Lets not go down that road (again)..
My good friend Scot Duke (the author of “How To Play Business Golf“) took some time out to drop a rather lengthy comment on my post “I’m beset by idiots!“.
I know Scot won’t mind me promoting his comment and my response to full post status but I think Scot raises a point here which needs to be addressed.
Paul,
Now that we got the weekend out of the way lets get busy on this one issue… I took a moment away from the sabbatical I am taking to write on my next book to jump back online on this issue since what you and your posse have saddled up to pursue is a growing concern out here in cyberspace. Time is being wasted; bandwidth is being burned up by the fraudulent attempts of these kids who have too much negative energy.Truthfulness is something very foreign to a number of these SEO’s site’s developers. Why is that? I like what Elaine had to say about the propaganda and how Tachnorati is using up a lot of bandwidth. For WHAT?
There needs be a sign or emblem a quality site could put on its front page or home page that indicated that it has been checked out and is legit?…OH, did I just give away an O’Flaherty Business Plan?. Since your analysis of several of the SEO sites we have reviewed together has been on target…I could go with an O’Flaherty Seal of Approval…
That’s dangerous territory Scot, and while your kind words are appreciated it’s something I’d have to suggest we stay away from.
The idea of somehow policing the internet and deciding which sites are legit or not is something I’ve talked about many times before.
What you are suggesting reminds so much of Tim O’Reilly’s attempt to introduce a “Bloggers’s Code of Conduct” with silly little badges and rules for how people handled comments on their blogs.
I was against that. I still am.
Not because his heart wasn’t in the right place but because it involves imposing standards on other sites and people to which they may not wish to conform.
Tim’s efforts actually lead me to crafting my own set of policies for O’Flaherty which Rex Dixon adopted and dubbed “The O’Flaherty Doctrine“.
I strongly believe that sites should have a clear policy, but it should be THEIR OWN policy. It should be written by them to reflect how they want to do things.
If they do that then their readers /users know exactly where they stand but the site owners haven’t had an arbitrary code imposed on them. They simply setting their own rules and are free to grow and adapt them as their site evolves.
Tim’s “failure” (it succeeded in getting us all talking about the issue) thought the blogosphere a valuable lesson. If we impose rules and regulations on the blogosphere en mass we loose the very thing which makes the blogosphere what it is.
We loose our independence, innovation, creativity and restrict our freedoms with the only upside being that we give the folks who promote the “nanny state” the feeling /illusion of being safer.
Make no mistake that the feeling is just an illusion. No “twinkie sheriffs badge” or seal of approval will ever change that.
You can expand this beyond the blogosphere to the internet as a whole as well. As soon as we start deciding what we think is “legit” or acceptable and imposing our will on others then it’s end game for freedom on the internet as far as I’m concerned.
Now, Scot, I don’t wish to sound mean here but Elaine hasn’t got a clue what she’s talking about. She’s very passionate when she talks about this stuff but hasn’t got a clue:
The update: Technorati banned me from adding more favorites and then they deleted all my favorites. They did this to a number of blogs. If you think their ranking system is accurate, you’re wrong.
I have since removed my account. Interestingly, my traffic has INCREASED since I started boycotting Technorati.
The people who matter are the blog readers, the group of people Technorati never bothered to care about. Technorati has yet to prove themselves valuable to anyone but propagandists.
and
Boycotting Technorati was one of the best things I’ve done for my blog.
Like I said before, I think their “service” isn’t one. They don’t provide any actual value.
When was the last time you read a great Technorati article? When was the last time they sent you a valuable reader and not just another spammer? When was the last time Technorati showed you someone who wasn’t a scraper or spammer or linkwhore had linked to your blog? When was the last time you trusted the Technorati search to provide you with accurate information?
Technorati is for spammers and propagandists. Simple.
Let them be ruined by those who profit in the “value” they sell. Technorati and Google created this link economy, they can deal with the consequences. Either improve the system and create VALUE or get out.
Her comments above are, I suspect, the direct result of her being banned from the Technorati Faves service.
A quick search of Technorati shows that they are still tracking her blog (and her coComment feed for that matter).
So while she may be boycotting them, Technorati certainly haven’t stopped providing link tracking and sending traffic to her blog.
Also she says that Technorati is for spammers and propagandists. This from the same woman who argued so vehemently against me in defense of the “Technorati Favorites Exchange” meme.
This from the woman who was convinced it was her right to game the Technorati Faves for her own gain.
Yep, I guess that makes the rest of us spammers and propagandists.
Paul,
Thanks for the mention. As far as Technorati goes, it’s just another ranking service amongst the many ranking services out there today. The reason they have such high regard (IMHO) is the same reason Alexa is for some reason the defining guide to traffic; and as we all know – it’s not.
First. That is what the internet seems to be. If you are first on the block and don’t just sit there, and build traction from being first, you will forever remain and be regarded as the defacto standard.
Service? Well that’s a whole other story!
Rex
Paul,
Again, you are dead on target of what is going on out here. I totally agree that providing an arbitrary seal of approval of legitimacy is not proving anything or solving any problems. However, these unfounded claims made from some of these websites are turning a very large market of new interneters away from using or having anything to do with the internet.
We have been through a number of bottles of wine now on this issue so we have been able to weed through what is real and what is not on the internet. New people coming online are not really interested in spending a lot of time to find out the good and bad of the internet as we have. When their first impression is someone hitting them up wanting to show them how to make a million dollars a second they quickly get the impression that is normal for the entire internet and they are gone forever. That is the price you and I are paying which is a pretty high price to pay for something we are not involved with creating.
