First off blogging and Seo is not for morons. If you are going to enter the game you better show up. My greatest weakness and almost a trademark is my inability to spell correctly. I can actually spell alright its my ability to proof anything that gets me into trouble.
Some popular gurus in the blogging scene like to run around spouting their wisdom in the SEO scene, most of the time they are entirely wrong. I won’t point out any blatant wrongs but will share with you a few things that will take your blogging to the next level.
Let’s go over a popularly debated topic. Paid Links.
Links are like the intercourse of the internets. Do you really want to pay for links? Just asking. Didn’t mean to offend anyone. Google doesn’t like prostitution but more than likely they won’t penalize those who buy links they will just totally discredit those who are out there selling their link space.
Why don’t they discredit link buyers?
If Google started discrediting bought links then it would be pretty easy for the competion to go out and buy links on obvious link sellers. And then report the link buyers as spammers and watch Google nail em.
Next Question, Site Wide Links or Post Level Links?
Google does not penalize site wide links on new sites. This is a myth. Again it’s a speculated rumor and not proven fact. It could effect your sandboxing only because of the rate at which the links grew. So don’t worry no need to run around asking bloggers to take your new blog off their blogrolls. It doesn’t hurt you. In fact the more links the better. I know some would disagree but the logic just isnt their. Then all the competition would have to do is buy lots of site wide links and wait until Goog punished you and rake in the gold. This is another anti-seo myth. That is full of mularkey. Don’t panic. Take another shot of whiskey and get back to building links.
First in a series entitled SEO is not for Morons
Geekland was offered a new sensation yesterday: no one less than Digg rebel and star Kevin Rose, with friends, has started a new microblogging and file sharing platform. Pownce. Think a mashup of tumblr, twitter, jaiku with a dash of Box.net.
What’s Pownce?
Pownce is a great way to send stuff to people you know. Add friends, then send them big files, invite them to upcoming events, share great links, and whip off a note to anyone, everyone, or just a few people.
Of course Kevin’s popularity immediately set off a small hype, buzz, especially among blogging geeks. Comparisons with twitter immediately were made, but can Pownce really stand a chance against twitter?
Is the Kevin Rose factor bigger than the factor Evan Williams, creator of Blogger and Odeo, was for twitter? I remember when I joined twitter, I found a majority of designers, 9rulers from the early days and other geeks who soon used twitter as Q&A platform. Not as catblogging platform or for bathroom visit announcements.
Does today’s average twitter user, 140 character microblogger, need one more platform? Do people want to maintain one more profile? Especially now many a Facebook account, with integrated twitter application, have.
Are people ready to [try to] move their whole friends list to another service? Has anyone ever tried to convert twitter friends into jaiku users, to have the option to comment? How many people have left MySpace and successfully moved their core friends group to Virb? Has anyone been successful in this? I wasn’t.
Even if Pownce would become more reliable and sophisticated than twitter, does the most sophisticated and most stable platform always end up in front?
And last but not least, are you ready to share your tweets, your microblogging stream, with Kevin’s fan club, the average adolescent Digg nerd?
I think I will continue to twitter and create havoc at Facebook.
Mini-disclaimer: Having read Wisdump for a long time, I know the Grammar Police reads with me. I immediately apologize for blogging in my fourth language. ;-)
One of the things I love about Web 2.0 is some of the creative designs out there. One of the things I hate about Web 2.0 is the lack of originality in design and typography. Let’s take a recent company that was reviewed and all the rage in the blogosphere.
The other day I was interested in a company that was profiled on TechCrunch. I’m a stat junkie so this company had a product that interested me. I looked over the product review on TechCrunch and I read the comments.
Mike Arrington is quoted as saying “breathless over blogstorm.” A few comments made me think okay this a great tool. I should check it out. Expecting to find a decent design + a decent product I made my way to the site.
What I found shocked and angered me.
I’d take a nice screenshot and show you but I want to see if you understand my anger so let’s fire up the old browser and head on over to Blogstorm.
