Skip navigation
Help

search queries

warning: Creating default object from empty value in /var/www/vhosts/sayforward.com/subdomains/recorder/httpdocs/modules/taxonomy/taxonomy.pages.inc on line 33.
Original author: 
Dan Goodin

Aurich Lawson / Thinkstock

Tens of thousands of websites, some operated by The Los Angeles Times, Seagate, and other reputable companies, have recently come under the spell of "Darkleech," a mysterious exploitation toolkit that exposes visitors to potent malware attacks.

The ongoing attacks, estimated to have infected 20,000 websites in the past few weeks alone, are significant because of their success in targeting Apache, by far the Internet's most popular Web server software. Once it takes hold, Darkleech injects invisible code into webpages, which in turn surreptitiously opens a connection that exposes visitors to malicious third-party websites, researchers said. Although the attacks have been active since at least August, no one has been able to positively identify the weakness attackers are using to commandeer the Apache-based machines. Vulnerabilities in Plesk, Cpanel, or other software used to administer websites is one possibility, but researchers aren't ruling out the possibility of password cracking, social engineering, or attacks that exploit unknown bugs in frequently used applications and OSes.

Researchers also don't know precisely how many sites have been infected by Darkleech. The server malware employs a sophisticated array of conditions to determine when to inject malicious links into the webpages shown to end users. Visitors using IP addresses belonging to security and hosting firms are passed over, as are people who have recently been attacked or who don't access the pages from specific search queries. The ability of Darkleech to inject unique links on the fly is also hindering research into the elusive infection toolkit.

Read 14 remaining paragraphs | Comments

0
Your rating: None

In the United States, two out of every three searches go through Google, which serves up a total of three billion search queries per day. "Googling" has become so ubiquitous that the company has become a verb in English (and in other languages, too).

Given that most of us use Google several times a day and may also use it to send e-mail, to plan our calendar, and to make phone calls, questions commonly arise about how all of that data is used. Google has said that it needs access to such large amounts of data as a way to “make it useful” and to sell personalized ads against it—and to profit substantially in the process.

However, a March 2012 study from the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that two-thirds of Americans view a personalized search as a “bad thing,” with 73 percent of those surveyed saying that they were “not OK” with personalized searches on privacy grounds. Another recent poll of California voters recently reached similar results, as “78 percent of voters—including 71 percent of voters age 18-29—said the collection of personal information online is an invasion of privacy.”

Read more | Comments

0
Your rating: None

  

In my nearly two decades as an information architect, I’ve seen my clients flush away millions upon millions of dollars on worthless, pointless, “fix it once and for all” website redesigns. All types of organizations are guilty: large government agencies, Fortune 500s, not-for-profits and (especially) institutions of higher education.

Worst of all, these offending organizations are prone to repeating the redesign process every few years like spendthrift amnesiacs. Remember what Einstein said about insanity? (It’s this, if you don’t know.) It’s as if they enjoy the sensation of failing spectacularly, publicly and expensively. Sadly, redesigns rarely solve actual problems faced by end users.

I’m frustrated because it really doesn’t have to be this way. Let’s look at why redesigns happen, and some straightforward and inexpensive ways we might avoid them.

The Diagnostic Void

Your users complain about your website’s confounding navigation, stale content, poor usability and other user experience failures. You bring up their gripes with the website’s owners. They listen and decide to take action. Their hearts are in the right place. But the wheels quickly come off.

Most website owners don’t know how to diagnose the problems of a large complex website. It’s just not something they were ever taught to do. So, they’re put in the unfortunate, uncomfortable position of operating like country doctors who’ve suddenly been tasked to save their patients from a virulent new pandemic. It is their responsibility, but they’re simply unprepared.

Sadly, many website owners fill this diagnostic void — or, more typically, allow it to be filled — with whatever solution sounds best. Naturally, many less-than-ethical vendors are glad to dress up their offerings as solutions to anyone with a problem — and a budget. The tools themselves (search engines, CMS’, social apps) are wonderful, but they’re still just tools — very expensive ones, at that — and not solutions to the very specific problems that an organization faces. Without proper diagnostics to guide the configuration of tools, any resulting improvements to the user experience will be almost accidental.

Sometimes design agencies are brought in to fill the diagnostic void. And while not all agencies are evil, a great many follow a business model that depends on getting their teams to bill as many hours as they can and as soon as possible. Diagnostics can slow the work down (which is why clients rarely include a diagnostic phase in their RFPs). So, many agencies move to make a quick, tangible impression (and make their clients happy) by delivering redesigns that are mostly cosmetic.

