zlacker

>>swomba+(OP)
Don't forget the one in the source code that will automatically get your account banned! (I leave posting it here as an exercise to the reader.)

>>rms+9
http://tinyurl.com/22q5z9

>>zepole+Q
Which ?may? lead to a site "whose name we dare not speak?... which loads only if "http://www." is removed from it... and then displays message:

"Down until 4/19/08 due to bandwidth limitations!

Want to advertise?"

This entire discussion is feeling very surreal - with innuendos about poison-named domains that ban one's account. I do like the idea of openness about banning policies. Why force people to stumble around in the dark and then be punished when they step in the dog piles?

[Or is there a concern about legal concerns if one "vilifies" a site by pronouncing it banned?]

>>CalmQu+Y
I can't see the site, but it looks like some kind of dumb meme:

http://images.google.com.au/images?q=internet%20serious%20bu...