Over the past two weeks, I’ve deleted literally hundreds of spam comments here.  This is in addition to the ones I normally delete, from those who want to use the comments here as their soapbox or to expose their own blogs or posts to a different audience.  There are some very tenacious people posting comments that they hope will see the light of day, one particular commenter who was responsible for nearly 300 spam comments in the past week.

It’s not going to happen.  As much of a waste of my time as it may be, I will not allow the comments section to become your billboard, no matter how nice your comments may be (they are usually along the lines of, “great post . . .”) or how devious your challenge (“I will consider being a regular reader if you respect my point of view”). 

Amongst my many peculiarities is that I have not shown much concern over whether any particular reader loves or hates what I write here.  Nor have I cared a whit whether a reader shares my sensibilities on a particular issue; I’ve been as quick to delete a rant against the death penalty as one that ultimately proposes the efficacy of a drug to correct penile dysfunction.  I realize that commenters often find my rules hard to understand, seeing their comments are both informative and interesting when I see them as tangential and self-promotional.  The rule is:  My blog, my rules.  They aren’t subject to democratic approval.  I know this because I control the delete button and you don’t.

Deleting a few hundred purely spam comments is not merely a pain in the butt, but a waste of time.  Having a blawg isn’t nearly as glamorous as many think.  It requires that I keep an eye on things, as they can spin out of control quite quickly at times, particularly when a post draws a bunch of day-trippers who are unfamiliar with SJ, my rules, my prickly ways, my snarkiness and the limits of my tolerance.  Most of these comments I allow, even though I find them unbearably assumptive, a typical trait of many younger readers.  It’s a fault of the Slackoisie, the characterization they deny vehemently, who mistakenly project their shallowness and egocentricity on me because, well, that’s what the Slackoisie do.

I recently saw a comment about me on another blawg that struck me as interesting.  The comment, clearly by a new lawyer, said that I was a “decent” blawger, except when I went on an off topic rant.  I would be fine, the commenter said, if I stuck to criminal law.  This falls into the pigeonhole of readers who believe that my purpose here is to please them and provide posts that suit their interests.  Readers of this ilk can bite me.  Simple Justice is about whatever I decide it’s about, and until you pay for the privilege, you get no say in what that might be.  I’m not courting your approval, and you can stop reading at any time.

On Twitter, I am now at about 500 followers.  Some are young women with webcams showing them engaged in sex acts.  Why they follow me is unclear.  I doubt they are interested in much of anything I say or write about.  I have no plans to watch their webcams.  I also have many followers who are “consultants”, all of whom are “available for speaking engagements.”  They may or may not be interested in something I write about, but I am unlikely to consult with them, and I have no speaking engagements for them at all. 

One young lawyer wanted to engage me in a twittering discussion of my posts here.  I suggested he post his thoughts in a comment, as I won’t discuss my posts in twits, to which he took offense.  He complained that I was telling him what not to twit, and that nobody, but nobody, told him what not to twit.  I was telling him that I wasn’t going to engage in a twittering discussion.  He can twit whatever he wants.  I’ll just ignore it.  And I do.  It’s really easy to ignore people on Twitter.

There are lists of “must-read” blogs and “must-follow” twitterers.  I don’t think I’ve made either.  They are mostly put together by those with a marketing-bent, both as a promotional tool and a means of capturing attention.  Blawgers and twitterers have a obsessive thing about lists which eludes me.  When they make a “top 10” list put out by the Chopped Liver Association of America, they will promote themselves shamelessly for having been so honored. 

The more I think about it, the more I understand why I’ve been deluged with spam comment lately.  They aren’t necessarily different in kind from much of the flotsam and jetsam that finds its way onto the blogosphere or twittersphere, but merely more unabashed about it.  Being an unapologetic capitalist, I can appreciate the tenacity of someone who would make 300 tries to post a commercial comment on Simple Justice.  In fact, I can better appreciate that than the kids who argue that they truly deserve to have the world revolve around them.  I may rethink my definition of spam.