A pretty face can last only a few years, but by then the agency is long gone. Invariably, the new owner wishes to make their mark by freshening or updating the website’s look. And another agency will be more than happy to oblige. Repeat ad nauseam, and then some.

Oh, and sometimes these redesigns can be pricey. Like $18 million pricey.

See why I’m so grouchy?

Forget the Long Tail: The Short Head Is Where It’s At

Whether you’re a designer, researcher or website owner, I’ve got some good news for you: diagnostics aren’t necessarily difficult or expensive. Better yet, you’ll often find that addressing the problems you’ve diagnosed isn’t that hard.

And the best news? Small simple fixes can accomplish far more than expensive redesigns. The reason? People just care about some stuff more than they care about other stuff. A lot more. Check this out and you’ll see:

This hockey-stick-shaped curve is called a Zipf curve. (It comes from linguistics: Zipf was a linguist who liked to count words… but don’t worry about that.) Here it is in dragon form, displaying the frequency of search queries on a website. The most frequently searched queries (starting on the left) are very, very frequent. They make up the “short head.” As you move to the right (to the esoteric one-off queries in the “long tail”), query frequency drops off. A lot. And it’s a really long tail.

This is absolutely the most important thing in the universe. So, to make sure it’s absolutely clear, let’s make the same point using text:

Query’s rank
Cumulative %
Query’s frequency
Query

1
1.40%
7,218
campus map

14
10.53%
2,464
housing

42
20.18%
1,351
web enroll

98
30.01%
650
computer center

221
40.05%
295
msu union

500
50.02%
124
hotels

7,877
80.00%
7
department of surgery

In this case, tens of thousands of unique queries are being searched for on this university website, but the first one accounts for 1.4% of all search traffic. That’s massive, considering that it’s just one query out of tens of thousands. How many short-head queries would it take to get to 10% of all search traffic? Only 14 — out of tens of thousands. The 42 most frequent queries cover over 20% of the website’s entire search traffic. About a hundred gets us to 30%. And so on.

It’s Zipf’s World; We Just Live in It

This is very good news.

Want to improve your website’s search performance? Don’t rip out the search engine and buy a new one! Start by testing and improving the performance of the 100 most frequent queries. Or, if you don’t have the time, just the top 50. Or 10. Or 1 — test out “campus map” by actually searching for it. Does something useful and relevant come up? No? Why not? Is the content missing or mistitled or mistagged or jargony or broken? Is there some other problem? That, folks, is diagnostics. And when you do that with your website’s short head, your diagnostic efforts will go a very long way.

The news gets better: Zipf is a rule. The search queries for all websites follow a Zipf distribution.

And the news gets even jump-up-and-down-and-scream-your-head-off better: Zipf is true not only for your website’s search queries. Your content works the same way! A small subset of your website’s content does the heavy lifting. Much of the rest has little or no practical value at all. (In fact, I’ve heard a rumor that 90% of Microsoft.com’s content has never, ever been accessed. Not once. But it’s a just a rumor. And you didn’t hear it here.) Bottom line: don’t redesign all of your content — focus on the stuff that people actually need.

You’ll also see a short head when it comes to your website’s features. People need just a few of them; the rest are gravy.

And there’s more. Of all the audience types that your website serves, one or two matter far more than the others. What tasks do those audience types wish to accomplish on your website? A few are short-head tasks; the rest just aren’t that important.

As you can see, the Zipf curve is everywhere. And fortunately, the phenomenon is helpful: you can use it to prioritize your efforts to tweak and tune your website’s content, functionality, searchability, navigation and overall performance.

Your Website Is Not A Democracy

When you examine the short head — of your documents, your users’ tasks, their search behavior and so forth — you’ll know where to find the most important problems to solve. In effect, you can stop boiling the ocean…

Ocean

… and start prioritizing your efforts to diagnose and truly solve your website’s problems.

Now, let’s put these short-head ideas together. Below is a report card for an academic website that starts with the short head of its audience:

In other words, of all the audience types this university website has, the three most important are people who might pay money to the university (applicants,) people who are paying money now (students) and people who will hopefully pay money for the rest of their lives (alumni). How do we know they’re the most important audiences? We could go by user research; for example, the analytics might suggest that these audiences generate more traffic than anyone else. Or perhaps the university’s stakeholders believe that these are the most important ones in their influence and revenue. Or some combination of both. Whatever the case, these three audiences likely swamp all other segments in importance.

