Calendar
Network
Feeds
AndyBeard
I need to start improving my reputation management tracking, I received a negative comment based on my tagline on Twitter.
Strange thing is, it is the first time I have had anyone ever give any reaction to it at all.
I haven't actually experimented with it, but Wordpress is meant to sort out the redirects on your behalf now, though I haven't tested this at all, and if this changes server load.
There are also plenty of plugins which can deal with redirects without touching htaccess if you need to change slugs
Disappointing that there was no real concentration on the choice of niche compared to where Skellie already is a contributor, and how large and popular that niche is and their high use of feed readers.
I think the launch of FreelanceSwitch was the best leverage I have seen used for a new blog, as the existing blogs owned by the writers weren't huge properties.
Story: Shoemoney, That Really Sucks
So who wants to do what Neil Patel did from Pronet / ACS when Jason Calacanis said the same?
There are so many things I would change in the way Shoemoney does his site, but at the end of the day there are multiple ways to SEO for similar results, and any change might have insignificant benefits compared to existing traffic sources.
Impressive use of SEO is Jim Boykin now ranking 3rd for Shoemoney on the Internet Marketing Ninjas site, there have been a flood of links to those demo videos
Story: Shoemoney, That Really Sucks
That is a little unfair on Jason, he did eventually have a few SEOs on his Podcast though that was to help him get more press for Mahalo
Now what a smart SEO would do is write a story as a basis to get on Rockstartup with Shoe and Ted, plus free entry to SXSWi flight, board and spending money
I have nothing against password protected content or subscriber only, but it shouldn't really be submitted to social sites.
"You are not authorised to view this resource. You need to login."
Sometimes with this patent stuff I get the feeling what they are trying to attempt is not to create something totally unique, but to just throw enough stuff in to allow them to use something (Google) previously had a patent for.
Even though there are tons of material already written about the original and modified PageRank patents, external sources have no idea what is really going on unless they know the dampening factor and how it is being applied to hanging pages or sites with specific authority.
As an example I hate when PDFs appear in the SERP, and they are almost always a dead end for a spider, yet on .gov sites and .edu they seem to appear a lot more frequently than html equivalents. One of these days I am going to have to delve into the linking structure and backlinks of some of these sites in more detail
Well that is assuming that Google aren't doing something similar.
I am not sure which is the best approach, for Google to allow webmasters to influence which pages are considered important by internal link structure and encouraging people to link to "permalinks" or the Yahoo approach which is trying to determine that for them, based on user data.
But this doesn't really change how you should construct a site, even if 70% of search was from Yahoo not Google.
Whilst I have been concentrating on the RSS route, I will be concentrating on email more in the future, fed by RSS - not quite the newsletter approach, but I hope a little more responsive.
This sounds like the negative side of the already existing code that somehow takes comments into account for Sphinns going hot, though I have never seen evidence of that working, maybe that needs a lot more comments.
Isn't there some way it could be portrayed differently, whereby you have Sphinns, and then a modifer being displayed based upon the comments received, either positives or negatives.
Thus a negative comment would be a down vote, and a positive comment would be an up vote that somehow counterbalances it.
You would have it such that each person in a discussion only has one modifer applied, but that somehow can be changed between positive, negative or neutral.
With the ability to counteract through discussion negatives, and change opinions, you wouldn't need to have the ratio of 2:1 or 5:1 and it is probably just an interface thing rather than a major code change.
I wouldn't have this affect a story on the front page - stories that hit the front page for whatever reason I think should stay there
I certainly wouldn't want any kind of preferential voting power - as more features for friends are introduced, you could easily argue for less voting power as per Digg, but not more.
I think one of the negative aspects of the spam flagging is that it only takes a couple of spam flags for a story to get killed - most people won't look at it.
Even if moderators later remove the flags, the story has been killed
'"Report Spam" should only be used when a submission is off-topic or trying to sell something either within the story or on the page linked to from the submission.'
We currently have content and interviews by notable sphinners clearly intended to promote something going unchecked, and reviews of 2 competing products receiving spam flags.
I have no problem with the former, as long as the content itself has value, and hell, if I write a review about something that happens to have an affiliate link, if the content is good I would like for it still to be considered, though I would never, and have never self submited content that is in some way promotional (no, I wouldn't ask someone to do it for me either)
If it is going to be universally enforced fair enough, though it does contradict the use your best judgement ethos we used to have, it should be included in the rules if that is what it is.
I am actually worried about Despinn especially about topics that polarize the community.