Does anything strike your fancy about this website?
To me it looks eerily like Copyblogger’s new design.
Let’s take a peak at the exterior. On the outside the similarities are fairly noticeable. Both 3 column sites with nearly exact column widths. Site exterior framework is nearly identical with ads and top posts being in the right hand column.
None of this stuff is anything that is to huge. It’s a fairly straight heavily inspired design. No biggie really I see it all the time. A new design comes out one a popular site and 1-2 people copy it hoping for success. However this copycat got a nice review on TechCrunch. This makes me ill.
What in the world was Mike Arrington thinking? Obviously the guy doesn’t know beans about design because this is bad news for the designer in question. He basically just authorized mainstream theft of designers who deserve to be paid for their hard work.
Let’s take a peak under the hood now. Surely these guys aren’t so lazy as to copy and paste code and use it right? One thing I know about design is this. Every designer leaves behind footprints that make it easy for someone like me to tell if I get to know a designers code who that designer is.
I’ve worked with Chris Pearson a lot. So I can easily tell if he designs something without looking at the site in question. If you handed me some css. I could tell you if Pearson did it.
I’m looking at this Blogstorm code. You can too by checking out this link. There are two very different styles. It’s almost as if two designers were working on code and they didn’t collaborate properly.
CP codes Horizontally. I can recognize his style in an instant. Whoever started coding Blogstorm codes Vertically. However there are large ‘chunks’ of code that are obviously scraped from somewhere else that highly resemble CP’s code from Copyblogger. It’s a rather ugly style sheet because they had to ’scrape’ inspiration from somewhere and it certainly wasn’t the right thing to do.
In some cases they even kept various image references and paths and just renamed them. Whoever it was spent a great deal of time on the site. But truthfully someone should roast for this. It’s cheap and it’s tacky. And to be honest although some would say you can’t copyright CSS. It’s just downright stupid to steal someone’s hard work and claim it as your own.
1. If you are going to do a design for a Web 2.0 Startup don’t under any circumstance borrow inspiration by copy and pasting CSS. Start from scratch or hire a good designer.
2. If you are going to report a new startup Arrington please double check some basics like why the heck the site looks similar to one that is in your feedreader. If it’s not in your feedreader it should be.
Among online businesses affiliate marketing is the most popular one. To run a successful affiliate business powerful web hosing is strongly required. Affordable reseller hosting plans along cheap domain registration are also being offered by the high flying hosting firms. Some times hosting firms offer web design assistance as well as act as ISP too. The AJAX is the most prominent software being commonly used by these ISPs to upload data to their servers. Wireless internet also helps a lot in making the work of ISPs easier and reliable.
I did a web video recently over on my publishing hub discussing our place in history, when I mean by our place I mean everyone. You, me, and everyone in between. This blog has passed hands and there is a little bit of stuff to be worked out still like Scrivs passing off the domain to SplashPress. Anyone who wishes to make sense of this feel free to ask him kindly to expedite this so business can continue as normal for all parties involved.
Anyhow, me and Scrivs have a history. One of the things I truly admire about Scrivs is his ability to stick to his guns. He’s always been open about how he thinks, and how he feels. But in the end he always does the right thing. He’s got a legacy. If you look at all the bloggers who have passed down the halls of 9rules and went on to bigger,better or just different things it’s truly impressive. He’s a man with a legacy. more
Obviously we have established so far on Wisdump that social networking such as MySpace and Facebook hits off well. They are sites in which you can simply post up who you are and keep in touch with friends. Then, on MySpace for example, you can build fancy, custom, invalid, profile designs and basically create an empire out of your corner of the community. Then, there is Twitter.
A Social Community Too
When Stuart wrote ‘The Ebb and Flow of Social Networking’, Twitter was not included on the growth chart. Why though? Is Twitter not a social community? You get a page of your own that you can customize the colors and background image of, you have a friends list, you have a display name, there are mobile features, and some form of interaction through instant messaging, and of course those spam accounts that are so bothersome. Therefore, we can safely call Twitter a social community too.
