So this isn't the whole spam, just the closing line.

Let`s take our chance together to feel the smell of real money

It's ostensibly spam to get me to invest in some sort of dealer in pipes for oil and gas (drilling? pipelines? it's not clear.), but I love the idea that for my small investment I could feel the smell of money. That is some big-time plutocrat nonsense right there.

One of things I noticed while trying to catch up and finish this year's Lentorama was that I seemed to be getting a pretty significant number of page views each day - for example, 40 today - which didn't quite jibe with the number of views on my most recent posts (for example, the last 10 days of Lentorama have, collectively, no views, but that's sort of expected). So what gives?

The answer, as it so often is on the web, is comment spam. And in the interest of turning a nusiance into entertainment, I'm going to share some of the more entertaining entries before deleting them. From a 2002 post about the design for the new building at the World Trade Center site, we get these gems:

Tremendous things here. I am very satisfied to see your article. Thank you so much and I'm taking a look ahead to touch you. Will you please drop me a e-mail?

I never did drop an email, which I guess is why this person never touched me. Probably for the best, it probably would have wound up as an episode of SVU.

This piece of writing gives clear idea in support of the new people of blogging, that in fact how to do running a blog.

I'm guessing my clever idea was the use of appropriate syntax and grammar.

Hi there! This is my first visit to your blog! We are a collection of volunteers and starting a new initiative in a community in the same niche. Your blog provided us valuable information to work on. You have done a extraordinary job! 

I'm guessing the volunteers are behind the linked website, By Extreme F^ck!ng (my edit). I am not sure how off the cuff architectural criticism gave them information to work on, but I assume it involves spires and tunnels.

My family every time say that I am killing my time here at net, except  I know I am getting experience all the time by reading such nice articles or reviews.

Listen to your family.

Have you ever thought about including a little bit more than just your articles? I mean, what you say is valuable and all. However think of if you added some great photos or video clips to give your posts more, "pop"! Your content is excellent but with pics and videos, this website could definitely be one of the greatest in its field. Good blog! 

I imagine my posts would "pop" if I included video and pictures from the linked site, collegeorg!es.0rg (also my edits). My posts would probably also make many other sounds as well.

Happy to see that it's an org site, because there's not enough non-profit porn in the world. These kids should get a medal from the UN.

you are actually a just right webmaster. The web site loading pace is amazing. It sort of feels that you are doing any unique trick. In addition, The contents are masterwork. you've performed a excellent activity in this topic! 

I will also find true love on Flag Day. 

A post on Baseball-Reference.com's website about Hall of Famers and All Stars sharing birthdays, and gave some expected averages for how many you'd find for a given day (for me, no Hall of Famers and six All Stars appearing in 17 games, which is above average). But the question that framed the post - the formation of a team of players all born on Valentine's Day - got me to thinking who would be on the team of players born on my birthday?

The lineup:

Catcher - Ron Karkovice

First Base - Jocko Milligan

Second Base - Cupid Childs

Third Base - Mike Ivie

Shortstop - Cecil Travis

Outfield - Al Woods, Jose Cruz, Frank Howard

Starting Pitcher - Toad Ramsey

Relief Pitcher - Ken Raffensberger

Ivie at third is a bit of a cheat - he played fewer than 100 games at third over an 11 year career - but my next best option was a guy named Vern Morgan, who put together 17 games at third over two seasons with the Cubs in the 1950s (the highlight of a career that saw him play in the minors for 15 seasons, mostly at the A and AA level).

I wound up employing a similar cheat for relief pitcher. Raffensberger is actually the winningest pitcher on my list, six ahead of Ramsey. But he also has the third-most saves with 16 (the leader has a whopping 29), and his ERA and WHIP are much better than the two guys with more saves. So I'm going with him.

So it's back to the usual stuff here with post 2001. Here are the results of the baby pool!

Question 1: Gender

Three of the seven entrants correctly guessed that the baby would be a boy, earning them 10 points each.

Question 2: Day of Birth

No one guessed the day spot on, but Greg earned the most points by being only one day off with his guess of May 15. No one was more than three days off.