Then, we would want to know the short-head tasks and information needs of each audience type. We might interview stakeholders to see what they think (column 2). And we might perform research — user interviews and search analytics, for example — to find out what users say is most important to them (column 3).

Of course, as the good folks at xkcd demonstrate, stakeholders and users don’t always see things the same way:

That’s why talking to both stakeholders and users is important. And once you’ve figured out the short head for each, you’ll need to earn your salary and, through some careful negotiation, combine your takes on each audience type’s needs. That’s what we’ve done in column 4.

Finally, in column 5, we’ve tested each task or need and evaluated how well it works. (Because it’s a university-related example, letter grades seemed appropriate.) You can do this evaluation in an expensive, statistically significant way; but really, enough research is out there to suggest that you don’t need to spend a lot of time and money on such testing. More importantly, these needs and tasks are often fairly narrow and, therefore, easy to test.

So, after testing, we can see what’s not going well. Finding information on “mentoring” is hard for applicants. And current students have a devil of a time when they “look up grades.”

Now we’re done diagnosing the problems and can begin making fixes. We can change the title of the “Paired Guidance Program” page to “Mentoring.” We can create a better landing page for the transcript application. The hard part, diagnostics, is out of the way, and we can now fix and tune our website’s performance as much as our resources allow.

From Project To Process To Payoff

These fixes are typically and wonderfully small and concrete, but because they live in the short head, they make a huge and lovely impact on the user experience — at a fraction of the cost of a typical redesign.

The tuning process itself is quite simple. It’s what we used to arrive at the report card below:

If you repeat this simple process on a regular basis — say, every month or quarter — then you can head off the entropy that causes fresh designs and fresher content to go rotten. Thus, the redesign that your organization has scheduled for two years from now can officially be canceled.

Your website’s owners ought to be happy about all this. And you should be, too: rather than tackling the project of getting your website “right” — which is impossible — you can now focus on tweaking and tuning it from here on out. So, forget redesigns, and start owning and benefiting from a process of continual improvement.

Special Thanks – Illustrations

Eva-Lotta is a UX Designer and Illustrator based in London, UK where she currently works as an interaction designer at Google. Besides her daytime mission of making the web a more understandable, usable and delightful place, she regularly takes sketchnotes at all sorts of talks and conferences and recently self-published her second book. Eva-Lotta also teaches sketching workshops and is interested in (something she calls) visual improvisation. Exploring the parallels between sketching and improvisation, she experiments with the principles from her theater improvisation practice to inspire visual work.

(al)

© Louis Rosenfeld for Smashing Magazine, 2012.

0
Your rating: None

About

“YOLO” is an acronym for the phrase “you only live once”, which is often used as a hashtag on Twitter to bring attention to exciting events or excuse irresponsible behaviors. The acronym was popularized in 2011 after being featured in the hip hop single “The Motto” by Drake. In November 2012, the Oxford American Dictionaries included the slang term “YOLO” in its shortlist for the 2012 English Word of the Year.

Origin

The earliest known use of the acronym is attributed to Adam Mesh from the third season of the NBC reality show The Average Joe. Mesh launched the “You Only Live Once” (YOLO) clothing line on March 20th, 2004.[2]

Spread

The first Urban Dictionary[1] definition was submitted by user Colin on April 6th, 2004. The promotion website for San Francisco’s nightlife event YoloSF[5] was launched on November 10th, 2005. In July of 2006, the American indie rock band The Strokes launched a promotional campaign called “Operation YOLO” prompting fans to request their 2006 single “You Only Live Once” (shown left) on radio stations. The life coaching site YOLO Coaching[4] was registered on June 1st, 2007. On March 14th, 2008, YouTuber JCVdude uploaded a video titled “YOLO ‘you only live once’ JCV” (shown right) outlining his philosophy of living life to the fullest.

On October 4th, 2009, the weather forecast site Weather Underground[6] blogger Beachfoxx published a post titled “Friends……YOLO – You Only Live Once.” On July 27th, 2010, an infant bodysuit with the words “YOLO You Only Live Once” screenprinted on the front was submitted to the online retailer Cafe Press.[7] On December 16th, 2011, The Huffington Post published a photo of the American actor Zac Efron with “YOLO” tattooed on his right hand. A Facebook[3] page for the acronym has 3,725 likes as of March 5th, 2012.