As far as Tachnorati, I am using them and I am getting traffic, so I have no problem with them, but other sites trying to do what they are doing and not is what I am concern with…
Thanks for showcasing this issue…it needs to be addressed…
Scot, it sounds to me like you want to create an AOL of the 90′s all over again.
A safe area of selected and approved websites that you can play in a walled garden in?
I don’t think the majority of people will ever want to go back to that. Maybe in a school environment?
I just don’t see how you could technically separate the wheat from the chaff on todays internet without it being subject to interference of sort.
I argued in favor of the Technorati Favorites exchanged because of this:
If bloggers pat each other on the back, then whose votes for favorites really matter? The non-bloggers, the regular readers. While the blogosphere is growing tremendously, there are still MANY people who do not blog, they are just average readers. They will only favorite blogs they actually like. Their votes are the ones that matter.
But they don’t use Technorati. Technorati hasn’t proven valuable to non-bloggers yet. It’s only valuable to bloggers who want to use it it to promote their blogs.
I didn’t do it for my own gain. I did it as an experiment, as a way of shouting out “Hey you, Technorati! Your algorithm sucks. It doesn’t measure the important things. Look how easily your system can be taken advantage of? Maybe you should fix the system instead of using fear to get the bloggers to do what you want.”
Yes, Technorati still tracks me. That’s because their system sucks. Bloggers can’t completely opt out. Technorati is just like a scraper.
If they send me traffic, it’s very little. They’re not one of my top ten traffic sources.
I decided to boycott them because I was wasting too much time and energy on them and my efforts were actually promoting them instead of making my point. I felt it was better to just opt out rather than fight this uphill battle that no one else seemed to care about. So, I opted out for my personal blog. I described it all here:
http://www.elainevigneault.com/2007/05/27/blog-tools-how-to-boycott-technorati.html
@Elaine .. first off I’m not going to argue with you about the Technorati service… We’ve been over that ground before. I’m sorry for you if it only shows you who’s spamming you but it works well for me. Showing me very valuable information about who is linking to me and I know that plenty of folks who read O’Flaherty do so because they found this site via Technorati..
Now as for your boycott..
Elaine, boycott whoever you want, whenever you want! Just don’t go making stupid, ignorant statements when you do it, okay? And if you do feel the need, then don’t bloody well expect me to believe you!
If you want to boycott Technorati I support you. It’s your choice. But don’t try to tell me that your boycott of Technorati has directly resulted in an increase of traffic to your blog.
As Penn & Teller would say “That’s bullshit!”
That’s like me saying that because I didn’t eat cheese, or wash my feet, for a week I got 10 new subscribers..
If you’re going to stand by that claim you’ll have to show the numbers and point out exactly how it works. It’s not as if an increase in traffic could be a cumulative effect related to the age of your blog, number of posts, quaity of posts etc.. Is it?
Don’t call me ignorant and stupid. It’s uncalled for and it just makes you seem like a jerk.
I never said it was directly related.
I implied they were related, but not directly. The relation is this:
When I boycotted Technorati and stopped doing things like the favorites exchange, I started doing more of the things I’m truly interested in: participating in blogs I care about, linking to blogs with my similar interests, etc. And all of that, along with the occasional ‘myspace for dummies’ post and some sexual innuendo keeps my traffic flowing.
So, stop calling people names just to rile them up. It’s rude and mean and shows where your true interests lie.
Elaine. Haven’t you figured out that I am a jerk
Now, I didn’t call you ignorant or stupid! I said you made statements which were ignorant and stupid.
If I wanted to call you either I would and I’d make it VERY clear that I was talking about you as a person okay!
Just like I did when talking about Cash for Comments.
So get this straight if I’m going to start name calling I’ll probably be a lot more provocative that something as tame as “ignorant and stupid”.
Now, if you can’t handle me calling something that you said ignorant and stupid that you’re commenting on the wrong blog.
I myself can be ignorant, stupid, selfish and uncaring. But when it comes to what I say on this blog I try to be fair.
My experience of our conversations Elaine is that you are adept at throwing statements around with little to no proof behind them and then you just expect others to take your statements as fact.
Proof please.. As I assume this statement means only spammers and propagandists use or get value form Technorati..
Again, proof please! It’s valuable to me! But then again, I’m a “whiner” right Elaine?
Again.. proof of the correlation between a boycott and an increase in traffic please…
You’re also very good at backtracking on what you said after the fact.. The need to so actually makes your statemtents look ignorant, stupid and uninformed regardless of whether or not you are actually any of those things..
One more thing Elaine, don’t give me this:
BULLCRAP!
You said:
That is a statement with a cause and an effect? Where is the implication! I only see a direct cause and effect!
Oh my gosh, I’ve been looking for this! I posted several weeks ago asking about what do bloggers see as a set of ethic they use to guide them in their online activities (marketing, affiliates, etc). I called it Project: I, Blogger. It’s about creating a conversation between bloggers about what is acceptable and what’s not. I’ll add this to an up-comming update on the project.
Thanks!
Shawn
Paul,
I think I see where your misunderstanding is. It’s in the equivocation of the word “since.” I have been using it to mean “in the period following the time when” whereas you seem to have interpreted it to mean “because.”
Sorry for the confusion.
Toodles,
Elaine
I definitely agree with what you said about someone trying to implement mass Internet control. It just doesn’t work. The Internet would not be the Internet anymore.
This is quite a heated debate, and I definitely don’t have the knowledge to participate, but I am intrigued by some of the points that are being made. What is Technorati and what do they do??