[geraldalewis]

1) I read the 'The company later had its employees comment on my blog with fictitious postings' out of context. It's not referring to `Jonathan's Card` but to the `Pay it Forward` campaign. Just pointing that out since it seems like others were not clear on that detail either.

2) Calling those `Pay it Forward` posts "fictitious" isn't merited. I would not be surprised to see an employee of any company posting a defense of the company they work for.

3) Anyone on HN who read "but unfortunately failed to anticipate that I can see the originating IP address of incoming comments" and didn't say to themselves "how does OP know they were trying to obfuscate their identity?" should be embarrassed.

It's always a good idea to read posts critically, and it's always a good idea to accept the least cynical understanding of a situation until compelling evidence is provided to the contrary.

I'll consider this submission as bait until something substantial is posted.

[benatkin]

On top of that, there's encouraging clicks on Google ads regardless of interest (some call it click fraud).

http://www.coffeestrategies.com/2011/08/08/starbucks-and-the...

[sesqu]

3) When an employee of a company publicly defends that company without disclosing their financial interest, I find it difficult to believe it just didn't cross their mind.