Following Derrida, it is worth noting what is being implicitly preferenced here (as opposed to what is being explicitly subordinated):
"authentic" links (no rickrolling?)
And what is being implicitly subordinated (as opposed to what is being explicitly preferenced):
uncritical, uncreative non-engagement
The means by which one distinguishes "authentic creative" non-sequitir absurdity from "bogus uncreative" opportunistic spamming might be worth a bit of "critical engagement." According to Barthes, artistic tactics that try to evade the mythologizing of language (tactics like dadaist/surrealist absurdity, essentialist poetry, or precise mathematical language) eventually wind up getting mythologized whole cloth ("E=MC2" as a myth of math itself, "the chance meeting on a dissecting table of a sewing machine and an umbrella" as a myth of absurdity itself). The critical efficacy of these tactics is diluted once they are thus mythologized.
So absurdist jodi.org
ascii text passes the filters as approved neo-dada (authentic, desirable, critical, [safe, mythologizable, art-world contextualizable]), but not-quite-on-topic spam is filtered as unapproved commercialism (bogus, undesirable, uncritical, [dangerous, having-already-been-recouped, art-world uncontextualizable]).
The initial 1917 filtering of R. Mutt's "Fountain" was justified (in part) because it was a mass-produced, utilitarian, overtly commercial object.For great deals on fountains, shop home depot!