|
« Previous |
Ain't too proud to blog
| mail it
| Next »
Posted: 08.08.2002 Women wave your pantyhose, sing the chorus and it goes...
I saw a post at Kristine's a bit ago about how two different photolog's had just taken her name "snap!". I commented that I would be crushed if someone took "my Shutterblog" name away from me. So I hopped on Google, and lo and behold, this Shutterblog was born on July 30th, 2002. (My Shutterblog was born on April 15th, 2002, thankyouverymuch.)
I agree with her "can't people be original?" viewpoint. I spend a lot of time thinking up my blog names before taking them public. I Google them first. That's why I'm not "Blah Blah Blog" as a matter of fact. I thought I was being original with that one 'til a quick look on Google told me otherwise. So I went back to the drawing board. Hence ATPTB. I Googled "Shutterblog" first as well. I realize that Shutter City just morphed their name with the word blog, and probably never even thought to look and see if there was another blog with that name already out there alive 'n' kickin'. But let the record show...I was there first. And I ain't changin' my name just because they took it. Unh uh. No way. Fuhgetaboutit. And I just registered shutterblog.com, too, so nyah-nyah! 
 Your originality never ceases to amaze me! Even when you [ever so kindly and generously] hooked me up with my site, you were original on behalf of me! YOU OWN the blog world, baybee! ¤ ¤ credit: Susan | 08.08.02 at 04:35 AM | link- -this ¤ ¤ Nah, I just rent it at discount prices... ;-) ¤ ¤ credit: robyn | 08.08.02 at 04:43 AM | link--this ¤ ¤that's exactly how I found out someone was using snazzykat -- and not just the name, but my entire layout -- as well as previous layouts, too!!! ¤ ¤ credit: erika | 08.08.02 at 07:29 AM | link--this ¤ ¤I was going to say that I didn't see the harm in it unless you had registered the domain, even then, it's just a blog name that is similiar, not a domain name. I mean, I registered Simple Grace and there was a SimpleGrace.com and .org already so I just used a dash in mine. I thought up the name and didn't want to throw it away because it was kind of in use somewhere else. Was that wrong of me? (I'm asking seriously, not to be a smartass). There's bound to be some repetition on the Internet in this day and age, I think that's to be expected but outright stealing of names and layouts is wrong. Can't wait to see your shutterbug domain! ¤ ¤ credit: jenni | 08.08.02 at 02:07 PM | link--this ¤ ¤Jenni, I wouldn't say it's wrong. I just try very hard myself when creating site names and domains to Google them first and make sure they're not in use anywhere else. It's why a lot of people come to me with help in picking out their own, I guess. I'm very big on plays on words and such (tampatantrum.com, whollymatrimony.com, excessbloggage.com, etc.). I agree there's bound to be repitition -- but you don't see two Vogue magazines, or two CNNs, or two Amazons. They have the money to copyright and protect their territory I guess. :-) I tell you, if anyone tries to start up "Ain't too proud to blog 2" though, I'm goin' after 'em with all guns a-blazin'! ¤ ¤ credit: robyn | 08.08.02 at 05:33 PM | link--this ¤ ¤I hear ya sistah! You are right on the not seeing two CNN's or Amazon.com's, etc. Hmm. It's making me re-think my domain choice. I didn't know you have helped people with coming up with domain names. I should have checked with you first. I still do have Daisyhead though if I decide to go back. ¤ ¤ credit: jenni | 08.08.02 at 05:59 PM | link--this ¤ ¤That's why I register names that no sane person would want. Like putthisinyourmouth.com . I'm considering destroysuperman.org. For pretty much no reason whatsoever. :-) ¤ ¤ credit: John Kenneth Fisher | 08.10.02 at 02:40 AM | link--this ¤ ¤
URLs that have pinged me for this entry:
All old ping links have been removed from this blog. Die spammers, die!
Psssssst...pass it on!
|