Question 3: Time of Birth

The scoring for this question took its toll on three contestants, who were far enough off of the time that they earned no points. Interestingly, they were the same three contestants who correctly guessed the baby's gender, which helped tighten things up quite a bit.

Kudos to Allyson and Salome for earning full points by being within an hour of the 9:06 pm birth time (with super kudos to Allyson for being within 20 minutes).

Question 4: Birth Weight

Most entries here stayed at or below eight pounds. With the kid tipping in at 9 pounds 6 ounces, this left five entries scoring no points on the question. I managed to get a couple, but OTC was the closest with a guess of nine pounds even.

Question 5: Birth Length

Not much variance here, as six of the seven entries scored at least 19 points. Mike and Greg got full marks, as Mike got the length exactly at 21 inches, while Greg guessed 21.5.

The final tally:

OTC: 59 points
Salome: 57
Allyson: 56
Me: 55
Greg: 52
Mike: 47
Brian: 46

Congrats to OTC, and thanks to all who played. I'll try not to feel too bad that I came in fourth in a pool where I had the most access to its subject.

If the doctors are to be believed, we're less than three weeks away from the arrival of Little Coen. So it's time for everyone to get in the pool!

The Blogalicious Baby Pool

Very simple, five questions:

1. What will be the baby's gender?

An important but simple question, given the binary nature of things, and thus worth 10 points. To help you handicap, here are the results of various gender-predictors:

Chinese Baby Gender Chart - girl if I did the Chinese age thing correctly. Using the wife's actual age, it's a boy.
Heart Rate - inconclusive, I think, as the heart rate was routinely above 140 early in the pregnancy but is now just below.
Old Wives Tales Quiz - came up 53-47 that we're having a girl, though I did it once before and it was 60-40 for a boy, so I may have changed one of the answers by mistake.
Another Test - says 77 percent chance it's a boy.
Childbirth.org - their test says 52-47 girl, though there were a couple questions I couldn't answer.

2. What day will the baby be born?

Pretty straightforward, 20 points if you're right, 1 point off for each day you miss by. We've been given a due date of May 19. Past history is inconclusive; the wife was born three weeks early and was her mom's first child, while I, as my mom's fourth, was pretty much on time.

3. What time will the baby be born?

Also straightforward, guess a time and if you're within the hour you'll get 20 points, with 1 point off for each half hour you're off by. And while I don't think the information is of much help, I can tell you that I was a mid-afternoon baby, while the wife was mid-morning.

4. What will be the baby's weight?

Entries here should be in pounds and ounces, with 20 points available if you're spot on, losing a point thereafter for each ounce you're off. Our last weight estimation, which was about three weeks ago, had the kid at 7 pounds, 1 ounce. I came in a six pounds even, the wife below that.

5. What will be the baby's length?

The guess here should be in inches, with 20 points if within one inch, losing a point for each inch you're off from there. The wife was in the high teens, while I think I was 24 inches long, though that looks too long to me.

Anyway, send your entry along or post in the comments. Good luck!

Based on the number of entries, most of you may not remember that I put together an election prediction contest (or perhaps most of you do, and I just have a much smaller readership than the handful I assume still read this thing). It seems like it would be gauche to have the results announced after next week's inauguration, so here they are!

The contest had five parts:

Part I: Pick the winners by state. There were 104 possible points here, as I threw in Guam's straw poll to get the contest to a 200 point theoretical maximum. Two of us managed to get 101 points: myself and Brian Hight. The odd number comes from Nebraska's split, as I awarded half credit to all of us who predicted McCain's win but not the split (the wife got full marks for picking the split, but then got half credit for picking a split in Maine, too).

Part II: Pick the percentages. Here you got 10 points each if you correctly predicted the popular vote percentages for Obama and McCain, losing a point for every quarter-point off one was. Kudos here to the wife, who got 17 of a possible 20 points.