  

The Motto

The acronym was used in the 2011 hip hop single “The Motto” by Canadian recording artist Drake featuring Lil Wayne. On October 23rd, 2011, Drake posted a tweet using the word accompanied by a photo of himself standing on a balcony.

The now defunct Twitter analytics site Trendistic reported that tweets with the keyword “yolo” rose significantly on October 24th, one day after Drake tweeted the photo from his balcony. In addition, Google Insights graph also indicates that search queries for the keyword “YOLO” began to rise drastically between October and November 2011. The song was officially released on November 29th and was followed by the official music video on February 10th, 2012. In just 21 days, the video accumulated over 450,000 views.

“Now she want a photo, you already know, though
You only live once: that’s the motto nigga, YOLO”

Criticisms

On November 29th, 2011, YouTuber iBeChucks uploaded a video (shown left) complaining about the use of the word soon after the release of Drake’s song. On February 29th, 2012, YouTuber ThisIsACommentary (shown right) uploaded a video titled “Yolo These Days” in which he criticized the word’s sudden rise in popularity and compared it to the word swag.

Notable Examples

Parodies

On June 17th, 2012, Redditor pigpen5 submitted a post titled “This is the first ad for an Anti-Yolo campaign a friend of mine is trying to start”[8], which highlighted a picture of a woman looking at a pregnancy test with the caption “Nine months from now #YOLO Just wont be as cool as you thought it was.” Within one month, the post received over 16,000 up votes and 700 comments. In the following days, the image was reposted to the viral content site Buzzfeed[10] and the Cheezburger site FAIL Blog.[9]

On June 28th, 2012, BuzzFeed[11] published a post titled "10 Phrases You Can Say Instead of “YOLO”, which included several alternative expressions with similar meanings to the acronym. On July 8th, BuzzFeed[12] published a post titled “20 Different YOLO-stragrams”, which highlighted several Instagram photos that have been tagged “#yolo.”

On July 14th, the Internet humor site Cracked[14] published a blog post titled “5 Reasons the YOLO (You Only Live Once) Meme is Wrong”, which included an infographic with fictional characters who have lived more than once. On July 20th, the New York Times[13] published a blog post titled “#YOLO”, which highlighted several tweets mocking the use of the hashtag on Twitter.

Twitter Feed

Search Interest

External References

[1]Urban Dictionary – Yolo

[2]Alexander Interactive – Yolo Clothing launches online store

[3]Facebook – Y.O.L.O

[4]YOLO Coaching – Yolo Coaching

[5]YoloSF – Yolo SF

[6]W Underground – YOLO – You Only Live Once

[7]Cafe Press – YOLO you only live once

[8]Reddit – This is the first ad for an antiyolo campaign

[9]FAIL BLog – Parenting Fails No YOLO

[10]BuzzFeed – Anti-YOLO Campaign

[11]BuzzFeed – 10 Phrases You Can Say Instead of YOLO

[12]BuzzFeed – 20 Different YOLO-stragrams

[13]New York Times – #YOLO

[14]Cracked – 5 Reasons the YOLO (You Only Live Once) Meme Is Wrong

0
Your rating: None



Last week, we covered the story of Camping Alfaques, a Spanish vacation spot whose owner recently sued Google in a local court. His concern: top search results that feature grisly images (note: thumbnail versions of a few appear in a screenshot below) of dead bodies from an old tragedy. Such cases have so many implications for the future of search engines and the companies who depend on them that we spoke to the owner of Camping Alfaques to learn more about his situation. He told us what led him to sue Google, how much the case matters to him, and why he doesn't want anything "deleted" from the 'Net—just relocated.

Mario Gianni Masiá, now the owner of an oceanfront vacation spot called "Camping Alfaques" in southern Spain, was a child in 1978 when a tanker truck exploded into a fireball on the road just beyond the site. 23 tons of fuel ignited, immediately turning 200 campers to ash and badly burning several hundred more. Safely on the other side of the camp, Mario was unscathed.

Photographers descended, of course; pictures were snapped, graphic shots of bodies stacked like charcoal, carbonized arms rising from the earth. Newspapers covered the deaths. A movie was made. But 30 years is a long time, and while memories of the disaster never vanished, visitors to the campground didn't have the most shocking images shoved in their faces just for planning a trip.

Read the rest of this article...

Read the comments on this post

0
Your rating: None



Today's the day Google's broad new privacy policy goes into effect. European regulators are claiming it violates data protection laws, but it's here and it may be here to stay.