Simplicity is Key
Now, wait, if Twitter is a social community in itself, why do we not see Twitter vs. MySpace? Or Twitter vs. Facebook? Well, because Twitter is so simple. Yes, you have a page to yourself with a personal design and it requires a separate account than other social communities, yet all there really is to do is post your status, and reply to others. Simple, and as well integrate-able with your profiles on other social websites. How genius, eh? You don’t see Facebook allowing you to integrate your Facebook status into your MySpace profile, do you?
Following the Trend
So, we have already seen that Twitter is a social community of its own, yet really shows no competition, and is integrate-able with other communities. It currently is quite popular, and some would say it’s at its “self-sustaining growth” stage, although some would also say its past it’s peak. Although, will Twitter even follow the same path that Stuart described before?
Not to bring opinion in, but I will have to say no, Twitter will create its own path. Why though? Well, Twitter is useful to some people, fun to some people, and annoying to others. The concept is much different, you are not there so much to interact with and send messages and comments to your friends, you are more-so just stating your current mood or status for interested people to know whats up. Sure, some people are starting to use it to gather opinions with Twitter’s feedback feature, although the majority are still posting their current happenings either through the online form, instant messaging, by a mobile device, or widget.
Twitter users aren’t bound to leave when they ‘get-too-old’ or fluctuate between active and inactive based on whether they are having a hot conversation with another user. Rather, if they have no one to talk to, there are still other ways to use Twitter, such as implementing it on your personal site or blog to share with viewers.
So, Why is Twitter Addicting?
Well, it can obviously be seen that most Twitter users are pretty consistent with their updates, and that there are those fun little features that do bring you back. Although, overall Twitter will be, for some time actually, a very active community mainly because it is integrate-able and easy to use. Seriously, when you can send a simple IM message and you update a section of content on your blog, MySpace, Facebook, and the other places you linked your status to, why would it not be addicting?
Nothing seems to be safe from politics or political correctness. Gizmodo posted an announcement yesterday which was followed up by pretty much the same announcement from Lifehacker giving rules on how they view Digging “properly” on their sites.
-No big yellow Digg badges for articles unless they have original content, new reporting, treatment, or photos. It’s not fair when we get the Digg for someone else’s work.
This has to be one of the more ridiculous rules, statements, whatever that I have seen in a while when it comes to the Web. First of all, good luck enforcing your so-called rules. Yes you can control the badges that appear on your site, however the community as a whole are not going to conform to your rules. As you saw with the “Digg Spam” article itself, putting in place barriers just fans the fire. If your not a believer about that statement take a look at how removing the unlock codes for Blu Ray sent the Digg community into an almost rebellious state posting the code over and over again.
Digg is a social bookmarking site that doesn’t take in regard for original work, it is simply a link to something that someone finds that is cool and wants to share with the community. Sharing shouldn’t be frowned upon when it is in fact the basis for the internet as a whole. Users of Digg are not going to track down the origin of specific content, that is not the goal of the site and it is nearly impossible in many instances anyway.
The Web has become a place where information is written, massaged, replicated, re-replicated, and fed to any number of locations, tools, and readers. Who knows where in the chain someone finds the information. At whatever point the user comes across the information there may be zero indications of who the original author was, or even that the site they are reading is in fact not the original author. It’s not right, but it’s the way of the world.
We Don’t Dig Digg
Why is it that Digg was singled out on this one? How many times are Gizmodo’s articles linked thousands of times on Del.icio.us, Reddit, or other similar services? Why are these services not mentioned and why is it ok for these sites to link to content that is not original, but for Digg it is not?
The Digg badges that are places on the site are helpful tools to get the story promoted by people who find it interesting. Why would you take the abilities of the user away? Yes they can still Digg the story but the convenience is gone. So really what are you proving other then making it more difficult for your own user base?
