Numerous upon the written content material

Another fragment of aleatoric sub-poetry, from the 5,036,601 spam comments that Akismet has caught since we installed it:

I image this might be numerous upon the written content material? nevertheless I nonetheless believe that it may be suitable for just about any type of topic material, because it could frequently be pleasant to resolve a warm and delightful face or possibly listen a voice whilst initial landing.

No doubt Stan Carey's spam-comment collection will contain the variants needed to infer the pattern out of which this was spun. (See "'Some superb entropy' in the language of spam", Sentence First 5/6/2013.)

Since we logged our two millionth spam comment on 1/31/2012, 437 days ago, we've averaged

(5035601-2000000)/437 = 6946 spam comments per day

over the past year and a bit. This is pretty close to the 6579 spamments per day that we averaged during the previous half-year, suggesting that Language Log's spammentarial ecosystem is in or near a state of equilibrium.

Most spam comments are even interesting:

Thanks for giving these substantial post.

thanks for posting, please keep doing it.

If you value custom and also have a few lounging around the house the best of each sides with consign. The best thing regarding consignment  created in your sales and get additional custom, and that means you obtain a particular percentage of the sale from the these people handle all of the aspects of selling your purse for you personally. The advantage in order to utilizing a consignment shop.

But none of them are very convincing. I continue to be puzzled about the generally poor quality of this stuff, as discussed in "The case of the missing spamularity", 11/23/2010:

There may well be a "classic … evolutionary predator-prey arms race" going on in the world of spam and spam filters — I have this on good authority, though I don't know much about the details — but whatever the resulting evolutionary trajectory is, it's not creating any "parasitic viral payloads" that do a credible job of "pretending to be meat".

Oh wait. The thing is, if Stross were right, how could we tell? I've never actually met John Cowan in the flesh…

[Seriously, I suspect that the current economics of spam rewards propagation rate much more strongly than payload quality; and that the aspects of payload quality that are optimized are relatively uncorrelated with "pretending to be meat". Otherwise, we'd certainly see much more higher-quality spam.]