That doesn't mean they won't spam you. They spam every site they can find, since it's easier to write a script that does every site than one that is selective.

True enough, I take your point, and also why they would head for obscure pages - I was just checking whether in this case they are simply wasting a small amount of my bandwidth, or were able to do more...

I don't know why they would got for dates in 2006, but many people do have archives that start in 2000.

looking for posts in the future is nothing new -- its been exploited in the past in wordpress ( and has since been corrected).

the idea was to insert comment spam before the post was actually made -- the post is made with the web site owner unaware of the comment spam, and you have immediate comment spam. with the post

very normal, ignore it, block it, whatever... its "normal" spam behavior.

whoo wrote:

very normal, ignore it, block it, whatever... its "normal" spam behavior.

Indeed, that's what I thought. And it would be a bit much to write a whole hack against it, so I won't bother, just do some blocking. Largely pointless, but it cheers the soul.

Thanks for your assistance...

Eventually normal search engines will go there too. Maybe. Your calendar will link to the beginning and end of time, so anything that follows links will, well, follow links. I thought there was something in the bug report forum about this but I can't find it right now.

Google bot, and Yahoo Slurb, are navegating and indexing around 1989, and 2020,
where obviously there is no posts.

: (

Why calendar offers link to dates where have no content?

henrique wrote:

Why calendar offers link to dates where have no content?

It's a known bug.

henrique wrote:

Google bot, and Yahoo...

I'd be a bit surprised if it were search engine crawlers - these were direct hits I was referring to.

Direct hits are totally possible due to the known calendar bug. Go to your blog and you can click the calendar to the beginning and end of time, or at least the beginning and end as far as MySQL is concerned.

I see what you mean - I thought *direct* was meaning by straight http GET, ie. a user bookmark, or (here) a bot loaded with a likely search hits routine. Googlebot, Inktomi etc. have to be pointed, so where does it lose the referrer link and become counted as a direct access?