Part III: Pick the Senate winners. Ten races, two points each. In order to score this I've assumed that Franken will remain the winner in Minnesota, and I gave credit for Georgia where people picked Chambliss and those who went with "other" to represent the run-off. Taking all that into account, Craig Barker ran the table and picked up all 20 points.

Part IV: Pick the next five finishers in order. This gave the minor candidates some love, with each candidate in proper order giving 5 points, those one position off giving 3, and two positions off giving 1. The wife earned all 25 points here, correctly getting the order of Nader, Barr, Baldwin, McKinney and Keyes.

Part V: Yea or Nay? Seven yea-or-nay questions, three points each. They were:

Would Santa Claus get 100 votes in West Virginia? A guy in Nevada who legally changed his name to Santa Claus was a registered write-in candidate in West Virginia, meaning that any votes for him would be reported under his name. Not surprising for a state full of coal, he only garnered 59 votes.

Would the Democrats get a 60 seat majority in the Senate? A nay for this admittedly unlikely possibility.

Would the Democrats get at least 250 seats in the House? Aye, they did.

Would any location be decided by fewer than 1000 votes? Nay, nowhere was even close to that number (though Missouri's 3903 is pretty tight).

Would the Democrats win more gubernatorial races than the GOP? Aye, they did, 7-4.

Would McCain or Obama get at least 75 percent of the vote in any state? Limited to state given the expected big win for Obama in DC, the closest we got was the President-Elect's 71.85 percent in Hawaii. Nay.

Would Obama win Dixville Notch, New Hampshire? The traditional first in the nation voting location went with Obama, 15-6, so aye.

Our wacky prop bet winner was the Left Reverend Erik Corley, sweeping the field for the full 21 points.

Entrants were also allowed to "ballot stuff" five races out a select group of state Presidential and Senate races. I don't think everyone realized that there were Senate races in play, as more than one entrant didn't use all of their stuffing opportunities. Brian was the only entrant to get the 10 extra points.

So when the smoke-filled room cleared, what were the final totals?

Coen, S. 170
Hight 167
Coen, M. 164
Barker 158
Corley 154
Sorenson 115

So kudos to the wife, whose success later in the contest made up for her McCain-friendly state picking. It should be noted that Greg's score is the result of an incomplete entry. I'm sure he'd have done much better if he'd bothered to try.

Thanks to all who played, and see you in 2012!

As you may imagine, scoring the election contest is a bit dicey, hence the delay. Which I know is killing the half-dozen of you who actually participated. At some point I'll score what I can and see if the outstanding races would matter. I'll try to get this wrapped up by Inauguration Day.

Still time to get your entry for my election prediction game. It's due at 11:59 PM EST tonight, given that one of the questions on it will be answered by 12:15 or so tomorrow morning.

Note that the original spreadsheet didn't include Iowa, so if you filled that one out please email me with your call for that state. Sorry, Iowa.

Still being a bit new at the Facebook thing, I have a question. I have three people who I don't know who have sent friend requests solely to become allies on one game that I've been playing (World Domination, in case you're looking for allies as well). I know that it's pretty common for people to add strangers as friends, but was curious as to any potential downside. Comments welcome!

I did something the other day that I wasn't expecting to do, ever: I joined Facebook.

I wasn't particularly resistant to joining, but I didn't have much interest in doing so, either. Then a friend from high school sent an email with a link to her profile, and I figured joining would be an easy way to keep tabs.

Don't expect to do too much over there, though I have set up a couple of applications, one a map showing where I've been and the other a book listing deal where I'm trying to put in every book I've ever read (an attempt that's doomed to failure but will be entertainingly futile).

I've not made a great deal of outreach to add friends, but that may change as I poach people off of the friend lists of those of you lucky enough to have made the cut so far. I'm resisting the urge to friend my eldest niece, though there'd probably be some comedic value in it.

Reminders and updates:

1. The Brilliant But Canceled tournament (still to be renamed) will commence Monday. If you have suggestions, please comment or send them along. Thanks to all of you who've given input so far, even if I've been lousy at emailing you back.

2. Next week also sees the start of Euro 2008, so if you've not joined my Euro Pick 'Em group at ESPN.com, get the lead out. Password is cornerkick.

