma is bigger than your...
------ This sentence no verb
------ Ths sntnc n vwl
Actually, George LeRoy Tirebiter is the name of a character from The Firesign Theatre's classic album Don't Crush That Dwarf, Hand Me the Pliers. I've never seen it on CD, only on lp, but if you have to mortgage the house to do it, get a copy and listen to it. Repeatedly. There are things in the middle of side 1 (aka This Side) that refer to something at the end of side 2 (aka That Side).
The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
that all of the hidden goatse links here on /. are evidence of potential astroturfing too?
Makes you wonder...
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
Ahh, screw it, I don't want to deal with this. I'm enjoying this AOL chat room much more -- I think I'll ask Sexygrrl69 what she thinks about those jerks at LinuxToday.
-----------------------
-----------------------
Stay in school, kids! Peace out, Dubya
I know that no one working at Slashdot, the finest tech news web page ever created, would ever stoop to that level. They are a very reputable, hard-working, and ethical group and I'm happy to be a reader. I think that everyone who sees this should tell their friends about how great Slashdot is.
Commodore Burrito
Right or wrong, this practice is about as old as newspapers. Ben Franklin's first published writings were letters to the editor of his brother's paper, sent under pseudonyms. It was a common practice in those times, for reasons of marketing or politics or both. Apparently the net has fertilized a revival of the practice... or maybe we just noticed it again. :)
With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd