Take a look at this webpage, purporting to report on a posting of mine here on the VC. Here's how it starts:
David Post at the Volokh Conspiracy writes: Code's a exceptionally momentous promulgate, in my purpose (and, I about, objectively speaking, in the purpose of melodious much actually interested in reasoning encompassing law and balance on the Net). Lessig got a kismet of things honourable in Code; most fundamentally, the inclination encompassing which much of the promulgate is organized - that "code is law" on the extensive network - is a exceptionally nonsensical bounteousness a certain, and still a downright a certain, and it has been utter to a queer blow the whistle on of exceptionally advantageous reasoning in the gift. Code got some things out of line, too - most fundamentally, when Lessig argued that it is abortive (and maybe still dangerous) to talk encompassing cyberspace's "nature."
[The actual original posting is here] It's pretty bizarre -- as best I can figure it, somebody took my original posting and ran it through some sort of nonsense-generator to produce the text shown there -- it's English, and it bears some relationship to my original posting, but it makes absolutely no sense. [along the lines of Noam Chomsky's famous sentence "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously," designed to illustrate sentences that can be perfect grammatically but semantically nonsensical]. Surprisingly enjoyable to read, actually . . .
As to why someone might want to do this, I'm less clear. And inasmuch as this is a legal blog, one might raise the question: is there a cause of action here? For "false attribution" under the Lanham Act, perhaps? False light publicity? [No, I'm not thinking of suing, or even complaining about it, though it is something of a shock to see something like this attributed to you on the Net; I assume that anyone who stumbles across this would realize pretty quickly that whoever this "David Post" might be, he surely didn't write this . . .]