Comments: Chocolate Poker Chips, the Google Logo, and Search Relevance

Well, I would have said Trader Joe's [Belgian] Dark Chocolate, but my wife's with you on Lindt, so... (Maybe I'm just cheap: three 1.75oz. bars of 58%-cocoa solids dark chocolate for $1.29 suits my penurious side, and 58% turns out to be about as intense as I can cope with...)

Seriously: A fine example of what our friends the spammers have done to searching. And to blog discussions, to be sure: The game referred to in your post can't even be mentioned in a comment on my blog, because I've had to block that word...

Posted by walt at April 24, 2006 12:17 PM

Chocolate one of the 5 food groups of the single male - along with cash, cigarettes, beer and women. If you don't think I can eat cash - give me some of yours. My wife had never had Toblerone or Lindt before she met me.

Remember what is was like before google and altavista? Sure there was some good content on the 'net but finding it could be hard. Archie, gopher and WAIS weren't (aren't?) exactly easy to use. Usenet was fine if you were an academic (never me) with guaranteed access.

Seth, the easier way to find the price may have been to click on the ads for
rather than the search links returned.
http://www.????????.com/ - from the right hand column. Would I trust them on a big/important order without trying first - no. I am sure there is someone selling any and every thing somewhere outthere. Did you try E-bay for choc poker chips?

Posted by tqft at April 26, 2006 01:04 AM

Walt: There seems to be a fundamental divide between the Milks and the Darks - chacun à son goût.
And amusingly, originally one could not post comments on that entry at GBlogscoped, because of the anti-spam system (I reported the bug to the guy who runs the site, and he had to take the p-word out of his blacklist to enable comments).

tqft: Good point - I didn't have any problem finding some sites with chocolate poker chips, and sites about corporate logos, but a price for putting the logo on a chip was tough. Though that search has a relevant result on page, clusty still did better.

Posted by Seth Finkelstein at April 26, 2006 05:56 PM