Heavy Weights
Many of the stories that get high marks on Digg are often prefixed with the sites name which gives the stories weight immediately. The Gizmodo story about Digg Spam is a prime example of this. The headline on Digg read: “Gizmodo: Digg Spam Sucks”. Many of Gizmodo’s stories get heavy numbers of Digg’s because it is in fact a very credible site when it comes to news.
Not putting the Digg badges on the stories really means a few less Digg’s because people are inherently lazy and probably won’t go find the story on Digg.com. Who is this dis-servicing though? I would have to say it’s the contents originator. Even though Gizmodo or another is getting the Digg’s the content author knows that it’s his content and can feel pride in the fact that it’s getting such heavy views.
If a site wants to help the person who created the content then they should give them credit more prominently so that users know it came from another source, even if they got to the site that replicated it through Digg. Without the giants like Gizmodo some of this content wouldn’t be seen by a large number of people.
How old are you?
Wait. Don’t tell me. Why? Because I don’t care.
On this great series of interconnected tubes we call the Internet, age is something that doesn’t take precedent over your skills, knowledge or talent. Sometimes. Whether you choose not to disclose your age is completely up to you, and it’s much like a game of snakes and ladders. You’re moving up the board, getting pretty successful and more well known. Disclosing your age (all depending on what it really is) can either further you greatly, or you’ll step on a snake and be behind everyone else.
A 12 year old blogger, nothing out of the ordinary. Why? Because these kids are smart. They wouldn’t write at that level if they weren’t. They realize that in an industry dominated by people significantly older than them, playing the age card, so to speak, can really further them. I’m not going to list examples here, but a quick Google search would leave nothing to desire, I suspect.
The thing with using your age as a method to advance where you are in terms of readership, traffic and personal recognition is that you loose a lot of things in the process. First of all, people are visiting because of your age, not you. Not what you write, not what you have to say. You have to be shameless to say, “Read my blog, I’m 12″, or “12 year old blogger”. It’s just playing on the fact that people will read that and come to your site. They may read something, just to see.
It would be interesting to see what would would happen if these guys had an experiment. I’m not against furthering your self and developing a great site, but if they were completely anonymous, would they achieve the same results?
Switching over for while to the world of freelance. Age is something that can totally hinder you here. Many clients you will come across will likely be older, having the money to hire you (not to say young entrepreneurs and developers don’t, because they definitely do) to invest in outsourcing a job. If you’re young and a client asks you your age before you’ve started the project, what do you do? Should you lie? Will telling the truth loose you the job?
After all, what originally took the potential client to a paying client was your work, your portfolio. The man behind the curtain so to speak is just that- so your age shouldn’t pull any weight here.
Age, race and sex are all things people can and do discriminate against. There are multiple ways, being young, to not be the object of such prejudices. First of all, if you’re just flat out great at what you do, it’s hard to argue that. Second, confront your client. Ask them if your answer to the amount of time you’ve been on this earth holds a pivotal point in you securing the job.
So, are you young? If you use it to further yourself, it’s your choice but keep in mind the things you’re sacrificing (mainly integrity and respect) and the things you stand to gain. If you’re in a freelance situation, think about how you’ll answer the age question. Whether you decide to tell the truth or not, either could have future or immediate consequences.
In conclusion, we all know it’s not a perfect world and your age (among other things) could affect your employability, so to speak. Solution? Judge people on their accomplishments and their abilities, rather than their age.
We’ve got a great series of writers ready to bring you a ton of great posts. Subscribe for updates if you haven’t already.
Connor Wilson is a freelance web designer and writer living in Toronto, Ontario.
MySpace has long been the dominant social networking tool with a huge numbers of users, endless news stories surrounding it’s use as well as mis-use, and almost becoming a buzz word itself. Those days are eroding as MySpace loses it’s news coverage, and begins to become more of an annoyance then a benefit. Users are beginning to see enough reasons to move their online persona’s to other sites and Facebook has been working extremely hard and is poised to cut the head off the MySpace monster, and here are 10 reasons why:
- Clean UI Design
MySpace opened their UI to be changed by users using CSS and other code snippets into their profile pages, and thus opened the door to some of the most horrendous looking “spaces” anywhere. Facebook has maintained all their designs, and not opened themselves up to horrible design and keeping their site simple, elegant, and easy to use.
