Dear Blog UK. On a page of ten or so ‘posts’ coming through the system, precisely four were genuine bloggers.

Why, BCUK, don’t you look at your daily pages of ‘new posts’ which have obvious titles about what services are being sold or required. Once you’ve done that simple bit of research, you can apply some basic filters to stop a large percentage of the spam arriving through your portals. You’re meant to be internet technology savvy aren’t you, (perhaps, even computer science savvy) so, why are you choosing not to do one of the basic and simplest things that computer systems can be set up to do, to keep inappropriate mail off their systems?

APPLY SYSTEM FILTERS PLEASE, BCUK. If you really love having all the dross from the internet coming your way, then open up a sub-site specially for it and filter all the sludge through there.



  1. I had a comment on a post I made several moons ago today, it said:


    Comment text:
    This can’t truly have success, I feel this way.

    I’ve deleted part of the link so it won’t work.
    I have a good AV program so clicked on one of these idiot replies once and of course I got a warning “Cannot open, Malicious content found”. So I ran Malwarebytes just in case, but it didn’t find anything.

  2. There is a blog on here that is bringing up many of these issues with the company who now owns and operates this site. We are having some good feedback from them and they are keeping us informed of that they are ‘actively’ trying to do. As yet there are minimal results but early days and at least we have an open dialogue with an actual person .

  3. These things are diabolical Mick. Whenever I get a ‘comment’ for something I don’t recognise, i.e. a post from years or many months ago,it always alerts me to scammers, but of course, as you say, it goes further than that, it can be malicious content.

    You have useful combat systems; I wish everyone did. A lot of people innocently rely on not opening anything in the emails from names they don’t know.

  4. Hello Amgroves, I have contributed a few times to the save our blog site you mention. The BCUK site operators are offering empty platitudes and are in general showing unwilling to do anything constructive. They obfuscate. It would be good to know from them why they are not operating appropriate filtering. They seem to like keeping the dubious floodgates open.

  5. I agree, Walrus, no-one want to be right about the negative and incompetent aspects of an organisation, such as Populis.

    I’ve added the ‘letter’ to the save the blog site. It’s odd that group members are not being notified of BCUK/Populis postings-perhaps just another indication of their inability to understand how a social blog site works and the I.T. skills required to do it.

  6. Like many upon first hearing those platitudes I was drawn in to think yes something is being done and there will be improvements but sadly I can be duped no more. Things are no better.

  7. There’s a lot to running a whelk stall and selling whelks, successfully. What we’re seeing, Walrus, suggests to me, Populis would not be able to do it without a lot of training and a desire to provide satisfactory, (preferably good) customer service.

    Populis are creating and presiding over an ever-increasing mess.

Thanks for visiting me. Please share your thoughts and ideas. Comment here.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.