The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Publishers track down news lifters

JonB

The Reg is doomed!!!!! 

Posted Monday 5th November 2007 16:54 GMT

If it weren't for the unsuitable apostrophe's, grammer and spelling dodgy.

Anonymous Coward

Supprised google dont already do this as an extension of there news whoring 

Posted Monday 5th November 2007 16:54 GMT

Joke

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22Called+Attributor%22&meta=

there done - can I have my VC wedge now please :).

Christopher P. Martin

Does that mean... 

Posted Monday 5th November 2007 18:13 GMT

Flame

...that El Reg will have to stop lifting stories from the BBC and publishing them a few hours later...?

Snert Lee

It means... 

Posted Monday 5th November 2007 19:02 GMT

...That, in about a years time, most news aggregator sites will have embraced the same grammar and spelling in vogue amongst Viagra spammers.

David Wiernicki

@Snert Lee 

Posted Tuesday 6th November 2007 04:46 GMT

Thumb Up

"3Par issued today new software into divides the hypothesized equipment which the InServ array ingredient opens. But is not depends upon the storage resources physics and the manual separation, the 3Par's new true domain software use logic divides into. The technology permits each domain dynamically by the weight size, when retained each part of security to separate by the firewall."

I like it.

Ian

Link? 

Posted Tuesday 6th November 2007 04:46 GMT

"The Reg is doomed!!!!! "

"If it weren't for the unsuitable apostrophe's, grammer and spelling dodgy."

Anyone else think there might be a link between these quotes?

"...That, in about a years time, most news aggregator sites will have embraced the same grammar and spelling in vogue amongst Viagra spammers."

Anonymous Coward

@Christopher P Martin 

Posted Tuesday 6th November 2007 11:48 GMT

...or a few days later, in the case of the congestion charge-dodging story, for instance.

Pascal Monett

What was that ? 

Posted Tuesday 6th November 2007 12:43 GMT

"It also checks (...) how many visitors the site gets"

Um, by the way, has this page count issue been finally resolved in a scientifically-approved manner ?

Or are page counts still an art of approximation and ego-inflation ?

Because if they are still imprecise, then somebody is going to be bothered for more than he's worth.

Not really fair, is it ?