- Clean UI Design…and no ability to change it
- Usability
One of the great things about Facebook when compared to MySpace is you can expect things to just work intuitively. Things act and react just as you would think they would. I know it seems pretty rudimentary, by often times MySpace tools fail for on reason or another without and valid explanation. The UI is much more straight forward which helps the users find and interact with the site more efficiently.
- Reliability
I don’t know how many times I get random login errors on MySpace. I have tried for ages as well to check to see if the contacts from my GMail account are MySpace users using their built in tools and always get errors and no explanation. I have never had issues with either of these with Facebook.
- No friend request spam
What nasty 16 year old tramp added me today? Yet another annoyance you don’t have to endure on Facebook.
- …ability to add applications without dealing with HTML
The fact that Facebook can add functionality by just clicking a button makes MySpace’s adding HTML or code to your profile boxes seem about as efficient as shared hosting holding up to the “Digg” effect.
- Portability (Mobile experience)
As better phones such as Apple’s IPhone are released and provide better mobile experiences this is going to become more and more important. Facebook is ahead in this department as well.
- Willingness to Change
Facebook has shown the willingness to change and innovate when necessary. MySpace is usually far behind the curve if they ever get around to implementing features at all, and it’s really beginning to show.
- Ability to pull together most or all of your online activities into one place
As users are getting more and more profiles online on different types of sites/applications, Facebook is making the move to allow you to incorporate all or most of that data into your Facebook profile. Bringing in your Photos, Music, Movies, Stocks, etc from other sites is something that is a great resource, and something that will be very important in the coming months/years.
- No bi-weekly messages stating that we will not be shutting down, or telling how to block spam friend requests
All that needs to be said here is that Facebook is professional enough not to do this. In addition Facebook doesn’t have to tell you how to stop spam friend requests because they really don’t happen.By the way, doesn’t everyone love Tom and his photo of himself in a mirror?
As mentioned previously, Wisdump needs a new logo. The following entries have been received and the choice is down to you.
Whilst the designs vary in quality (in my opinion), each and every design submitted is here.
Cast your vote for your favorite in the comments below. The design with the most votes received by the end of Wednesday will be the winner. Please ignore colors as these will be changed to suit the new design anyway.
01 - Submitted by ‘Stalker B.’ :
02 - Submitted by ‘DDAG’ :
03 - Submitted by John Proctor :
04 - Submitted by Bartus F. Teipel (www.bybartus.circuscircus.com.br) :
05 - Submitted by Chris Moyer :
06 - Submitted by James Smart :
07 - Submitted by John Stansbury :
08 - Submitted by Jernej G. :
09 - Submitted by Krystian - Sunlust (ignore the typo!) :
10 - Submitted by Dan Burke :
Note: Only one submission included a URL to the designers website. If your design is listed above and you would like a link to your site, drop me an email.
Another form of this question I am trying to answer is when your favorite site gets acquired (I don’t mean lil ones like Wisdump, but large players like last.fm) is it always a bad thing? When Myspace was acquired by Fox Interactive Media many expected a huge corporate fallout because Myspace had gone corporate. That hasn’t happened. When Yahoo acquired Flickr, many expected the same, but the worst thing to happen was that Yahoo required you to login with a Yahoo ID.
Why is it people never think that being acquired by a larger company is a good thing because it gives the site they love more resources to work with and possibly move the company further along? Then again, how much activity do you really see from sites after being acquired? To me this is the bad thing about being acquired. It is not that anything major changes, the sites generally go untouched in today’s acquisitions because the larger companies are starting to understand that is what is best. However, the acquired company seems to be content with what has happened and maybe they feel they can take their foot of the pedal now.
Can anyone think of any examples of successful Web 2.0 sites that got acquired and then bombed afterwards?