There are some not-completely-foolproof ways to hide from Google, but first let's talk about what's changed. Prior to today, Google had more than 70 privacy policies for its various products. But with the company trying to create a seamless experience across search, Gmail, Google+, Google Docs, Picasa, and much more, Google is consolidating the majority of its policies down into just one document covering most of its products. This will make it easier for Google to track users for the purpose of serving up personalized ads.

Read the rest of this article...

Read the comments on this post

0
Your rating: None

New submitter happyscientist writes "This is a nice 'Hello World' for using Hadoop MapReduce on Common Crawl data. I was interested when Common Crawl announced themselves a few weeks ago, but I was hesitant to dive in. This is a good video/example that makes it clear how easy it is to start playing with the crawl data."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

0
Your rating: None

About

Scumbag Brain is an advice animal image macro series featuring a photo of a brain that is sometimes seen wearing the Scumbag Steve hat, with captions that describe self-conflicting psychological experiences like sudden realizations, awkward dreams and persistent memories. The situations presented are similar to Oh God Why rage comics.

Origin

The earliest known Scumbag Brain image macro was posted to the suicide support r/suicidewatch subreddit in a thread titled “Fucking Scumbag Brain”[1] by Redditor Jackist on March 24th, 2011, received only 198 upvotes prior to being archived.

Spread

Compilations of the series were posted to the humor blog Pleated Jeans[8] on July 21st, 2011 and to the viral content site BuzzFeed[7] on August 9th, 2011. On October 10th, 2011, the web comic site The Oatmeal[9] published a comic titled “If my brain were an imaginary friend” that featured an annoying brain that is able to remember complex information from several years ago, but cannot remember where it put a set of car keys. A single-topic blog, ScumbagBrain.org[10] was created in March 2012. The same month a series of instances was featured on PopHangover.[12]

Additional derivatives can be found on Memebase[5], Tumblr[4] and Reddit[11], where there are more than 3800 instances. A Memegenerator[3] page has received 280 submissions, the Quickmeme[2] page has received more than 20,000 submissions and a Facebook[6] fan page has accumulated 203 likes as of May 2012.

Notable Examples

Search Interest

Search queries for “scumbag brain” began rising in July of 2011, the same month the Quickmeme page was created.

External References

[1] Reddit r/suicidewatch – F*cking Scumbag Brain

[2] QuickMeme – Scumbag Brain

[3] memegenerator.net – Scumbag Brain\

[4] Tumblr – #scumbag brain

[5] Memebase – scumbag brain

[6] Facebook – Scumbag Brain

[7] BuzzFeed – The 25 Best Of The Scumbag Brain Meme

[8] Pleated Jeans – The Best of the Scumbag Brain Meme

[9] The Oatmeal – If my brain were an imaginary friend

[10] ScumbagBrain.org – Home

[11] Reddit – Scumbag Brain search results

[12] Pophangover – Scumbag Brain Meme

0
Your rating: None

About

The Wadsworth Constant is an axiom which states that the first 30% of any video can be skipped because it contains no worthwhile or interesting information.

For EVERY youtube video, I always open the video and then immediately punch the slider bar to about 30 percent. For example, in this video, it should have just started at :40. Everything before :40 was a waste. This holds true for nearly every video in the universe.

Origin

On October 1st, 2011, Redditor grim_fandango posted an image on the r/pics subreddit titled “And so ends 20 years of frustration,”[1] which contained instructions on how to fold a bed sheet. In the comments, Redditor KillerRefreshRate asked “How the hell do you get from 3 to 4?”[9], to which Redditor octal9 responded with a link to an instructional YouTube video. Redditor Wadsworth[2] commented on the video link with the following message:

Redditor Redebo replied to Wadsworth saying, “perhaps this should be known as the Wadsworth Constant.”

Spread

The same day, the blog The Daily Dot[6] posted an article about the axiom and numerous definition entries for the term were submitted to Urban Dictionary.[10] Redditor ReachingHorizons posted a follow-up thread called “And so the Wadsworth Constant was born,”[3] which received over 19,005 up votes and 15,768 down votes before archival.

On October 4th, YouTuber monadamm uploaded an explanatory video titled “What is the wadsworth constant?” which also demonstrated as an example of the axiom with the definition beginning at 0:10:

Application

Redditor and YouTube employee newtuber[5] revealed a new URL parameter “&wadsworth=1” which can be added on to the end of a YouTube video URL to load the video at 30%.