3. While it's in one of the more, uh, "transitional" parts of the South End (SoWa, or South of Washington Street), I'd recommend Gaslight if you're looking for a casual semi-fine dining experience. The food is French bistro, and is very good if not great, but there's a good-sized parking lot next door where you can park for free. That makes up for a lot.

I won't comment on the SoWa name. You can guess what I think.

So I'm mulling running a tournament here over the summer. The basic idea is Brilliant But Cancelled: The Tournament.

(Note to any NBC Universal legal counsel: I'll change the name when it starts, save the cease and desist letter for someone else.)

I don't have much of it planned, but it would generally follow the format used by Craig (among others) - each day would feature a number of match-ups (likely four to start, fewer as we move along), with multiple days allowed for voting in the comments and by email. At this point I'm thinking of limiting it to broadcast network prime time shows that lasted no longer than two seasons or 50 episodes (to cover older shows that had longer seasons or ran more than once a week), but am open to argument for including cable and/or non-prime time programming. Field size is open, too, but would likely be 64.

I'd probably start this in early June, though I'd really want to end it by August 1, so it's finished before our big graduation that month.

I'm working on shows to include now, but nominations are more than welcome, especially as I may miss some of the more recent shows that the kids watch.

Fans of the beautiful game (and people who like to choose winners in international sports based on flag colors or whatever) are welcome to join the group I set up on ESPN.com for their Euro 2008 pick 'em game.

Group Name: Go England! Wait, what?!?
Password: cornerkick

Has your March Madness bracket gone to pot? Well, here's a shot at redemption with my annual Frozen Four tourney.

The rules are relatively simple. Take yourself here to get the bracket. Pick your winners and get them to me by noon EDT on Friday.

Scoring will continue to be 1-2-4-8 points per win per round. Upset points based on regional seeding throughout the tournament is also in effect (so if you pick Air Force to win its first game, you'd get 4 points if they pulled it off, one for the win and three for beating a number 1 seed).

Should this thing end in a tie, it will be broken by comparing the following in order:

1. Most correct winners picked
2. Most correct match-ups picked
3. Most teams in the Frozen Four
4. Caber toss or monkey knife fight

One entry per person, please. There aren't enough games to let you go crazy with multiple entries.

40 Days, 40 Churches

Day 41: Universal Life Church, the Internet

So the idea of this feature was that, during the 40 days of Lent, I'd mention a church that I'd been to or had some connection with, significant, tenuous, or otherwise. But then we go to church yesterday and the bulletin mentions that Lent doesn't end until Holy Saturday, which is the day before Easter. Apparently, the Sundays during Lent don't count. Heck of a time to learn this, though if nothing else it gives you an idea of the level of detail we went into in Sunday school.

So, for better or worse, more churches for you. But I have a feeling they'll be more like today's entry than those previous.

As some of you know, I am an ordained minister in the Universal Life Church. Have been for over a decade, when on Halloween in 1997 I put in my name, clicked a button, and received my certificate. It is just that simple. I did it in furtherance of something Halloween-related, but whatever it was I don't think it came to pass, so I became ordained for nothing.

I assume I'm still an active member of the ULC's clergy, though I don't think I'd fall back on it to get a decent parking space or perform a wedding. Though as Massachusetts does grant one day licenses to perform weddings, I am available for your matrimonial needs.

Looking for added guidance on who to vote for, I've taken a number of online quizzes to see what candidate I match up with the best. The results?

USA Today: Mike Huckabee
Political Base: Bill Richardson
Minnesota Public Radio: Clinton or Kucinich
SpeakOut.com: Chris Dodd
SelectSmart.com: Kucinich
Blue Pyramid: Peter Camejo (who isn't even running!)
ABC News: Huckabee (which isn't surprising, as they use the USA Today questions)
GoToQuiz.com: Richardson
dehp.net: Kucinich
Glassbooth.org: Edwards

Clear as mud, just as you'd expect. Also pretty funny that neither of the people I've decided I'm most likely to vote for came up at all.

