Worf says, "Sir, the Federation does have enemies! We must seek them out!" Picard replies, "Oh, yes. That's how it starts! But the road from legitimate suspicion to rampant paranoia is very much shorter than we think. Something is wrong here, Mr. Worf. I don't like what we have become!"

I looked at the links you provided, thoroughly I might add to substantiate wrongdoing on the part of Saydrah in this incident. I couldn't find any. Let's face it, associatedcontent.com is a large website, the 51st most visited website on the Internet: http://www.quantcast.com/associatedcontent.com. It's no Google, but it's up there.

There are thousands of articles written by thousands of users on AssociatedContent. Of course you're going to be able to connect a dot somewhere to all of her new postings about any website she mentions or submits. That doesn't automatically mean she's trying something underhanded, it just means some author from AssociatedContent happened to mention that site, as well.

Heck, if she submitted a link from Google, I guess you could say "ah, she must be profiting from that!" as well, right, because I'm sure that's been written about/referenced on mega giant AssociatedContent.com.

You have no proof she is profiting from these links yet you are running a campaign as if she did.

The only reason people are upvoting this topic right now is they feel indignation toward the past and wished Saydrah was permanently banned. Maybe they're morally justified, maybe they're not. But I can certainly tell you the merits of this post and evidence are totally unsubstantiated and misplaced.

As others in this topic have said much more eloquently than I ever could about this new revelation you have brought forth:

Person one:

How does she or her company, Associated Content, make money from her linking to a site that an article on AC used as a source? I could understand if she linked to an AC article, but what does her link have to do with AC?

Person two:

That's the comment she was responding to. How is it spam if it's relevant to the topic at hand? Associated Content has, what, eighty six hundred bajillion employees? And all of those associates are generating content more or less constantly? Shit, find something that hasn't been written up by an AC writer.

Person three:

"So I read the AC "writeups" for the sites that Saydrah has posted. I was just skimming, but it didn't look like a write-up at all. It's an article about the topic at hand (dog food and animal behavior, respectively) with a link at the very end to the website if you want to do some extra reading. This is your shady connection? How the hell did you even find this?

Remember that scene in Beautiful Mind where the main character begins to see patterns and we as the viewer start thinking "oh he's on to something", but then we find out he had really just lost his mind and was seeing things he wanted to see.

That's how I view this "evidence" that you have brought forth.

If you have more proof, by all means, bring it forward. Otherwise this is just petty drama.