Redditor buggg posted a Python script[7] that applies the Wadsworth Constant on a command line.

#!/usr/bin/env python2

import sys

def wadsworth(original):
if len(sys.argv) != 0: phrase = ’ ’.join(original[1:])
else: phrase = original
output = phrase[int(len(phrase)-len(phrase)*.70):]
return output

if name == ‘main’:
print wadsworth(sys.argv)

On October 13th, 2011, the tech blog Lifehacker[8] published an article about a Wadsworth Constant bookmarklet.

javascript:location.search+=(location.search?‘&’:‘?’)+’wadsworth=1’

Redditor ReachingHorizons posted a link to a java application[13] which calculates the 30% mark of input text.

Redditor WadsworthIt posted a link to the website “Wadsworth It!”[14] which processes any image or video URL and crops the first 30% of the media.

Defying Wadsworth

On October 14th, Redditor thesoundandthefury published a video titled “Defying the Wadsworth Constant,”[11] which was intended to demonstrate that not all videos can be skipped in the beginning.

Dozens of other YouTube videos have been since posted onto Reddit’s “The Wadsworth Constant” subreddit[12] section either in demonstration of or defiance against the axiom.

Search Interest

Search queries for “Wadsworth Constant” spiked on October 3rd, 2011, two days after the original post.

External References

[1] Reddit – And so ends 20 years of frustration

[2] Reddit – Wadsworth’s comment

[3] Reddit – And so the Wadsworth Constant was born

[4] Reddit – Remember the redditor-invented Wadsworth Constant? A YouTube employee has made it real.

[5] Reddit – Today I made it possible to go straight to the Wadsworth Constant on any YouTube video!

[6] The Daily Dot – How the Wadsworth Constant will give you 50 percent more time

[7] Reddit – Wadsworth Constant

[8] Lifehacker – Skip Past the Boring Intro on YouTube Videos with the Wadsworth Constant Bookmarklet

[9] Reddit – How do you go from 3 to 4?

[10] Urban Dictionary – Wadsworth Constant

[11] Reddit – Defying the Wadsworth Constant

[12] Reddit – Wadsworth Subreddit

[13] Reddit – Wadsworth Calculator

[14] Reddit – Developed Wadsworth Site, Would You Use It?

0
Your rating: None

About

“Abandon Thread” is a catchphrase that is used in online forums to indicate that a discussion thread has degraded in quality and should be abandoned. The phrase is often used as a reaction to thread jacking, flame wars or more general trolling behavior. In image macros and animated GIFs, the phrase is often paired with people or animals that appear as if they are attempting to flee. (See also Hey Guys What’s Going on in Here)

Origin

The phrase has been used in discussions threads on sites like the Democratic Underground[5] forums as far back as January 19th, 2004.

The earliest known animated GIF version shows a snail transforming its shell into a jetpack before flying out of frame with the caption “Abandon Thread” flashing in red. It was uploaded to ThreadBombing.com[1] on August 14th, 2009. The GIF was made from a clip of a CGI test video from Spon.com[3] titled “Spontaneous Snail” that was uploaded to YouTube on November 21st, 2006.

Spread

Usage of the phrase in discussion threads have been noted across a wide range of forums and websites like Lone Portal[8], Gaia Online[9] and IGN forums.[11] In addition, GIF derivatives of “Abandon Thread” images can be found on sites like Funny Junk[4], GIF Ninja[10], GIF Soup[6], Ebaumsworld[7], and Threadbombing’s “Thread Sucks” category.[2]

Notable Examples

Fuck This Thread I’m Outta Here

Similar to “abandon thread” responses, another set of image macros and animated GIFs featuring the catchphrase “fuck this thread I’m out of here” can be used in the same context.

Search Interest

Search queries for “abandon thread” had a small spike in July 2010 before picking back up in January of 2011.

External References

[1]Abandon Thread – Thread Bombing / 8-14-2009

[2]Thread Bombing – Thread Sucks

[3]Spon.com – Spon

[4]Funny Junk – abandon thread=

[5]Democratic Underground – Abandon thread! Abandon thread!

[6]GIF Soup – Gif Results for abandon thread

[7]Ebaumsworld – abandon thread

[8]Lone Portal – ABANDON THREAD!

[9]Gaia Online – Abandon thread. Troll attack.

[10]GIF Ninja – abandon thread

[11]IGN Forums – Someone cap Abandon Thread with this GIF

0
Your rating: None