So like a true friend, I've been sitting on these interview questions from Paul for a couple of months. Thanks for nothing, right? Anyway, here's the interview, and if you'd like to revive this meme leave a comment and I'll send you five interview questions.

1) Now that you've entered into the homeowners club, what do you miss most about being a renter?

Not having to fix stuff. The combination of not being handy and buying a house in need of TLC is a great thing if you like to spend. I worry about getting to the point where we'll put too much money into the house and not at least break even on the resale. Of course, we could stay there for the duration, but that seems unlikely.

2) In your opinion, who is the best former Terrier hockey player that did NOT make it to the NHL?

This is a tough one, given how many former Icedogs had a cup of coffee (which is more of a baseball term, but I'm at a loss for hockey equivalent; feel free to suggest one) in the NHL. I actually went back and looked at some stuff on the Internet Hockey Database (which is a fantastic resource), and have determined that the best player who I've seen play who didn't make it to the NHL was Mike Pomichter, who had three seasons with great point totals, but who left to go pro the season before we won our last title. He then went on to have a long and not particularly successful minor league career.

I'd also considered Petteri Koskimaki for this, as he had a couple of strong seasons while playing on teams loaded with future NHLers (McEachern, Amonte, Tkachuk, among others). He doesn't appear to have played anywhere after BU, even in Europe. That's surprising, though given his senior year numbers I wonder if he took an injury that put him out of hockey for good. I honestly don't remember; the seasons are starting to run together. Google doesn't even return post-BU stats for him.

Another possible answer: Jack Parker. I've occasionally wondered how things would have gone had he actually taken the Bruins job back in the early '90s. I'd like to think he'd have found success, but given that the average tenure of a Bruins coach seems to be about three years, the idea that he'd have wound up back at BU before too long isn't unlikely.

3) Among all your quiz bowl journeys, away hockey games, etc.., what was your best road trip (elaborate)?

In terms of actually getting to see things, I'd have to go with last year's TRASHionals trip to Austin, as we took a couple of extra days and actually saw things in Austin and San Antonio. Usually on these trips you don't see anything more than the host school and your hotel, but on this trip I actually got to see the Alamo and a bunch of other stuff. It was a nice change.

For weekend quiz bowl trips, there's more trips to the Philadelphia area that had at least one funny story than I can remember. For hockey trips, I do fondly recall our fan van trip to Lowell (well, Chelmsford, actually) where we wandered up the street and found that Chinese place. How we didn't get lost or hit by a truck I don't know.

4) If you could design a flavour of ice cream for Ben & Jerry's what would it be called and what would it include?

I was coming up with one when I saw that Dairy Queen kind of beat me to the punch with their Kit Kat Blizzard. But I'll do them one better with Kat Food: dark, milk, and white chocolate Kit Kat pieces in a combo of vanilla and chocolate ice cream. I was considering cinnamon as a secondary flavoring, which would pretty much make this my standard Angora Cafe frozen yogurt order from about 1993 to 1995.


5) Favorite Seinfeld episode and why?

A tough one given the options. There's "The Strike," which precipitated all the Festivus nonsense late last year. There are also some of the iconic episodes like "The Contest" and "The Chinese Restaurant." And after the two months I've had to come up with something, it turns out I don't have a favorite episode. There are several that I really enjoy, but none quite reigns supreme. Aren't you glad you waited for that answer?

Ran across this and thought it was amusing. Consider yourself tagged.

1. Grab the nearest book.
2. Open the book to page 23.
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the text of the next three sentences in your journal along with these instructions.
5. Don't dig for your favorite book, the cool book, or the intellectual one: pick the CLOSEST.
6. Tag five other people to do the same.

"To be effective a team must be clear on its roles (who does what?) and goals (what are they trying to accomplish?). Norms are the assumptions or expectations held by group members that govern the kinds of behaviors that are appropriate or inappropriate in the group. They are the ground rules which regulate the group's behavior."

(from The One Minute Manager Builds High Performing Teams by Ken Blanchard, Donald Carew, and Eunice Parisi-Carew)