Michelle,
I first thought of giving this example in private, but then decided it would be best to give it in public, because it is not exactly outing someone for doing something wrong, it is an example of something done right, but which wouldn't conform to the new "verbage"
http://sphinn.com/story/23287
Darren wrote a great article, it is topical, contains a few interesting stats and reinforces a major news story placing it into real perspective.
It just happens to have referral links in it to 2 Adsense alternatives.
As far as I am concerned , Darren has done nothing wrong, and nor has someone submitting the article.
The problem is you are never going to be able to draw a hard and fast rule about how much good content has to be included for an article to be self promotional.
In many ways it is similar to the situation with high quality paid reviews, which happen to include search engine friendly links. Google uses a one glove fits all, which many are not happy about.
You will get people who have not been blogging as long as Darren submitting their own articles or their readers submitting the articles, and they will also have affiliate links in them on occasion, maybe even for the same companies.
Votes will determine the if their content is better or worse than Darren's, the links in the article shouldn't be a factor.
I can give you tons of other examples, that just happened to be submitted today and was easy to find.
I used Darren's article as an example because it wouldn't be an issue for the majority of people (and it certainly isn't a problem for me) but it would break what Rob stated
""Report Spam" should only be used when a submission is off-topic or trying to sell something either within the story or on the page linked to from the submission."
The best short term measure would be to not show an article has been reported as spam
I am sure we are on the same page, and that is how things have been going up until now. Stories like this one http://sphinn.com/story/23101 get 2 spam flags, and then get them removed once the story is dead. It is already being abused or misunderstood.
If you then add what Rob describes into the mix, the spam reporting is probably going to add to the work of moderators, and you will get a lot more spam flagging.
They are using a newer data set than they used in September, and due to the jump I experienced with position in the listings, it is likely that the data being used is fairly recent.
Yeah but that refers to the DMOZ data, not whatever PageRank data - the editor of that section of Dmoz actually left a comment and has done previously as he is a subscriber, and Patrick's listing at Lonely Marketer is now fixed, at least in Dmoz.
PageRank data is something different, and new data can only really be detected because of changes in position of sites in the PR5-PR6 band, and how
It was actually funny when someone referenced Wikipedia in my comments as a definitive reference regarding the 8 point scale seemingly used in Dmoz for the listings. The Statement in Wikipedia has no verifiable source ;) and seems to be inaccurate, as if they were using an 8 point scale for the listing positions, I wouldn't have sen my listing move. The listing is on a 10 point scale, but the graphic is 8 point - very confusing.
if you want to rant about why your rant post isn't listed be my guest. Apparently Matt says people are also questioning why their post was included as a rant. All good fun.
I have actually emailed Loren to discuss how we should judge the quality of a rant
My way of thinking is a good rant has to have a lot of solid content to support it, thus I am biased to posts like your card counters post john, or Danny on SEO is Bull type stuff.
A post needs to be unforgetable and the kind of thing I will want to link to as timeless content.
I wouldn't look on "rank" as someone losing their marbles, and would also like to think of it as a badge of honor
Damn Shoemoney is gunning to knock me down from my #6 ranking for "Circle Jerk" (which links to him, well Pam) - good post, though it is also important not to spread your efforts too thin
Showing a lot higher here, Shoe might be gunning for a spot just below those videos - I am not sure if the videos display in universal search if I turn safe search on.
Maybe it is older, but it is newer than the data from all the October updates., otherwise I wouldn't have seen the jump in my own position.
It really only confirms what has been said by Google in the way they are applying the penalties, but it provides a useful backdoor to get an idea about true standings.
It is a shame that the general public won't see the true listings, as I am sure very few use the Google Directory, and will only see the manually manipulated version.
It is possible to deduce actual values if you can compare to known values and historical reference.
Story: Get A Free Link From Wired
The way I look at it SEL did nothing worse than pointing someone in the direction of a Dofollow list or creating a search engine for Dofollow blogs.
It isn't the only user generated conntent site where you can post content and get links
Sorry for the errors earlier, I made a quick change on my header whilst in the middle of writing an article (blog claim code for Izearanks).
I saved once and everything seemed fine
I went to make another quick tweak, but the page hadn't loaded fully and was missing a chunk of header code, when I saved it it broke everything, but I didn't notice it as I was dealing with 3 different sets of builders.
It took me a little while to restore from a backup once I realised what had happened
I glanced at Defensio, but it is an expensive option if you have lots of comments and blogs.
Spam Karma is a little more work with the way I have it configured, but there are less false positives. I should do an update because I have tweaked things a little.
Story: 75+ Internet Marketing Gurus on Twitter